Monthly Archives: April 2013

SCRATCH A LIBERAL HARD ENOUGH AND YOU’LL FIND AN “ISLAMOPHOBE”

 

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-30 14:53 -- SCRATCH A LIBERAL HARD ENOUGH AND YOU'LL FIND AN "ISLAMOPHOBE" 

  
 
 
The recent controversy started by MSNBC's ultra leftist daytime host Alex Wagner when she accused Fox's Bill O'Reilly and Charles Krauthammer of believing that Obama is secretly Moslem (for criticizing him for not calling the Boston bombing an act of Moslem jihad) got me thinking about the left's obsession with right wingers calling Obama a crypto Moslem (see).
 
For if Islam is a religion of peace and justice and a great asset to the human race, as pro-Islamic leftists repeatedly say when defending the faith, then calling Obama a "Moslem" should be regarded as honorific by them. If Islam is a great beneficial force for good in the world shouldn't they defiantly say 'Even if Obama were secretly Moslem I couldn't give a damn! Islam is okay with me and a Moslem Obama is also cool!' But instead, leftists go berserk when Obama is called a "secret Moslem," as if he was being accused of child molestation or rape. Why is that? Is it because in their hearts they harbor politically incorrect notions about Islam? That they inwardly despise the faith agreeing with Bill Maher that (unlike Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, etc.) it's a religion of violence, injustice, oppression, intolerance and war? And resent it when their darling secular progressive president comes under attack and called Moslem-as if he's being belittled and ridiculed as some kind of backward, regressive, medieval cretin? Is that it? Are many leftists hypocritical on the subject of Islam and just as "Islamophobic" as many on the right? I think they are. Scratch a leftist hard enough and chances are you'll find a Pam Geller or Bill Maher underneath.
 
FORWARD EMAILS TO

OMINOUS SIGNS OF A COMING HORRIFIC 9/11 ATTACK?

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-29 14:08 --OMINOUS SIGNS OF A COMING HORRIFIC 9/11 ATTACK? 

 
http://search.aol.com/aol/imageDetails?s_it=imageDetails&q=IMAGE+OF+THE+TSARNAEV'S&img=http://s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/v2_article_large/public/2013/04/22/tamerlan-tsarnaev.jpg&v_t=keyword_rollover&host=http://www.ibtimes.com/tamerlan-tsarnaevs-possible-involvement-waltham-triple-murder-investigated-1207921&width=183&height=138&thumbUrl=http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTXRM2jPd9kJO0Ct3Z42-L3zxNbCqAUGQlB33c84tv-LfMV-rKRclXorAcyBA:s1.ibtimes.com/sites/www.ibtimes.com/files/styles/v2_article_large/public/2013/04/22/tamerlan-tsarnaev.jpg&b=image?s_it=imageResultsBack&v_t=keyword_rollover&imgsz=&imgtype=&imgc=&q=IMAGE+OF+THE+TSARNAEV%27S&oreq=b71b7f5cc27c495d80ac5dc0077f2cde&imgHeight=380&imgWidth=500&imgTitle=Tamerlan+And+Dzokhar+Tsarnaev&imgSize=24507&hostName=www.ibtimes.com
 
http://search.aol.com/aol/imageDetails?s_it=imageDetails&q=IMAGE+OF+JARAD+LOUGHNER&img=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/cd/Jared_Loughner_sheriff's_office.jpg/220px-Jared_Loughner_sheriff's_office.jpg&v_t=keyword_rollover&host=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jared_Lee_Loughner&width=128&height=152&thumbUrl=http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcS-ViI9g0qr9UnTfqTdwiZCLOuY7id-GhNG34eMiU9luCXLw-0xqTrEv7Y:upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/cd/Jared_Loughner_sheriff%27s_office.jpg/220px-Jared_Loughner_sheriff%27s_office.jpg&b=image?s_it=imageResultsBack&v_t=keyword_rollover&imgsz=&imgtype=&imgc=&q=IMAGE+OF+JARAD+LOUGHNER&oreq=d6f83b0097a243a9a19db3283e0550d9&imgHeight=260&imgWidth=220&imgTitle=Jared+Lee+Loughner+-+Wikipedia&imgSize=14474&hostName=en.wikipedia.org  http://search.aol.com/aol/imageDetails?s_it=imageDetails&q=IMAGE+OF+CHRISTINA+GREEN&img=http://celebritynewsandstyle.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/christina-taylor-green.jpg&v_t=keyword_rollover&host=http://celebritynewsandstyle.com/youngest-arizona-victim-christina-green-112/&width=139&height=140&thumbUrl=http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRMoAVhDfhV8VkJTi2ult807ZWatX9KX37RCSoG9ae9SipNeg-ozj1iX-Cf:celebritynewsandstyle.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/christina-taylor-green.jpg&b=image?s_it=imageResultsBack&v_t=keyword_rollover&imgsz=&imgtype=&imgc=&q=IMAGE+OF+CHRISTINA+GREEN&oreq=6c4234fd53804faca4ae9b8617ebbf11&imgHeight=646&imgWidth=639&imgTitle=Christina+Green,+at+just+9,&imgSize=95637&hostName=celebritynewsandstyle.com

 

  http://search.aol.com/aol/imageDetails?s_it=imageDetails&q=IMAGE+OF+PLANE+PART+FOUND+AT+GROUND+ZERO+MOSQUE&img=http://hamodia.com/hamod-uploads/2013/04/Plane.jpg&v_t=keyword_rollover&host=http://hamodia.com/2013/04/28/likely-911-plane-part-found-at-ground-zero-mosque/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=likely-911-plane-part-found-at-ground-zero-mosque&width=121&height=161&thumbUrl=http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSAfi6cavIxotxf5GJTpBTujc_ZhqFmm1An0pF6Bd9k8hoPgDS9IVU7jd7M:hamodia.com/hamod-uploads/2013/04/Plane.jpg&b=image?s_it=imageResultsBack&v_t=keyword_rollover&imgsz=&imgtype=&imgc=&q=IMAGE+OF+PLANE+PART+FOUND+AT+GROUND+ZERO+MOSQUE&oreq=48ce394f792d43dcb1f867bdf85d9206&imgHeight=1365&imgWidth=1024&imgTitle=Ground+Zero+mosque+where+a&imgSize=348063&hostName=hamodia.com


Lately events relating to terrorism and national security seem to have taken an ominous turn perhaps toward a second 9/11 size mass terror attack on US soil. Look at the signs and shudder. Last week it was reported that our Islamic supremacist enemies at the Ground Zero triumphalist mosque found a piece of the wreckage from one of the two 9/11 planes that slammed into the Twin Towers. The piece, authenticated by experts, was found wedged between the mosque at Park 51 and the building next door just blocks from Ground Zero (see above photo). This discovery was made just weeks after Osama bin Laden's terrorist son-in-law (Suleiman Abu Ghaith) was arraigned in a nearby Federal Court in Lower Manhattan for plotting to kill Americans; and we suffered the only successful Islamic terror bombing since 9/11-with one of the terrorists (Tamerlan) suspected of having slit the throats (al Qaida style) of three Jewish men on 9-11-11 (an obvious sacrificial offering of evil Jews to Allah see); and the other (Dzhokar) obtaining US citizenship exactly one year later on 9-11-12-the day al Qaida struck our consulate in Benghazi to honor bin Laden and his deadly attack.
 
With all this sudden focus on 9/11 coming from many directions could it be a warning from On High that a second large-scale attack is in the works? An attack that's eluding authorities (like the Boston bombing) because of the administration's blindness and weak on terror 9/10 mentality? I don't know. But if you recall when Gabby Giffords was shot in Tucson the gunman Jared Loughner killed Christina Green, a lovely child born on 9-11-01, with Loughner born on 9-10-88 (one month after the birth of al Qaida). Was this a providential sign warning about the consequences of the 9/10 mentality leading to another horrific 9/11 event? I hope not. Boston was enough; but not for our monstrus Islamic enemies whose thirst for American blood is unquenchable.

 

 
 

ZUBEIDAT TSARNAEV: THE JIHAD MOM WHO MADE JIHAD KIDS

  • FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES
  • 2013-04-28 09:45-- ZUBEIDAT TSARNAEV: THE JIHAD MOM WHO MADE JIHAD KIDS 
Russia had wiretap on Boston

suspect, discussing jihad with mom - Atlas Shrugs

 
http://rt.com/files/news/1e/e2/b0/00/rtxyzl1.si.jpg
 
LIKE MOTHER
 
 
LIKE SONS
 
Zubeidat was the maker of jihad kids bringing bloodthirsty killers into the world destined for slaughter and carnage.

Her murdering sons sprung from her hateful womb with sword in hand ready to do battle with infidels shouting "Allahu Akbar!!!"
 
This woman deserves a prominent place in the Mothers Hall of Islamic Shame.

http://www.newsrealblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/a-sword.jpg
 
 
 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

FOX NEWS UNDER ATTACK FOR ALLEGED ISLAMOPHOBIA

FROM APOLLOSPERAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-25 16:24 --FOX NEWS UNDER ATTACK FOR ALLEGED ISLAMOPHOBIA 

 Fox News Attacks Muslims Relentlessly In

Wake Of Boston Bombing

http://preview.search.aol.com/aol/imageDetails?s_it=imageDetails&q=image+of++lightning+bolts&img=http://www.clker.com/cliparts/5/Q/D/T/J/W/storm-lightning-bolt.svg&v_t=keyword_rollover&host=http://www.clker.com/clipart-storm-lightning-bolt.html&width=140&height=140&thumbUrl=http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSj4E52_Y6PesVaUOHXV_FS_R0klOsbEg5_tX5UfxxxiaOsYwIEhVm1VZiYqA:www.clker.com/cliparts/5/Q/D/T/J/W/storm-lightning-bolt.svg&b=image?s_it=imageResultsBack&v_t=keyword_rollover&imgsz=&imgtype=&imgc=&q=image+of++lightning+bolts&oreq=a9487c3ba8b94506a06150c949a6c6e5&imgHeight=800&imgWidth=800&imgTitle=Storm+Lightning+Bolt+clip+art&imgSize=3029&hostName=www.clker.com

 
 
http://www.addictinginfo.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/FOX+News+Channel+FoxNews.jpg
 
 
 As it is politically incorrect to link any murderous act of Islamic terror to Islam-a misunderstood religion of peace and justice whose (mass murdering) founder was the peace loving Mahatma Gandhi of his age-Fox News in its coverage of and comments on the most horrific Islamic terror bombing in America since 9/11 has crossed the line of acceptable discourse way too many times over the last ten days incurring the wrath of the see-no-evil-in-Islam left media.
 
Citing Bill O'Reilly, liberal Bob Beckel, Ann Coulter and other Fox regulars for alleged inflammatory, derogatory and bigoted remarks about Islam being the underlying cause of the Boston bombing-and most of the terrorism in today's world (some 20,000 deaths since 9/11)-and warning of more domestic attacks by young, radicalized, homegrown Islamists the left fears that Fox could trigger a wave of anti-Moslem hysteria and cause the unthinkable: a nationwide backlash with arsonists burning down mosques and Moslem neighborhoods subject to violence, bombings and death like blacks in the old racist South. 
 
Assuming that the left is right (which they're not) about Fox trying to exploit the Marathon Bombing to stir up hysteria (like Obama tried doing with the sequester) nothing could possibly come of it. For if the earthshaking, history changing Islamist attack on 9/11 that left thousands dead and injured wasn't followed by a violent, murderous anti-Moslem backlash we certainly needn't fear it from this mini-9/11 in Boston. However much Fox and others rightly blame the attack on Islam (and the murderous wave of worldwide jihad unleashed by its Prophet 14 centuries ago) we're not going to see Moslems lynched from trees, rapped, kidnapped, beaten or terrorized in an attempt to rid our country of them. 
 
Criticism of Islam is indispensable for understanding the roots of Islamic terror throughout history; and we shouldn't fear condemning those verses in the Koran that call for violent, predatory, subversive jihad-and the atrocities and crimes of its author-which provide inspiration for today's jihadists like al Qaida and the Tsarnaevs.
 
We can do these things without worrying about fanning the flames of hatred and bigotry resulting in persecution or Moslem internment camps like we once had for Japanese Americans. For we are Americans, the most fair-minded, forgiving and tolerant people on earth, and understand that most Moslems aren't the enemy, most live in peace with unbelievers and don't emulate and worship Mohammed's savage, power mad, militant side using force to make Islam feared, powerful and supreme. For every Moslem  who picks up the sword in Allah's name to advance the faith there are many more who won't.
 

But all the same it wouldn't be unfair, Islamophobic or unwise for local, state and federal law enforcement agencies to increase surveillance of Moslem communities and mosques as realistically there are thousands of homegrown Tsarnaevs out there dreaming of doing jihad and plotting more terrible crimes. As most of the 20,000 victims of Islamic terror since 9/11 have been Moslem these measures are necessary for their safety and security as well as our own.

 

 

 

LINDSEY GRAHAM, GITMO STRIKERS AND JOHN KERRY (BOSTON BOMBERS HAVE NO BELIEF SYSTEM

 

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-24 15:38--LINDSEY GRAHAM, GITMO STRIKERS AND JOHN KERRY 

 
April 24, 2013

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/politics/

 
http://mjcdn.motherjones.com/preset_16/graham_0_0.jpg

Lindsey Graham: Boston

Suspect's 'Ties To Radical Islamic Thought' Justifies 'Enemy Combatant' Status

Lefty Huffposters by the hundreds are having a field day ripping into Lindsey Graham and twisting his words to mean he wants all US Moslems who simply think about jihad (killing Americans) to be arrested as enemy combatants. Typical of this is the following by SSF:
 
"So Senator Graham now believes that suspected "thought-crimes" should justify denying an American citizen his Constitutional rights?"  
 

No stupid. Not thinking jihad but doing jihad by those (like Tsarnaev) plugged into jihadist ideology is what Graham was referring to. Nor by giving him "enemy combat status" would Tsarnaev's Constitutional rights be violated as he would temporarily be held as an enemy combatant for intel purposes only, then afterwards Mirandized and put on trial in civilian court for his crimes. Graham nowhere says he wants indefinate military detention for Tsarnaev like a Gitmo detainee. But is he an enemy combatant? You bet he is. 4/15 was as much a deadly act of aggression and war against the US (in the ancient Islamic tradition of anti-infidel jihad) as was 9/11-which Dzhokhar Tsarnaev (and his brother) tried to emulate on a smaller scale.

That should make him an enemy combatant in any rational person's eyes, especially when he and his brother planned to continue their murderous jihad in New York and possibly elsewhere until they were stopped. It's the dangerous PC 9/10 mentality that blindly sees them as criminals and not soldiers in a global struggle to defeat the US and make Islam powerful again as Allah and the Koran command.
RELATED ARTICLES Supreme Court: ‘There Is No Bar to this Nation's Holding One of Its Own Citizens as an Enemy Combatant’ - Atlas Shrugs

http://www.atmo.se/dynamicContent/gitmo_large.jpg  

 Guantanamo Hunger Strike Grows

 To 92 Detainees, Military Says

 
IF EITHER BUSH OR MCCAIN OR ROMNEY WAS PRESIDENT
 

this would be headline news all over MSM. But because it might reflect badly on Obama mum is the word. All these 92 terrorist inmates (out of 166) are protesting their innocence using the sob story that they haven't been charged with anything and were in the wrong place at the wrong time when apprehended. "Either charge us with a crime or set us free!" they scream. "Or else let us starve to death"- which the Obama administration won't let happen as they are tortuously being forced fed. With terrorists being droned to smithereens many of these detainees would probably be dead by now if they weren't in Gitmo; or would be droned if they were released and return to the battlefield-which most would do to.

 
RELATED ARTICLES
 
 
 
 
http://www.anexcellentspirit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/logo_pjmedia.jpg
 
 
 
http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2013/02/26/162765484_custom-d41b73addf9d984b334e630ea6a469b7d961f351-s6-c10.jpg
 

While in Belgium this is how Kerry explains the Tsarnaev brothers:
 
"I think the world has had enough of people who have no belief system, no policy for jobs, no policy for education, no policy for rule of law, but who just want to kill people because they don’t like what they see. There’s not room for that."
 
The Tsarnaevs have no belief system? No values? Believe in nothing? Not even a twisted form of Islam? Well if nothingness was the cause of their violent rampage that completely takes Islam out of the equation-which I think is Kerry's bizarre diplomatic intention. If not, then he's a total fool.


New email for ApolloSpeaks

OBAMA, BIN LADIN AND THE ULTIMATE CAUSE OF THE BOSTON MARATHON BOMBING

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-23 15:47--OBAMA, BIN LADIN AND THE ULTIMATE CAUSE OF THE BOSTON MARATHON BOMBING 

 
 
 Jihad There are misconceptions
 
 
 
 Some, like Tom Brokaw, are inclined to blame the Boston bombing on drone strikes and the collateral killing of many innocent Moslems. Others blame Iraq and Afghanistan and the thousands of Moslems who have died from those wars. Still others blame it on our longstanding friendship with Israel, or Gitmo not being closed as Obama promised at the start of his presidency. But the recent surge of al-Qaida inspired violence can only have one ultimate cause overlooked by Brokaw and the rest: The US invasion of a Moslem country from an occupied Moslem land to kill a revered Moslem leader (gunning him down like a dog) in blasphemous violation of Holy Moslem Law and the Koran.
 
If only Obama hadn't ordered the killing of isolated, impotent Osama bin Laden there wouldn't have been riotous 9/11 pro-bin Laden protests across the Moslem world; Ambassador Stevens and three aides wouldn't have been brutally killed; the Algerian energy plant wouldn't have been seized and 85 dead; and the Tsarnaev boys wouldn't have blown up the Boston Marathon with that poor Moslem kid facing the death penalty or life in prison. If only we hadn't killed bin Laden how different things would be today. Or would they? 

Drone strikes, the Iraq and Afghan wars, the rebirth of Israel, Gitmo and bin Ladin's death, etc. if these things hadn't happened Islam would still be in a state of profound moral and political crisis having lost its caliphate and great world standing after 500 years of ruinous decline-casting doubt on its divine election as God's chosen faith for all mankind. Mohammed and the first fanatical jihadists were for killing, deceiving and subverting their way to establishing Islam as a great world empire as a further means to world domination. Today's jihadists are fighting and dying for IMPERIAL RESTORATION: killing, deceiving and subverting their way to making Islam a great imperial power again, and at long last achieving its purpose in history: a one world, totalitarian, medieval Allah ruled Moslem state. And it is this that ultimately explains jihadist attacks great and small in today's world: the Boston bombing, Ft. Hood, 9/11 and all of the other Islamist atrocities and crimes plaguing our time.

Death to jihad! Death to Islamism! Death to Moslem intolerance and supremacy! the greatest threat to progress and freedom facing mankind. We're in a war to the death for the fate of the earth with medieval savages who mustn't prevail. And as with the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, the Second World War and Cold War this is a cause worth fighting and giving one's life for.
 
 
 

JOHN KERRY COMPARES ISRAELI DEFENSE COMMANDOS TO THE BOSTON MARATHON KILLERS

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-22 10:00 -- JOHN KERRY COMPARES ISRAELI DEFENSE COMMANDOS TO THE BOSTON MARATHON KILLERS

 
 
 
Kissing Islamist Prime Minister Erdogan's butt John Kerry likens slain, violent, anti-Semetic flotilla thugs to the innocent victims of the Boston terror bombing, and by extension IDF commandos to the bloodthirsty Boston bombers when they are essentially identical to the Boston police.
 

Moronic appeaser John Kerry (who would have made a worse President than he is Secretary of State)  shockingly made an analogy between terrorists and the victims of terror when he said in Istanbul yesterday that after dealing with the families whose loved ones were slain in the Boston Marathon Bombing he understands the pain, anger and frustration of the families who lost loved ones during the IDF raid of The Mavi Marmara-the Turkish flotilla ship that illegally attempted to break the Israeli naval blockade of Hamas-ruled Gaza in 2010.

 In other words, in Kerry's perverse view, the IDF commandos who killed nine armed, violent Jew-hating flotilla jihadists hell-bent on breaking the blockade to help wicked, genocidal Hamas terrorists are no better than the two Boston Marathon jihadists who killed and maimed scores of innocent Americans. Actually, coming from the man who compared our heroic troops in Vietnam (and their noble mission of fighting Communism) to savage, bloodthirsty, Mongol hordes we shouldn't be shocked or surprised.
 

THE BOSTON MARATHON BOMBING: THE WHY, THE MOTIVE, THE REASON, THE TRUTH

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-21 12:37--THE BOSTON MARATHON BOMBING: THE WHY, THE MOTIVE, THE REASON, THE TRUTH 

April 20, 2013
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/politics/   

 
 

  

 
Secular leftists who were praying that a right-wing nut was the Marathon bomber are scratching their heads in disbelief unable to comprehend why such a sweet looking innocent immigrant boy would commit so savage a crime. Why did he do it? What was his motive in killing, maiming and injuring scores of innocent people? 
 
ABXNOMORE:writes:
 
Don't be so sure, ApolloSpeaks.
 
My reply:
 
I'd bet the barn on it and win.
 
 
 
So says an ancient God.
 
My reply:
 
If it's Islam's war god you're referring to then you're right.
 
  
 
All the predictions over the past six days have been wrong, yours has about the same chance of being right as the arab and the Tparty predictions.
 
My reply
 
Speak for yourself. Your predictions have probably been wrong as you were hoping for and possibly expecting the bombing to be the work of rightwing tea party anti-tax skin head extremists.
 
Eliza Dooks writes:
 
Gosh, are you folks just typing a line you heard on Fox? Because instead of offering any real, intelligent insights you just keep saying this. It's dull.
 
My reply:
 
It's actually very simple to figure out: Anyone who turns to Islamic extremism for answers to life's meaning and purpose, as the Marathon Bombers did, believes that Islam is the answer to everything-all the world's problems evils and wrongs.
 
Eliza Dooks writes:
 
The keyword is EXTREMISM. There are extremists in every religion. Being Muslim does NOT make someone a terrorist. Have you ever met a Muslim? Spoken with a Muslim? It isn't very responsible to form opinions about a religion or culture you have no first hand experience with or knowledge of other than what you see on television or read in newspapers. To condemn almost a quarter of the world's population for the actions of a few isn't sensible and makes us no better than those we condemn.
 
My reply:
 
My comment was limited to Islamic (jihad driven) supremacists like the Tsarnaev Brothers. And they are legion.
 
redeye writes:
 
Why would you indict an entire religion based on the actions of a few?
 
My reply:
 
Olethea writes:
 
Is Islam the answer?

Or do sick people twist things to validate their sick ideas? David Koresh purported to be following the bible. So did Jim Jones.

Do you blame christianity for their behavior?

My reply:
 
Every Islamic supremacist group across the spectrum believes that Islam, God's final revelation of truth to humanity, is the one infallible and absolute answer to war, poverty, disease, injustice etc and most every evil and ill that afflicts mankind. And that the end of establishing a one world Moslem caliphate or state justifies any atrocity, crime or lawless and immoral means: war, mass murder, genocide, rape, theft, deception, subversion etc. The self-radicalized Tsarnaev Brothers adopted this ideology and would have went on killing for Allah and Islam until they were arrested or gladly killed. The problem with jihad in Islam is that its founder was himself a mass murdering terrorist thug who declared endless war on all infidels until they were conquered and subdued. Does this make all Moslems jihadists? No. Even Mohammed said all Moslems could not be cold blooded killers such as he.
 
 Olethea writes:  
 
And every Christian supremacist group across the spectrum believes that infidels should be killed. So what's your point?There are extremists in every religion, my friend.
 
My reply:   
 
 It's like leftist atheist comedian Bill Maher said the other day "comparing Islam to Christianity is Liberal Bullsh*t. Jewish, Christian, Buddhist and Hindu extremists don't want to kill me. Moslem extremists do. Moreover, unlike Mohammed Jesus wasn't a jihadist so any Christian violently at war with unbelivers is a perversion of Christianity. Google " Maher: Comparing Islam to Christianity 'liberal bullsh*t' | The Daily Caller "
 
 taylor5 writes
 
Mcveigh?
 
My reply
 
Was McVeigh's evil deed motivated by a grand vision of a one world totalitarian religious state bringing peace, justice and unity to mankind?

THE TSARNAEV BROTHERS AND ISLAM: THE RELIGION OF WORLD PEACE

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-20 09--THE TSARNAEV BROTHERS AND ISLAM: THE RELIGION OF WORLD PEACE

    PAX ISLAMICA
   
 The glorious world victory of Islamic peace, the dream of every jihadist.
 
 Don't be misled by the crimes of the Boston Marathon killers into thinking ill of Islam. Islam is a religion of peace-of supreme, absolute, unending peace. Islam is not your peace or my peace; not Jewish, Christian, Buddhist or Hindu peace; not Democratic, Communist, Socialist or Anarchist peace; not Conservative, Progressive or Reactionary peace; not Capitalist, Marxist or social justice peace. Islam is the religion of Islamic peace (and only Islamic peace) which calls for the conquest of divided, suffering, war-torn humanity in a one world Moslem state of peace-where Allah the God of peace and his Law of peace divinely reign supreme in peace forcefully uniting everyone to live in peace or else suffer the peace of the grave.
 
When Hezbollah in Beirut blew up 240 Marines it was for peace. When al-Qaida killed 3000 Americans on 9/11 it was for peace. When 13 Americans were gunned down at Ft Hood it was for peace. When four Americans were murdered in Benghazi and three people in Boston it was for peace carried out by men of peace advancing the cause of Islamic peace-as Islam's warrior prophet did 14 centuries ago when he lifted his sword to heaven and declared endless war in God's name for the sake of peace on earth.
 
Those who kill for Islam are peacemakers, Islamic peacemakers, good, brave, noble souls justly fighting in the way of the prophet; struggling to make the Pax Islamica (the victory of Islamic peace) a reality on earth.
 
Allah the Compassionate, the Merciful, the All Wise is the God of Peace; Mohammed the warrior and Revealer of Truth is the Prophet of Peace; the Holy Koran with its declaration of war on unbelievers is the Book of Peace; and Sharia is the Constitution and Absolute Law of God's Justice and Peace. Those who kill infidels for Allah, Mohammed, the Koran and the Law are soldiers of peace advancing by sword or subversion the truest and most perfect idea of peace-true and perfect because it's divine, an idea in God's mind, a plan for all mankind. Believers who die while killing for peace are martyrs for God and his idea of peace-and blessed in heaven with eternal peace while their victims rot in the chaos and torment of endless hell.
 
Tamerlan Tsarnaev is in heaven enjoying God's peace while he waits for his brother to join him in peace. There's no placating, appeasement or peace with such men short of surrendering to them. This is a fight to the death for the fate of the earth. There's no middle way. It's either us or them
 
 

OBAMA’S MENTAL CONFUSION OVER THE BOSTON BOMBING

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-17 12:12- OBAMA'S MENTAL CONFUSION OVER THE BOSTON BOMBING 

http://preview.search.aol.com/aol/imageDetails?s_it=imageDetails&q=IMAGE+of+MEDIAITE&img=https://si0.twimg.com/profile_images/2087901315/mediaite2.jpg&v_t=keyword_rollover&host=https://twitter.com/Mediaite&width=139&height=139&thumbUrl=http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTksZQC--8bhUnO2F8ycCruxCeSlV1Bg_fOBTjagqEBIzGop42KKz52BhhZ:si0.twimg.com/profile_images/2087901315/mediaite2.jpg&b=image?s_it=imageResultsBack&v_t=keyword_rollover&imgsz=&imgtype=&imgc=&q=IMAGE+of+MEDIAITE&oreq=50281414d4504d62a484641a432cba4a&imgHeight=500&imgWidth=500&imgTitle=Mediaite.com&imgSize=292907&hostName=twitter.com

Obama Calls Boston Bombing

 ‘Terrorism’

 
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2012/12/15/us/politics/OBAMA/OBAMA-articleLarge.jpg 
 
I don't get it. Obama who refused to call the Ft. Hood massacre an act of Islamist terror (he called it "workplace violence"), and at first refused to acknowledge Benghazi as a premeditated al-Qaida terror attack (saying it sprung spontaneously from a nonexistent protest over a video when an al-Qaida group quickly claimed responsibility for it) now says that Monday's unclaimed bombing was "an act of terror. " Any time bombs are used to target innocent civilians, it is an act of terror” said Obama. What kind of nonsense is this? When guns, knives, clubs and poisons are lethally used by Islamists for the glory of Allah and Islam they're not acts of terror? Guess not in Obama's book as Nidal Hassan, the Allahu Akba shouting Ft. Hood gunman, wasn't a terrorist according to him. 
 
Moreover, bloodthirsty nonterrorists have used explosives to carry out their crimes. Dynamite was used to kill 45 people (children and teachers) in the worst (nonterrorist) school massacre in history (see). The very insane George Metesky, called "The Mad Bomber," terrorized New York City for 16 years planting bombs in subways, movie theaters and public buildings-my father, an NYPD detective, worked this case and arrested him. Sure, most deadly bombings are acts of terror and Monday's twin blasts look and smell like an al-Qaida operation and probably is. But until we know for sure who's behind it, it could very well be an Adam Lanza with a bomb who killed and injured people for the thrill of it without political intent or hatred of the US. It appears that because the majority of folks and the media believe that the Marathon Massacre was a terrorist act Obama chose to join them to avoid looking foolish again.
 
POSTSCRIPT
 
Prior to calling Monday's bombings a "terrorist act" the White House issued this contradictory proclamation: "As a mark of respect for the victims of the senseless acts of violence perpetrated on April 15, 2013, in Boston, Massachusetts, by the authority vested in me as President of the United States...... I hereby order that the flag of the United States shall be flown at half-staff........"
 
Now either Monday's horrific bombing was a "terrorist act," as Obama later said, or it was "a senseless act of violence" as he originally said. He can't have it both ways. If it was a "terrorist act" then it was a purposeful act of war carried out by a militant anti-US enemy hell-bent on defeating and destroying us-thus making the dead and injured  war casualties as if they were soldiers struck down on a battlefield (as Newt Gingrich said of the Benghazi dead (see)). But if Monday's bombing was "a senseless act of violence" then the victims were no different from Newtown's injured and slain insanely killed for no great purpose or political reason by a bloodthirsty madman (an Adam Lanza with bombs) looking for post-mortem fame.
 \
COMMENTS ON MEDIAITE
 
Yashomite writes:
 

Well put Apollo. After hours and hours of soul searching Obama came to realize there was no way he could call this an act of workplace violence so seeing as how everyone else in America was calling this an act of terrorism he figured he might as well join the fray as you say. I agree with you and Gingrich that "terrorist act" and "act of senseless violence" are contradictory.

PapaJohn
 
Really, Apollo?
 
Who are we at war with? Where is their capital? You know, so we know what our final objective is. Who are their ambassadors?

Something tells me, Apollo, like many things, you haven’t really thought this one through….

My Reply

This may be news to you but Bin Laden declared jihad (holy war) on us in the late 1990s which made al-Qaida a nontraditional stateless enemy of this country. BTW Bin Laden's inspiration for his jihad against us is the Koran written by a warlord prophet who declared endless war on all unbelievers until the earth was conquered and Islamized.

 

FROM FT. HOOD TO PATRIOTS’ DAY MARATHON ATTACK

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS'  TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-16 04:28 --FROM FT. HOOD TO PATRIOTS' DAY MARATHON ATTACK -

After lunatic Moslem jihadist psychiatrist Nidal Hassan killed twelve soldiers and one civilian in his deadly attack at Ft. Hood the administration refused to call it what it was: a terrorist attack; calling it instead "workplace violence." Now if it's discovered that yesterday's mass causality attack in Boston was a terrorist attack carried out by a jihadist like Hassan will our see-no-evil-in-Isalm administration call it "tragic sports event violence?"

POSTSCRIPT I 

WOLF BLITZER DOES A MICHAEL BLOOMBERG ON BOSTON ATTACK

Just as Mayor Bloomberg speculated that the failed Times Square bombing could have been carried out by right-wing terrorists upset with ObamaCare so CNN's Wolf Blitzer surmised that the Patriots' Day Marathon Attack might be the work of an anti-tax terror group because it was Tax Day. In connecting the dots his reasoning probably went something like this:  Boston, Tax Day, the bombers must have been Boston anti-tax Tea Partiers.

 Hey, Wolf if there were such a group they'd have attacked a government facility not a sporting event that has nothing to do with taxation.

POSTSCRIPT II 

FROM JIHAD WATCH

SAUDI IN CUSTODY FOR BOSTON BOMBING

"Authorities question Saudi national in Boston attack," by John Miller for CBS News, April 15:

(CBS News) Following the twin blasts at the Boston Marathon that has claimed two lives and hundreds injured, a Saudi national is being held in custody in relation to the incident who was near the scene of the blast, CBS News correspondent John Miller reported.

Law enforcement sources told Miller a witness saw a person acting suspiciously when the explosions happened along the marathon route.

"They see him running away from the device," said Miller. "Now, a reasonable person would be running away. But this person had noticed him before. This is a civilian -- chases him down, tackles him, turns him over to the Boston police. The individual is being looked at [and] was suffering from burn injury. That means this person was pretty close to wherever this blast went off, but not so close as to suffer the serious injuries that other people did."

DEBATE: ARE GUNS MORE AMERICAN THAN APPLE PIE? ARE GUN RIGHTS MORE AMERICAN THAN OBAMA?

 FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-14 11:15-- DEBATE: ARE GUNS MORE AMERICAN THAN APPLE PIE? ARE GUN RIGHTS MORE AMERICAN THAN OBAMA? 

April 13, 2013

ARE GUNS MORE AMERICAN THAN APPLE PIE ?

Actually 90% of apple pie eating Americans
 and ice cream eating kitten owners are okay with civilians owning guns.

 Background Checks Beat Apple Pie,

Baseball, Kittens In Americans'

Hearts: Poll

Because the issue of gun control is of little concern to the American people HuffPo did an idiotic poll with the polling firm You Gov showing that background checks on gun sales were more popular than apple pie, baseball, kittens and having sex. It found that eating ice cream was more popular than anything with Republicans liking the desert more than Dems (see). You can't make this stuff up. Now with millions of Americans owning 300 million guns and the gun control issue of low national importance I intuitively came to the following conclusion which I posted on HuffPo:

 GUNS ARE MORE AMERICAN THAN APPLE PIE.

And gun rights more American than Barack  Obama.

These 15 words (once deleted and twice posted) ignited a mini-firestorm on HuffPo that won the favor of 49 pro-gun rights posters and the ire of 29 lefties. The following are some of the more interesting comments and my replies:

E-Nation writes

That's the problem right there (your first sentence).

My reply

 It's not a problem for the vast majority of Americans whose lives are personally untouched by gun violence; just for a minority of hysterical leftist anti-gun alarmists who see a crisis where none exists.

 Xak999 writes:

 It's only a problem for the vast majority of Americans who can't decipher your comment.

 My reply

 Let me explain: The vast majority of Americans will go through life without experiencing gun violence. But what little gun violence there is is a menacing national crisis to leftist anti-gun nuts.

 Xak999 replies

What LITTLE gun violence?

My reply 

 Little, tiny, inconsequential compared to our total population. Gun murders in 2011 were 3/10,000ths of 1% of the US population. That's why the issue of gun control, according to Gallup, is of very little importance to the public-down there with ethics, poor healthcare and taxes (see).

conscioushope writes

And you are dummer than dirt.

My reply

Dirt is where Obama's anti-Constitutional dream of a gun free America is going.

 ReMarker writes

 You help make the argument that some Americans are shallow thinkers. Get a clue, no one will take the guns of law abiding citizens. Maybe that's your problem.

 My reply

As long as guns are more American than apple pie law abiding gun owners have nothing to fear.

 XFR Stone writes 

Well that's twisted.

 My reply

 Why? Are the millions of Americans legally owning 300 millions guns twisted?

 XFR Stone replies

 Would you consider it healthy? 300 million guns...that doesn't sound a bit ridiculous to you?

 My reply

 What's unhealthy or ridiculous about owning a gun, or many guns? What is the illness? Give it a name.

 XFR Stone replies

 You said it all in your apple pie post. Hmm. food or devices of destruction...Which is a better thing to have?

 My reply

 I said guns were more American than apple pie not that they were more nutritious.

XFR Stone  replies

 I think they're childish. Boys with toys.

 My reply

 It's childish to own a gun for self-defense? Boy, if I was accosted by a criminal that's one toy I'd want to have-and most would agree.

 XFR Stone replies

 Why do you think criminals use them? Because they are childish and have no sense of societal responsibility. Now what we have done is create laws that have allowed criminals to get guns for 200 plus years and now we must fear our own creation. Yeah, that was real smart.

  My reply

Most criminals purchase guns illegally on the black market and use them to succeed in their criminal activities. As Gallup reported in a recent survey, the fear of gun violence is so low in our society that most Americans give very low importance to the issue of gun control (see and see).

 Xak999 replies

 Apollo:

It's twisted because no one can vouch for the maturity level, sanity level and mental illness level of those millions of Americans who own nearly one gun for every American (even those who don't own guns).

 My reply 

We have over two hundred years of experience in this country with the vast majority of gun owners going to their graves committing no crime (violent or not) with their  weapons.

mstaggerlee writes

 Right!!! The Uzi, the Khalishnakov, the Luger and the Berretta - more American than apple pie!

 My reply 

 Ask Americans which is more American the Colt 45 or apple pie? What do you think most will say?

Ganymede425 writes

Guns were invented by the Chinese.

 My reply

 True. But what makes gun ownership so American is the huge, incomparable number of civilian gun owners in this country as opposed to the number of Chinese civilians owning guns: ZERO.

 Ganymede425 replies

 That definition would make the North Korean military more American than apple pie.

 My reply

Okay, let me restate that: what makes gun ownership so American is the Second Amendment and the staggering number of guns constitutionally and legally owned by Americans. Is there another people more in love with guns and the right to self-defense using guns than our countrymen?

 Yeriah  writes

And the president is more American than you. 

 My reply 

Not true. My political philosophy is rooted in the classical, limited government, individual rights Liberalism of the American Revolution. Obama's philosophy is rooted in the unAmerican collectivism and state supremacism of the French Revolution. 

Yeriah writes

 Who told you the American Revolution was based on "you are on your own" philosophy?

 My reply

It was based on Classical Liberalism-on the dignity, worth and responsible freedom of the individual and his priority over the state which serves him. The very opposite was the case with the French Revolution and Obama's ideology of government utopian supremacism which is failing. 

 sally-anne writes

 And with right comes responsibilities, Apollo.

 My reply

FYI Obama has a long history of being an irresponsible, left wing, anti-gun rights nut. Check out his radical voting record while sitting in the Illinois senate.

 craigsco

please...just go have sex with your gun and get it over with !

My reply

Wasn't it the Beatles who sang, "Happiness is a warm gun?"

 ciotog17

 Go bake an apple pie with a loaded gun in it, then. Stand by the oven awaiting further instructions. Off with you now.

 My reply

How about something less dangerous and more practical like a National Gun Rights Day celebrated with cakes made in the image of guns.  

ciotog17 replies

In your case, let's just stick with the loaded apple pie, shall we? It's what America wants.

My reply 

 Okay. But I'm a Whole Foods guy (keep that to yourself); and before I do it I'll need info on the nutritional value of guns and bullets. Perhaps you can help me there.

ciotog17 replies

  Gladly. Open mouth, insert pistol, pull trigger. IF you gain weight, then you'll know. 

My reply 

In the absence of owning a gun I'll opt for doing the next best thing: standing in front of Joe Biden. 

SeanMartin writes

No wonder you guys have such a lousy PR problem.You talk like morons.


My reply
 

So lousy that we're winning the gun control debate against hysterical anti-gun extremists like Obama and his shameless exploitation of Newtown.

SeanMartin

 Dude, you might want to check reality once again. The only people supporting you right now are the same bunch who think a woman's vag is their personal political playground... and they're not winning that battle either.

So, unless you got some better solution to trot out than waving your little p3nis substitute and screaming hysterically about black helicopters coming to take your little toys away, I'd suggest doing a bit more self-research.

 My reply 

20 Newtown children are dead because of imbecile lefties like you championing the rights of the mentally ill not to be institutionalized until they commit crimes. BTW, the instruments of self-defense aren't children's toys. With them the Founders freed us from tyranny. With them slaves were freed. With them we all stay free.

Johnny Motschenbacher writes 

I think I just became dumber reading ApolloSpeaks, formerly known as ApolloWaksHiself2Bush. How does this guy seriously have 185 devoted fans?

My reply 

This dummy has researched and studied the history of Obama's radical anti-gun legislation in the Illinois senate. Have you? If you do I'm sure you'll get more than a leg tingle; you'll get a huge er3ction. BTW my 185 Huffpo fans also read my blog at Townhall along with many others.

Johnny Motschenbacher replies

ApolloWaksHiself2Bush didn't study anything, obviously. Did you actually look and see what Obama has done with guns since his first election? NO you didn't, or you would be all for his gun policy. I still find it funny how the right just picks an issue and argues for it no matter how it affects them. Keep up the good work!

My reply

The problem with Republican lawmakers on gun control was eloquently stated by MSNBC's Martin Bashir when he said that not enough family members of Republicans are being shot to death by criminals. Meaning that the number of gun homicides in this country is just too small and insignificant to rouse Republican lawmakers (and the general public) to action.

Luckyclover writes

According to wikipedia, guns originated in China as opposed to the President and the Constitution which originated in America. Does that answer your stupid question?

My reply

 How many guns do Chinese civilians own under their constitution? ZERO (see).

How many guns does Obama want Americans to own? I'll give you a hint: in Illinois he voted for legislation to shut down all gun manufacturers in that state-a very unAmerican thing to do. No?

  Luckyclover replies

No.  

My reply 

"No" only if you're a constitution hating anti-gun rights wacko like our Gun-Control-Failure-in-Chief.

Out on bail writes

  1. USA over nra. 

My reply

USA is the self-defense gun owner's Mecca of the world.

AngryLiberalDude writes

Define "radical anti-gun senator". I can call him a purple garbage can toaster oven too and it doesn't mean he is one.

My reply

Who but a radical anti-gun leftist would sit on the board of the radically left anti-gun Joyce Foundation (with radical Weatherman terrorist bomber Bill Ayers) to fund radical anti-gun groups across the state of Illinois-while voting for radical anti-gun measures in the state senate like criminalizing gun owners who injure or kill home invaders, or shutting down state gun manufacturers, or outlawing many types of hunting and target rifles, or limiting the number of handguns a citizen can purchase per month. And the list goes on.

< p style="text-align: center;"> 

SHORT SWEET DEBATE ON OBAMA’S FAILED KEYNESIAN STIMULUS

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-13 09:34 --SHORT SWEET DEBATE ON OBAMA'S FAILED STIMULUS  

http://academic.reed.edu/economics/parker/f10/201/cases/GDP_growth.jpg
GDP chart from the Commerce Department's Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA) 
showing that the economic recovery started before Obama took office.
  
North Light writes on Huffpo: 
 
Republicans hate government funded stimulus?They never do when Republicans use it in an economic downturn.

I COMMENTED
 
There isn't a single example in history of a government funded stimulus spending its way out of economic distress. Neither the Hoover Republican stimulus of the early 30s nor FDR's Democrat New Deal stimulus succeeded in ending the Great Depression. Neither the Bush Republican $150 billion stimulus of 2008 nor Obama's massive $850 billion Democrat stimulus of the following year worked-Obama believed that the Bush stimulus was too small and hugely outspent him; FDR thought the same of Hoover and ramped up federal spending, but to no avail. 
 
The Greek stimulus, Spanish stimulus, Italian stimulus, Portuguese stimulus, British stimulus, Irish stimulus and multiple and ongoing Japanese stimuluses have all failed. David Stockman nailed it when he recently said: "What we are seeing is the death of the Keynesian State.
 
North Light replies
 
I respectfully disagree, Apollo. If we hadn't had Obama's Reinvestment and Recovery Act, the deep recession would probably have turned into a real depression. Stimulus is not a magic bullet fixing everything that is wrong in an economy. The argument *things aren't perfect therefore stimulus don't work* is faulty....it does not mean a stimulus doesn't dampen the impact of the recession or that the investments won't pay off.
 
My Reply
 
Actually it was Bush's TARP that prevented the economy from going into a depression by saving the US financial/banking system from collapse. By the time Obama was sworn into office the worst was over and the economy was on the mend. In fact, as the GDP charts from the Commerce Department show, the end of the Great Recession actually began in Q4 2008. It was in late November or early December 2008 that GDP hit rock bottom and the V-shaped recovery began (see above chart). By June 2009 (still Bush's economy) the recession was officially over.
 
The stimulus was a gigantic waste of money. The deep recession or depression that  Harding/Coolidge inherited from Woodrow Wilson was turned into the Roaring, Soaring, Prosperous Twenties by slashing taxes, spending and federal regulations. Obama has gone in the opposite direction increasing taxes, spending and regulations; and the result is the worst recovery since the Great Depression bordering on a double dip recession-a weak, pathetic, trickle growth recovery just hovering above ZERO GDP GROWTH with a soaring stock market engineered by the Fed (a bubble) to create a false wealth effect.
 
RELATED ARTICLES
 
 

 DAVID STOCKMAN AND THE DEATH OF THE KEYNESIAN STATE – A DEBATE

< p style="text-align: center;"> 

THE GREAT CONFUSER’S GREAT FLIP FLOP ON DEFICIT AND DEBT REDUCTION

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-11 11:39 -- THE GREAT CONFUSER'S GREAT FLIP FLOP ON DEFICIT AND DEBT REDUCTION 

 
 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/10/obama-budget-stimulus_n_3055069.html

"My budget will reduce our deficits by nearly another $2 trillion so that all-told, we will have surpassed the goal of $4 trillion in deficit reduction that independent economists believe we need to stabilize our finances, but it does so in a balanced and responsible way -- a way that most Americans prefer."

Which is it Mr. President? Either the nation's finances are stable, responsible  sensible, sound and good or they are not? Either we're unstably, unsoundly, irresponsibly spending and borrowing too much money or we're not? Either we need a balanced budget to stabilize things or we do not? Which is it? Please tell us and set us straight.  You have said that we don't have a deficit or debt problem. You have said we don't need a balanced budget like Bill Clinton had to get our spending under control and generate surpluses. You've said that Simpson-Bowles (who headed your Deficit Commission), and "obstructionist" Republicans in Congress, are needlessly alarming the folks when they shout GREECE! GREECE! and warn of national bankruptcy and blood in the streets if we don't get our fiscal house in order. But now doing a flip-flop you urge Congress to pass your budget to do what?  "STABILIZE OUR FINANCES." But why? If our deficit and debt are stable, sound and good, if they're not unsustainable and out of control (like Simpson-Bowles and Republicans warn) then why do our finances (our spending and borrowing, our deficit and debt) need to be stabilized? Either our finances are stable or unstable? Either we're spending and borrowing too much or we're not? Either a devastating fiscal crisis is looming which we desperately need to avoid or it's not? Which is it Mr. President? Make up your mind! Please tell us the truth! We're baffled and need to be unconfused.
  
COMMENTS
  
Razer writes

We're not Greece, but we could be. Anytime you tell america everything's peachy America stops moving. You say we're stable and America starts rocking the boat as hard as it can to make sure. You say we're not borrowing too much, new budgets come out asking for a couple trillion more. You say we're not spending too much, suddenly politicians find themselves a reason to pick up a pay raise. You say we're secure we cut the defense budget. You say we're at risk we ignore it because it's convenient. We get hit and we increase spending ten fold, exhaust our resources, troops, and the patience of our "allies". No dear sir, America is never "stable". Too many people want too many things and are willing to sacrifice everyone else to get it. Either way, FUD has no place in our politics. Republicans want the country to believe that we're on the precipice of devastation and they're the only ones who can fix it. To make their point they hold the country hostage at every critical point trying to get their pint of blood. Democrats want the country to believe that we're fine and we just need to keep a handle on things. They like to make their point by denying republicans at every turning point.
 
My reply
 
Actually Dems want us to believe that the country is in a worsening crisis of inequality and growing poverty that a little more taxation, borrowing and spending couldn't cure-then a little more and a little more and a little more until we become like broken, bankrupt socialist Greece and "a little more" can't be done anymore.
 
 Razer's reply
 
We're already there with SS. A little more can't be done, people have to stop scapegoating. The system's been doomed for awhile, this is nothing new.

My reply
 

Unfortunately a little more can and will be done to make our bankruptcy more painful.

RELATED
 
 
< p style="white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; text-transform: none; color: #141412; font: 15px/19px 'Source Sans Pro', Helvetica, sans-serif; margin: 0px 0px 24px; orphans: 2; widows: 2; letter-spacing: normal; text-indent: 0px; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px;"> 

THE DEATH OF MARGARET THATCHER, HER VICTORIOUS FALKLANDS WAR AND WHAT IT COULD MEAN FOR DAVID CAMERON

  

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-08 17:40 --THE DEATH OF MARGARET THATCHER, HER VICTORIOUS FALKLANDS WAR AND WHAT IT COULD MEAN FOR DAVID CAMERON 

 

 
MAGGIE THE MIGHTY
 

The warrior goddess Britannia incarnate (the British Athena): wise, brave, strong, noble, true. The female Churchill. Deadly foe of Socialism. One of the greatest transformative women in all of world history. Part of the triumvirate that ended the Cold War and brought down the Soviet Union. Ronald Reagan's inspiration and political soul mate. I weep for her and will miss her.

 
http://img.timeinc.net/time/magazine/archive/covers/1982/1101820510_400.jpg
 
 
THE DEATH OF MARGARET THATCHER, HER VICTORIOUS FALKLANDS WAR AND WHAT IT COULD MEAN FOR DAVID CAMERON
 
If it weren't for Margaret Thatcher leading Great Britain to victory in the 1982 Falklands War her Conservative government would have likely been defeated in the 1983 elections and she would not have gone on to transform her country (saving it from a socialist caused economic depression) and help Ronald Reagan win the Cold War. Indeed, the Falklands War was a blessing for Thatcher, her country and the Free World.
 
I mention this on the day of Thatcher's death because today is indirectly related to the Falklands War in a rather strange way that could indicate a similar turn of events for David Cameron. What I mean is this when Margaret Thatcher died today it was the 1063rd day of Conservative PM  David Cameron's coalition government*.
 
*May 11, 2010 (Start of Cameron's government) to April 8, 2013 is 2 years, 10 months and 28 days or 1063 days.
 
Now here is where it gets profound: if we add 1063 days to May 4, 1979, the day Margaret Thatcher's prime ministership began (see),  it brings us to the date April 1, 1982. Amazingly this date marked the start of Operation Corporate*, the British code name for the Falkland's War (see). Could this be a sign to David Cameron (whose popularity is declining, see) that in a dark hour of his coalition government he'll be faced with a crisis similar to the Falkland's War? And that if he follows Thatcher's bold example and orders military intervention it will score a Falkland's like victory, boost his popularity and win him a second term-and perhaps a solid Conservative government like Thatcher had?  We shall see.
 
*One day before the Argentine invasions. 

DEBATE ON THE NUMERICAL INEQUALITY OF STRAIGHTS AND GAYS AND ITS MEANING

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-07 11:29 DEBATE ON THE NUMERICAL INEQUALITY OF STRAIGHTS AND GAYS AND ITS MEANING 

 
Ying Yang - Duality by
 
It's Ying/Yang not Yang/Yang or Ying/Ying. Lefty progressives who study oriental
philosophy and are familiar with this wonderful Chinese mystical symbol totally
ignore its meaning
when applied to human sexual harmony, balance and 
mental health. As Ying/Yang is the way of Nature and
Nature's God heterosexuals vastly outnumber
homosexuals and always will.
 
I posted the following question on one of the many blogs in the Gay Voices section of The Huffington Post. The reaction was thunderous with 25 pro-gay lefties replying-the bulk of which were name calling or giving stock answers likening the numerical inferiority of gays to left-handed and red-haired people. Below is the debate I had with some of them.
 
 
    QUESTION

If homosexuality and heterosexuality are no different in Nature and equal by Nature, as many on the pro-Gay political Left believe, then why are the two numerically unequal by Nature? Why has Nature throughout human history in society after society and age after age consistently and severely limited the number of homosexuals born into this life making them a small, tiny minority of no more than 3% of the world's population? What is the reason for this huge uneven seemingly unjust disparity? Why has Nature made it this way? Someone please enlighten me.
 

THE DEBATE
 
< p class="comment-text" align="center"> HoosierInMaryland writes
Oh, and the number of people who are right-handed vastly outnumber those who are left-handed. Does that mean nature has a much greater affinity for right-handedness than left-handedness?” 
 
My reply
 
A human hand is a human hand having the exact same functions whether it's on the left or right side of the body. There are no special advantages to being left-handed or right-handed: we eat, write, bowl, open doors etc., with both hands. On the other hand, homosexuals and heterosexuals in their sexuality and the way they practice sex are not the same and greatly differ, so the analogy holds. Heterosexual sex can give birth to children and propagate the species; homosexual sex cannot.
 
Would the human race survive if suddenly everyone born from Nature were left-handed? Yes. Why? Because most left-handed people are heterosexual. Would the human race survive if suddenly every new-born child were homosexual? Eventually humanity would die out. So to ensure the survival of our species Nature by design has severely limited the number of homosexuals to a small, tiny existentially unthreatening minority. This is true with most people born with physical, psychological and mental defects, mutations, deficiencies and disorders. Nature keeps their numbers down to a bare minimum otherwise abnormal people would be way too numerous and civilized human society couldn't exist
 
 If heterosexuals were to adopt the gay lifestyle and forgo p*nis-vigina sex (which same sex couples can't do) the human race, homosexuals included, would perish. So my question to you is this: Why is it that the vast majority of left-handed people are heterosexual and only a tiny number gay? The answer is obvious: survival of the species.
 

HoosierInMaryland replies

In your universe of bigotry and hate aren't lesbians, bisexuals and trans-genders also a "tiny number"?  Now you answer this, Apollo: If your God made humans in his/her image, doesn't that mean that all humans (heterosexuals, homosexuals, bisexuals, and transgender) are all made in his/her image?  That your God created all of them and puts up with them? Looks to me like your beef isn't with the GLBT community, but with your God, who created them along with heterosexuals.
 
Adam-and-Eve-Garden
Ying/Yang
in the Garden of Eden.

My reply
 

You're misinterpreting the Biblical story of Adam and Eve to suit your mindless, pc, pro-gay ideology. Taken literally both Adam and Eve were created by a pure, good, wise, sinless God in His own DIVINE IMAGE: God-like, untainted, without evil, immorality and sin. Having sinned Adam and Eve lost their DIVINE IMAGE, lost their innocence and original, primordial God-like state (spiritual likeness to God)-and were banished from Paradise (happiness) giving birth to children in a fallen, ungodly and sinful existence (needing God, religion or moral philosophy to correct, regenerate and save them). In other words, man in his fallen state is not made in GOD's IMAGE but in the image of fallen humanity (corrupted Adam and Eve): immoral, ungodly, sinful.

All human beings (homosexuals included) have the capacity for moral virtue, spiritual regeneration (salvation),-to become living images of God like Adam and Eve before the fall dwelling in innocence, spiritual happiness and bliss. What a wonderful story, no?

 HoosierInMaryland replies

You write: "You are misinterpreting the story of Adam and Eve. . . ."

So was Eve 'created' on or after the 6th day?

Genesis Chapter 1 says that she was created on the 6th day (with the implication that she was created from dust, just like Adam), but Genesis Chapter 2 says that she was created after the 6th day from one of Adam's ribs.  If the bibble (sic) is inerrant and has no internal contradictions, one or the other is incorrect (and also provides proof that the bibble (sic) is NOT inerrant).  Guess why many don't consider the bibble (sic) inerrant with no internal contradictions.

And exactly what did your jebus (sic) say about homosexuality?  Anything?

I'm asking that you provide information.  I am not interpreting information.

And you admit that all people, one way or another, were created in your God's image.  I guess you don't consider the GLBT community as people, then?  Exactly who is disrespecting others if that is your attitude?

My reply

What kind of Christian uses a screen name taken from a pagan deity? It was you who quoted Genesis to disingenuously try to shame me with a good Biblical idea that you obviously disbelieve in. The story of Adam and Eve is a parable about humanity's origins and sinfulness and as such I respect it and the Judeo-Christian tradition with its healthy heterosexual family based morality, the bed rock of  healthy societies and free constitutional republics. The GLBT community is a group of abnormal, defective, perverse human beings (of varying degrees) born with psycho-sexual disorders (due to chemical imbalances of testosterone and estrogen of varying degrees) blindly and lovingly accepted and embraced as normal, natural, healthy, balanced and good by well-meaning, straight leftist loons who pity them and bleed for them as oppressed, suffering victims. And joining leftists are anything goes Libertarians who care nothing for gays, and some good Conservatives with blind spots (and gay kids). Human beings in their fallen state have the capacity to become wise, good and beautiful like God, though some are better suited by Nature than others to achieve this ideal-very difficult for homosexuals who generally are depraved, sensual creatures of license and lust-which darkens, deadens, depresses and demeans the human soul and spirit.

 

Like it or not your God, whoever he/she is, put GLTB people on this planet and allows them to exist. Like it or not.

I am not disputing that most left-handed people are heterosexual or that if all or most children were born homosexual that it would end the human race. But supposing that all or most were (and why couldn't it happen) what would that say about the 'wisdom' of your God?  Maybe that he/she was not so smart to allow it to happen?  But I thought your God was all-wise, good and knowing and capable of anything and everything.  Why then does he/she even allow what you call "sick, depraved, sin driven creatures" to exist in this world? Either your God doesn't exist or if he/she does the GLBT community is okay with him/her and it's not the abnormal immoral community your bigotry and hatred says it is.

My reply

I have a Platonic understanding of the universe which places a God of perfect unchanging infinite intelligence at the pinnacle of existence, and the ever changing physical world at the other end with a lesser deity (the World Soul or Mother Nature) connecting the two in between (much like the human soul connects the rational mind and body). All of Nature's terrestrial creations are imperfect in different gradations and degrees of beauty and deformity. This material world is the lowest, darkest, densest realm of existence (a moving shadow of Eternity furthest removed from God) filled with good and evil drawing men's souls to higher things (to their true spiritual God-like natures) or down into the filth, slime and excrement of depravity, vice and sin (away from God and what's good and God-like in us); the later is where the GLTB community is-one of Nature's foul, ugly, deformed creations, and I will always be its socially conservative foe when it comes to marriage, adopting kids and politically correct views of what they in are.

 

LOL! So you're a Platonist. You mean like in Plato who was a homosexual? Read the Symposium. Plato was okay with Gays.

My reply

You misconstrue the Symposium which offers different views on the nature of love-Plato's view was represented by the heterosexual Socrates who tried to rescue Athen's youth from the vice of homosexuality and loved his male disciples "Platonically" meaning chastly without sensuality. Plato was only Gay in the literary imagination of Mary Renault and her novels set in ancient Greece. In reality Plato (Socrates, Aristotle the Stoics) wasn't okay with "Gay" but with Sophrosyne (moderation, self-control, temperance), one of the four Platonic cardinal virtues necessary for happiness, well-being and the truly good life.  In his Republic and Book of Laws Plato rightly and wisely describes homosexuality as a form of lust: unhealthy immoderate sexual desire, lacking restraint, balance, self-control or Sophrosyne and therefore incompatible with happiness, well-being and the philosophical life.

The end of Platonic philosophy is the contemplation of God which lust driven human beings who worship the pleasures of the flesh as the greatest good can't achieve-their souls being too impure, dark, diseased and heavy with sin. As Plato said in the Phaedo, "Only the pure can approach the pure." Meaning one must be pure like God to know Him.

 No answer.

 wilray replies 

 It may come as a surprise to you Apollo, but gay people reproduce. King James, as in the King James Bible, sired 8 children, and he was as gay as a goose. I know someone whose father is gay and whose mother is lesbian.

Some 75% of male giraffes are homosexual, yet giraffes are only endangered because of human activity. It is ridiculous for you baggers to keep talking about some doomsday scenario of the human race because of homosexuality. Why ignore the reality, that although homosexuality exists, the human race and most of the ills of the planet are caused by overpopulation. The more likely scenario is that the human race does not curtail reproduction and we destroy our resources. Overpopulation will effect the survival of the human race. In that scenario homosexuality is not an issue

My reply

King James the homosexual did what? Fathered eight kids? What kind of homosexual does that? Obviously James who was very, very sexually active with his queen-wife and very fond of her-so much so in fact that he refers to her in a letter as his "dearest bedfellow" and elsewhere as "flesh of my flesh and bone of my bone"-strange things for a homo to say (see).

Moreover, if giraffes were predominately "Gay" they would be an extinct species having homosexualized themselves to death long ago. It's true that aberrant sexual behavior such as homosexuality does exist in animals. It's also true, as the body of evidence proves, that it is very rare.

 As for doomsday scenarios leftists love them like catastrophic climate change causing a universal deluge or water world. Being that Nature is intent on severely limiting the number of homosexuals to 2%-3% of the human population  there's no possibility they could endanger mankind's survival-nature has seen to it.

a73yobroad writes

To answer your question Apollo

CAUSE THERE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN BIGOTS AND REPUBS...

My reply

You mean to say that Nature is a blindly bigoted, hate-filled entity showing an unfair, unjust preference for heterosexuals over homosexuals because she keeps the hetero population so overwhelmingly large and the homo population permanently undersized and small? Is Nature a human being that she can be bigoted and hate-filled? Nature is a power greater than man, not God or perfect like Him, but a kind of lesser deity free from human faults and flaws-though imperfect in her creations. The only rational answer is that there's Wisdom, Direction and Intelligent Design in what she does.

No answer.
 
RELATED
 

OBAMA’S TWO FOR ONE BUDGET DEAL. CAN WE TRUST HIM?

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-06 08:41 OBAMA'S TWO FOR ONE BUDGET DEAL. CAN WE TRUST HIM? 

April 5, 2013

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/politics/

 Obama Budget: Administration

Explains 'Compromise Proposal'


"The budget would reduce the deficit by $1.8 trillion over ten years -- $600 billion of this reduction would come from revenue raisers, and $1.2 trillion would come from spending reductions and entitlement reforms...."
 
http://www.commonsenseevaluation.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Nixon-Plus-Carter-Equals.jpg

Lying + Incompetency = Obama
 
IN OBAMA WE DISTRUST

The Obama Budget proposes that for every dollar raised in revenue ($600 billion) two in spending will be cut ($1.2 trillion) from entitlements and other things. We've seen this song and dance before and only a fool would buy it. In 1982 Tip O'Neil and the conniving Dems tricked Ronald Reagan with a similar 3 for 1er: for every dollar raised in revenue ($93 billion in excise and business taxes) three would be cut from the budget ($280 billion). Not only did the Dems spend the entire $93 billion without cutting a dime of the promised $280 billion but going into overdrive they spent an additional $450 billion-only $140 billion went to Reagan's Cold War winning defense buildup. And Reagan is held responsible for the double crossing Dems runaway spending spree and debt. 
 
Hopelessly hoping that the lying tax, spend and cheat Dems had undergone a moral transformation George H. W. (read my lips) Bush in 1990 broke his pledge not to raise taxes and repeated Reagan's mistake agreeing to tax hikes on the rich and excise taxes with the promise of spending cuts that never materialized. This p*ssed off conservatives and caused a sluggish recovery from a recession that gave us Bill Clinton-whose reckless subprime mortgage housing program for the poor created the bubble that crashed the economy, which in turn gave us Obama (the most reckless spending head of state in history-and the worst recovery since the Great Depression. Did anyone think it would be different this time around with the most slippery, lawless, untrustworthy, deceitful president since Richard Nixon ?

 
 COMMENTS
 
Beatriz09  writes
 
Hey, Apollo, who's the liar? Truth is during his first term, Obama cut spending by $1.7 trillion. That's more than $3 in spending cuts for each dollar in tax increases.
 
My reply
 
$1.7 trillion? How? By stopping the war in Iraq? That was on George Bush's timetable. By cutting $713 billion from Medicare? That's being used to fund Obamacare. $85 billion in sequester cuts.  I'll credit him with that.

 

OBAMA RISKS NEW HOUSING BUBBLE FOR ECONOMIC LEGACY

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-04 11:37--OBAMA RISKS NEW HOUSING BUBBLE FOR ECONOMIC LEGACY 

Obama Pushes For Housing Bubble

2.0

"Got bad credit? Want to buy a home? You're in luck! President Obama is ramping up the country for housing bubble 2.0 as he urges banks to loan to people with poor credit so they can purchase homes. What could go wrong? Oh just about everything. And don't worry, the government is going to promise banks everything will be just fine," writes Katie (read more).

THE INSANITY CONTINUES
 
Obama desperately wants to leave office with a booming economy at any price even if that means creating another housing bubble that won't burst on his watch. He'll do any irresponsible thing to hurt the economy in the long run as long as it helps his economic legacy. Hillary must be crapping in her pants as it was her husband's revolution in reckless, risky subprime lending for poor uncreditworthy minorities (called the "democratization of credit") that was the fountainhead of the 08 crash. And BTW as an attorney for ACORN Obama pioneered this dangerous, immoral lunacy by forcing Citibank into lending to poor black familiies with no credit or bad credit charging it with racial discrimination and threatening bad publicity  with a civil rights lawsuit if it refused.  But try as he may it won't help him as his egalitarian social justice agenda (Obamanomics, Obamacare, amnesty for illegal aliens, etc. is a lead blanket around the economy stifling robust  economic growth. And this will continue to the end of his miserable, misguided presidency.

 
 

DAVID STOCKMAN AND THE DEATH OF THE KEYNESIAN STATE – A DEBATE

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-02 15:26 --DAVID STOCKMAN AND THE DEATH OF THE KEYNESIAN STATE 

April 2, 2013

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/business/

It's Sundown In America!

David Stockman, Ex-Reagan Budget

Director: George W. Bush's Policies

Bankrupt The Country

http://search.aol.com/aol/imageDetails?s_it=imageDetails&q=image+of+dave+stockman&img=http://www.thenation.com/sites/default/files/user/238200/David_Stockman_ap_img.jpg&v_t=keyword_rollover&host=http://www.thenation.com/article/173621/it-wasnt-david-stockman-who-wrecked-economy&width=183&height=130&thumbUrl=http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQJYqzxlEekmIOJJAcj-PJDwqp1GaO4wy8OQifbc09m9Cy6D-TVBpH-70QPGw:www.thenation.com/sites/default/files/user/238200/David_Stockman_ap_img.jpg&b=image?s_it=imageResultsBack&v_t=keyword_rollover&imgsz=&imgtype=&imgc=&q=image+of+dave+stockman&oreq=99676a954134473998c97ceacb974cec&imgHeight=436&imgWidth=615&imgTitle=David+Stockman,+former+budget&imgSize=30244&hostName=www.thenation.com
 
Reagan economic advisor David Stockman writes that the Keynesian State-which is corrupting and wrecking capitalism-is leading us into inevitable catastrophe under Barack Obama and Fed Chief Bernanke .
 
 
THE HUFFPO HEADLINE IS MISLEADING
 
David Stockman in his alarmingly impassioned NY Times doomsday piece (see) rightly declares the death of the Liberal-Keynesian-Tax and Spend-Entitlement-Crony Capitalist-Debt Driven-Redistribution State which is Grecifying our country and must be stopped before it's too late. Slamming Obama and Bernanke as much as George Bush Stockman warns that their reckless fiscal and monetary policies are continuing the wrecking and corruption of capitalism and building up a horrific bubble more devastatingly ruinous than the Clinton-Fannie-Greenspan-Wall Street housing crash that happened under Bush. Stockman urges that we return to the pro-growth, supply-side, strong dollar, limited government, balanced budget, entrepreneurial capitalism of the Coolidge era-the sound fiscal and economic policies of slashing taxes, spending and federal regulations that turned the Wilson Depression into the Roaring, Soaring, Prospering Twenties. If Stockman's frightful predictions are correct Obama will go down in history as the luckless winner of the 2012 election and Romney as the lucky loser.

 What I wrote above and below were posted on HuffPo.  
 
OBAMA IS BANKRUPTER IN CHIEF II, INSANITY ON STEROIDS, MEGA TIMES WORSE THAN GEORGE BUSH
 
in that he's governed by the disproven theory (that's collapsing bankrupt, broken socialist Europe) that government can replace the private sector as the engine of economic growth and tax, spend, borrow and redistribute its way to prosperity and social justice perfection.

 COMMENTS AND REPLIES ON HUFFPO
 
kbrown2225 writes
 
Sound economic policies of Coolidge? You mean what led to the Great Depression, right?”
 
My reply
 
Wrong! It was the recession caused by the Fed's tight money policies worsened by Hoover's tariff, tax and spending policies that depressed the economy then made it worse and worse.
 
kbrown2225 replies:
 
Really, the Great Depression began only six months after Hoover was elected and Coolidge left office. The stock market had been on a nine-year run that saw the Dow Jones Industrial Average increase in value tenfold, peaking at 381.17 on September 3, 1929.

Speculation thus fueled further rises and created an economic bubble. Because of margin buying, investors stood to lose large sums of money if the market turned down—or even failed to advance quickly enough. 
None of this had ANYTHING to do with Hoover's tariff, tax, or spending policies. Where do you get your historical information, fox news? 
 
My reply:
 
Wrong again. It was more than the bursting of the speculative bubble that caused the crash-recession of 1929 (what did that have to do with Coolidge's low tax, limited gov't policies?). The Fed contraction of the money supply causing a credit crunch was a bigger factor. When Hoover signed Smoot Hawley into law devastating the export market the economy was still in a recession. In 1932 when he signed a massive tax hike on the rich into law it worsened the depression and made it great-the following year the UE rate hit 25% the highest in our history. The new Fed chief under FDR reversed his predecessors policy and the economy started to improve-until FDR like his stupid predecessor began to massively raise taxes-personal, corporate, excise, etc., causing the market-economic crash of 1937-38 FDR's "Recession Within The Depression."
 
kbrown2225 replies:
 
Sure, live in your fantasy world where high taxes and tariffs caused the Great Depression. Sounds like something you learned at Glen Beck University.
 
My reply
 
If the Fed had eased up on its deflationary monetary policy it likely would have kept the economy in a recession even with Hoover's export killing tariffs. But it foolishly stayed the course; then came Smoot-Hawley and the US export market dropped by a whopping 60% surging the UE rate to depression levels.
 
forpeace writes:
 
Apollo
 

Are you still living in denial?! LOL

My reply:
  
What am I in denial about that Stockman isn't?
 
 
Typing in caps doesn't help push an argument , especially one that is erroneous from the beginning..............
 
My reply:
 
Did you even bother to read Stockman's article where he tears apart the failed Obama stimulus and declares the DEATH OF THE KEYNESIAN STATE?  I use CAPS because I'm a CAPITALIST.
 
 
Yet he still doesn't accuse Obama of spending money that he didn't , unlike you did , genius..................Get a clue.............
 
My reply:
 
The clueless one is in the White House thinking he's a mastermind with all the answers. Stockman's critique is against the Keynesian State which started with Hoover and FDR and is being ruinously perpetuated by Obama-Bernanke.
 
PerpetualChange replies
 
And Stockman still says "Trickle Down Economics" and Bush specifically , bankrupted the country , and not Obama.....

My reply
 
What Stockman says in the article is that Reagan and Bush perpetuated the Keynesian State and did nothing to reverse it-nor is Obama reversing it as he is a blind, foolish committed Keynesian (which Reagan and Bush weren't). BTW what you call "trickle down economics (supply-side)" started with Harding/Coolidge who Stockman holds up as a model of economic sanity..
 
 
So, you don't think the stimulus worked?
 
My reply
 
With 24 million Americans still unemployed and underemployed and near zero GDP growth with falling wages and rising prices and the country engulfed in gloom, absolutely not. Just another failed Keynesian experiment and Stockman agrees with me.  
 

Class Warfare Now replies:

The biggest single part of the stimulus was tax cuts. So, I'm glad that you agree with me that tax cuts don't work.

My reply:

Wasteful, ill-considered, targeted tax cuts that did nothing to stimulate consumption as much of it was either saved or used to pay down debt just like the Bush stimulus of 2008 where $160 billion was given to Americans as a tax rebate.

 only1Demvoter writes

only1Demvoter finds " ApolloSpeaks " inconsequential...Maybe if you yell your Revisionist Fallacy LOUD ENOUGH , in another dimension, it'll be some kind of Alternate Reality for you ( et.al. ) ... Here on Earth, we Progressives deal in Facts.

-ralph

 
My reply:
 
I'm YELLING along with Stockman who in this splendid piece of impassioned analysis declares the death of the Liberal-Keynesian-Tax and Spend-Entitlement State.
 
only1Demvoter  replies:
 
You mean " You WISH with Stockman ", Apollo... As I stated earlier, yelling a fallacy, don't make it ANY truer.
 
-ralph
 
My reply:
 
What is revisonist or fallacious about citing the failure of Keyensianism as Stockman does? Can you prove him wrong by giving me one example where Keynes' theory of stimulating demand actually worked in turning around a distressed economy into a rip roaring, butt kicking prospering recovery?  Just one tiny example. That shouldn't be too hard.
 
No answer because there is no example.
 
Marcel2010 writes
 
READ the article, or you can't handle the truth.....
 
My reply:
 
I read it twice and will read it again. What did I miss?

Marcel2010 replies:

If you read it twice then what is your point? U fully understand where our economic problems began, with Reagan, and resulted in Bush economic collapse..very good
 
My reply:
 
The point is if you had carefully and thoughtfully read the article you'd know that Stockman said our economic woes are rooted in the failed Keynesian State which rose  in the 1930s during the Hoover-FDR big government tax and spend depression era.
 
 
when you finish your tirade, try a bit of reality. duh.
 
My reply
 
My tirade is peanuts compared to Stockman's ferocius assault on Obamanomics and Bernanke's QE to insanity.
  
hearken writes
 
You cons can't see the forest for the trees...you are why this happened...hope you are proud of your bankrupting my country.
 
My reply
 
 Does Stockman see the forest for the trees? If the answer is yes then know that I more or less see eye to eye with him.
 
imageWIS writes
 
You really need to go back to your high school and demand that they properly educate you! Because clearly, you don't know anything about socialism or Europe.
 
My reply
 
Should Stockman go back to school as well? He agrees with me about the collapse of the European-social-entitlement state which is unraveling before our eyes-but invisible to the ideological blind.

mick719 writes

here's a nickel, Apollo.
 
My reply
 
Stockman's distressingly pessimistic analysis of the economic policies of the current and past administrations point to the coming of Brother-Can-You-Spare-A-Dimeville.
 
Kemo Sahbee writes
 
LOLOLHAHAHAHAHA

You're a funny dude Apollo.

My reply
  
Yo Kemo, let me in on the fun so I can laugh too. After reading Stockman's article I'm enveloped in gloom.
 
frank2061 writes:
 
That lie about Obama denying the value of the private sector in growing the economy has really gotten old. But you're still buying it and spreading it. Pathetic.
 
My reply:
 
Not so old or untrue that Stockman doesn't agree with me about Obama's failed, ruinous, pathetic trickle growth borrow and spend Keynesian welfare state policies.
 
JoeMentia writes:
 
It's amusing when you simpletons vomit up slogans and pretend they equal an ideology or analysis.
 
My reply:
 
Is Stockman's analysis of Obama-Bernanke's failed ruinous bankrupting policies the words of a puking simpleton?
 
No answer. 
 
kaykaythere writes:
 
GOP instituted programs make up over 75% of the current deficit ----try again
 
My reply:
 
And what's Obama's answer? TAX BABY TAX, SPEND BABY SPEND, DOUBLE DOWN ON BORROWING and make our bankruptcy twice as painful-which Stockman correctly warns is the absolutely wrong way to go and is the reason for Obama's failed near zero growth recovery.
  
 
I see. By the way, have you ever thought of using FACTS to make your point? I didn't think so.
 
My reply
 
What I said reflects the content of Stockman's article on Obamanomics.
 
Jack3Ohio writes:
 
Really...isn't most of the problem in Europe caused by austerity? Do you not remember the fiasco Bush left for us after 8 years? and Bush entered office with a surplus. Did that just miraculously disappear in anticipation of President Obama? AND public sector jobs have shrunk since 2008,so what private sector jobs are now being done by government? I would not rely on Fox or drudge for any accurate information.
 
My reply:
  
It was runaway spending and debt that caused the problems in Europe that austerity is trying to fix. My post reflects Stockman's analysis of Obama-Bernanke's ruinous fiscal and monetary policies. Stockman is merciless with everyone and rightly recommends a return to the low tax limited government policies of Coolidge who left Hoover with a huge surplus that he turned into a huge deficit like Bush did (but for different reasons). Hoover (like Obama and FDR after him) tried and failed to tax and spend his way out of the Depression. Didn't work then. Isn't working now. As Stockman said:
 
THE KEYNESIAN STATE IS DEAD!
 

8 “LIBERAL” DEMOCRAT BIGOTS OPPOSE GAY MARRIAGE (SARCASM)

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-01 18:20:33.000 -- 8 "LIBERAL" DEMOCRAT BIGOTS OPPOSE GAY MARRIAGE (SARCASM) 

 
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/politics/
EIGHT AGAINST
EQUALITY
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/01/bob-casey-gay-marriage_n_2994199.html


CASEY FLIPS: Another Democratic Senator
Backs Gay Marriage...8 Still Oppose 
 

In opposing all forms of non-traditional marriage these 8 "Liberal" Democrat bigots crush the fundamental right to happiness of homosexuals, bisexuals, polygamists, beastialists, incestualists, pedophiles and the list of oppressed and violated victims of hate and fear goes on and on. Unless all societal norms are smashed and trashed under the 14th Amendment (along with the family and religion) we'll never be a truly free and open society advancing toward the revolutionary future of anything goes chaos.

DEBATE ON THE NATURE OF SEXUAL PLEASURE

 

FROM APOLLOSPEAKS' TOWNHALL ARCHIVES

2013-04-01 10:35:09 -- DEBATE ON THE NATURE OF SEXUAL PLEASURE

http://search.aol.com/aol/imageDetails?s_it=imageDetails&q=image+of+procreation&img=http://emefleur.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/procreation.jpg&v_t=keyword_rollover&host=http://emefleur.wordpress.com/2010/08/17/why-procreate/&width=183&height=98&thumbUrl=http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQBu15hmLimyOoXKOm1EBy0zrgsP7BVunD46WLFES5bamIp8w0ffVJ5wCE:emefleur.files.wordpress.com/2010/08/procreation.jpg&b=image?s_it=imageResultsBack&v_t=keyword_rollover&imgsz=&imgtype=&imgc=&q=image+of+procreation&oreq=2a3c8fb26f984a86b6057dca21a2f09e&imgHeight=238&imgWidth=440&imgTitle=Therefore,+why+procreate?&imgSize=56964&hostName=emefleur.wordpress.com 
 
 
Procreation
 
 
 In our increasingly libertine, sensualized
sexualized, orgasm worshipping declining culture too few of us stop and ask ourselves the fundamentally important question what is nature's reason for sexual pleasure and its blissful sensations? To challenge lefties and their anything goes view of sexuality I posted the following question in the comment section of a HuffPo artictle dealing with the Supreme Court and same-sex marriage and got the following reaction. I asked:
  
WHAT IS THE REASON (NATURE'S REASON) FOR SEXUAL PLEASURE?
 
Why is the sexual act so delightful? Why did Nature make it that way? Can someone enlighten me on the subject?'"

Rippington writes
 
If "Nature's Reason" for making sex pleasurable was to aid in procreation....... why did "Nature's Reason" make non procreative sex equally pleasurable?
 
My reply
 
 The joy of a child I believe far far far exceeds the fleeting ephemeral pleasures of sex which at best add a little relish to life; and at worse can be mentally and physically destructive when taken to excess.
 

blukazoo writes

Go ask Ted Bundy's parents if their kid was better than sex.

 

My reply 

Up until his parents learned that he was a sick, sadistic serial killer they would probably have answered  in the affirmative: having a son like Ted is better than sex.

Saint Brian the Godless writes:

Didn't I marry you once? Hard to remember because of the trauma...

Spoken like a dried-up prune.
 
My reply
 
I was once a dried up, burnt out, wasted, out of control libertine. And the experience was pretty damn traumatic.
 

Saint Brian the Godless replies

You fancy yourself moral now, though, right? I wouldn't be too sure, former libertine. Nobody is so twisted as those who claim moral high ground, and those people feel just great about themselves.

My reply

If self-control (moderation in the enjoyment of pleasure) were the whole of morality then I would be a morally good person. But self-control is only one of many virtues, and by itself cannot make a morally good man.

TaiJi2 writes
 
All of the most important acts of an organism are "pleasurable". Duh! It's the incentive our nervous systems give to sort our priorities.
 
My reply
 
 
So then in the order of importance and nature's priorities what is the ultimate reason for sexual pleasure?
 
No answer.
 
 
What is the 'reason' for the coccyx?
 
My reply
 
If the blissful sensations of sex were to suddenly vanish from this earth guess what would vanish with it?
 
SpeakupNation  replies
 
Bliss?
 
My reply
 
Beautiful, blissful, endearing babies. But is human joy and bliss limited to sex?
  
SpeakupNation replies
 
What is your point, Apollo? Is this the lame procreation argument? LOL! SO seniors and sterile couples should be banned from marriage? Or just banned from having sex?
 
My reply
 
Can there be anything of greater value springing from the sexual act than a beautiful, tiny, adorable, sweet human being? Is a fleeting, ephemeral, momentary pleasure or delightful passing sensation of equal or any greater value and worth than that of a new born child or, for that matter, your existence which natural, normal heterosexual love made possible? 
 
 

You didn't respond to my question. That is because you bone heads can't respond.

 My reply

 I admit my reply was a bit bone headed. I guess I'm just not liberated, hedonistic or post-modern enough to ultimately separate human sexuality from procreation, or to make sexual pleasure (no matter how delightful) an end in itself giving it greater value than baby making. But to answer your question, no heterosexual couples who are sterile or are seniors should be banned from marriage as they can enjoy normal, natural, healthy sex-the kind that brought them into this world and made their lives possible. Can you say the same for homosexual couples who aren't sterile or  seniors? Can they enjoy the normal, natural, healthy sex that brought them into this world?

No answer.

 Jennifer Mead writes
 
To answer your question for mating silly. Why do two people fall in love? Why do most societies pair off in couples who pronounce love? Sex can be pure pleasure or when mixed with love it can be off the charts beautiful. Humans are alone in their own skin, touching holding loving are very important to us.
 
My reply
 
 As the song says: "Love is a many splendid [and wonderful] thing. But before there can be two people falling in love and mating they first have to be born into this world. And what initially made that possible was what? The sexual instinct and its intensely delightful pleasures.
 
Jennifer Mead replies
 
In plants and animals it is the same reason. To insure their species survives. I would think humans have done a better than good job at doing that. We now are driving other species to extinction from how much we have procreated. However, there are side affects to sex that include bonding, love and nurturing. At least in women anyway, I would suggest that for a homophobic hater like you.
 
My reply
 

Deeply bonding with another human being, feeling like one soul in two bodies with your mental and moral powers doubled is exhilarating-like heaven on earth. But it is not a greater good than procreation and survival of the species.

 
Agree. So you are saying that because a small minority of people are Gay that somehow that is going to hurt procreation? Cause your premise is faulty considering how many children are born daily. Wouldn't it be more advantageous to help unloved children rather than pick on Gays? I mean if you want a better society that is.
 
My reply
 
To ensure the survival of our species Nature's God by design has made the number of heterosexuals (in every society) greatly exceed the number of gays. In other words, because of their small numbers homosexuals can never be a threat to human survival, and that will always be the case. BTW, who's picking on gays?
 
No answer.
 
 
Jen Celli writes
 
Amazing how that beautiful love can then produce a LGBT human then, isn't it?
 
My reply
 
Without heterosexual love homosexuals would not exist. But if homosexuals were to somehow die out with none being born it would in no way be harmful to humanity. Humanity survives and thrives with or without homosexuals.
 
 
To make christians give in to temptation and do the Men's Room Shuffle?
 
My reply
 
And what good would that do Christians, or anyone?
 
 

Saint Brian the Godless replies

Well for one thing, it allows them to be who they really are, for as long as that men's room experience lasts. They need to blow off steam from pretending they're straight all the time.

My reply

Surely there are better, safer, healthier ways to blow off steam and relieve oneself of the stresses and strains of this difficult life, no?