“Puke” Alert

The Lefty looney’s on this site refuse to acknowledge what the entire world already knows.  But here is even more proof.  Do you remember the SELF-AVOWED COMMUNIST, Van Jones?  The Man Valerie Jarret said she and Obama watched and courted to work in their White House (until a REAL reporter, Glenn Beck, outed him as a Commie and Obama had to fire him).  Well, HE sure seems to think Obama’s little Marxist speech meant something:

Van Jones Calls Obama‘s ’You Didn‘t Build Your Business’ Comments the ‘Deepest Form of Patriotism’

There is no way, shape or form that Obama’s attack on the small business person can be in the least bit described as “American.”  “American” means something – and it is NOT what the Progressives have tried to relabel it as.  An AMERICAN is a rugged individual who believes in individual rights and liberty, taking care of himself and WILLINGLY helping his neighbor in need.  Obama’s idea of America is straight out of Wilson’s dreams, and that makes it Communist/socialist — and the SELF-DESCRIBED COMMUNIST, Van Jones, agrees.

101 thoughts on ““Puke” Alert

      • LOL, true. But then, we have to start by defining the left. I’ve done that on the RNL. In the US, the “left” is defined as pro-govt. with the “far left” being total govt. On the right are “CLASSIC liberals” and the far right, “anarchists.”

        In this sense, there are “leftists” in BOTH Parties. Once you understand this, things start to get even spookier, don’t they? 😉

      • Actually KB, if you believe in Christian principles and go by the teachings of the Bible, that’s exactly what we need to do. But first we need to get our economy on track.

      • Kellsbells, we have to support other economies if we want ours to survive, if other countries don’t have a good economy they can’t support ours.

    • “Off Topic…”

      Careful, Augger’s going to fire an “apples and oranges” comment at you. 😉

    • Respectfully Guy, I think the link is nonsense. Of course it was a cursory skim.
      Why should we apologize for anything that happened in which we had no influence?

      We only need to re-instate our Constitution, and destroy the agencies that violate our constitution, not write a new charter.

      • That’s actually my wife’s blog. And her posting was the first I’d heard of it. I agree that we shouldn’t have to make any kind of apology either…that’s what we have Obama for. I just wanted to get some more opinions on it.

      • And how do you propose we do that texas? Our Constitution hasn’t been followed for decades and we’ve done nothing about it, we should apologize for that since we do have influence and choose not to use it.

        • Our founders, our Declaration of Independence and Our Constitution were inspired by G-d.

          There are more writings than any of us know, explaining the true intentions and meanings of our foundations. It is NOT our generation’s fault our forefathers allowed To be taken, or stole our heritage.

          It is our generation’s duty to relearn and renew the spirit of America. We do that by studying and sharing with our friends and neighbors the hopes and dreams of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

          • Ah, but it IS our fault that we did not learn it in school as WE are the nominal leaders of this nation. Likewise, if we refuse to learn when others try to teach us what we should have learned in school, THAT is our fault, as well.

            Do NOT let people off so lightly. I understand you think it only turns them off, but then, that is PROGRESSIVE logic: give them ALL a trophy and worry about self-esteem rather than learning and understanding.

          • No B,
            Most of us were indoctrinated or never knew what was out there, or where to look for it.

            Our forefathers allowed trusted our schools to do their duty.

            I’m completely befuddled that so many were complicit or were fooled, or we’re just evil, in allowing our heritage to be buried and hidden.

            Explain how so many who took pride in teaching our youth could help steer our people off course.

            All the educators of a generation were not murdered here, like the communists and fascists did in other countries.

              • Well, one more thing: they specifically said that our schools should teach what Franklin termed “the \American religion.”

                That there is a God. He governs in the affairs of man. We owe Him homage. The best way to do that is to be good to and help our fellow man. And we WILL be judged in the afterlife according to how well we lived in this one.

                According to the founders, without THOSE principles in the heart of every citizen, a free and self-governing society is impossible: and they were correct.


                • Sorry, yes, I did forget religion, it was a fundamental part of schooling.
                  You have to ponder where we started on the slippery slope to hell, I believe it began with the 60’s generation, we are the liberal leaders of today.

                  • Actually, you can trace it back to the period immediately after the end of the Civil War, when the students of Hegel started to immigrate to the United States. 30 or so years later, what we now know as the Progressive/Liberal movement was established by the likes of Teddy Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson: with Wilson explicitly writing that what he was doing was “Americanizing” the European model of socialism/communism.

            • Have you ever read or studied any of the Old Testament? It’s in our nature. God kept beating us over the head and we felt bad, tried to be good and then failed. Over and over and over. Guess where we are at right now as followers of God?

  1. Sorry, Joe, but I refuse to let right-wing conspiracy theorists define “American” for me, especially those who seem to think that virtually everyone living in the country and serving in Congress is “unAmerican.” Perhaps you’re the one who is clueless about “what the world already knows.” Thanks for the headline, but I managed to keep down my dinner.

    • I must be one of those right-wing conspiracy theorists, okay, I admit it, I am, because I believe that they are right that everyone serving in Congress is “unAmerican”, if not they would not ignore the constitution and they would not continue to let Obama get away with his rogue brand of dictatorship.

      • You have my sympathies, Phoebe; it must be very frustrating having most of the country disagree with you.

          • If that were true, they wouldn’t re-elect 85 to 90 percent of Congress in each election, and we wouldn’t have either of the candidates we do for president.

              • Phoebe53,

                With respect, I submit that it IS true – but those people get elected for the same reason the average American refuses to accept the reality of our situation: normalcy bias. They simply cannot bring themselves to believe “their” representative is “one of them” – even when they are.

                Otherwise, the polls will tell you that the average American consistently votes COUNTER to the ideals and principles they profess to embrace. A simple search will reveal the figures for you – just make sure you read one of the more reputable polling places reports (reputable not as in “their politics agree with mine:” but rather, “they get their polls/predictions correct.”) 😉

                • I was thinking about this yesterday. I believe it was the Gallop poll that showed Obama popularity at 47% Congress at 17% Direction the country is heading was down at 61% . The numbers don’t add up, how can Obama be so popular but Congress and the direction of the country be so far down.

                  • The way they word the question is one method used to “steer” the results.

                    Another is the nature of the Question. Consider the difference between:

                    “Do you think Obama is a likable person who would be fun to hang with at a party?”


                    “Do you think Obama’s policies goals are good for the nation?”

                    Then, if they say they think he is a nice enough guy, you report that AND those who say they like his policies as “support the president.”

                    I have worked in public polling. I have VERY little faith in it – especially when they show a margin of error greater than +/- 3%. Over 3% and it is a push poll – plain and simple.

                • OK, when I say something I’m automatically wrong, but then when Phoebe agrees, she’s right–but only because most people in America are delusional? Got it. 🙂

                  Though I do agree with you that Americans often vote in opposition to their own interests.

            • There’s an old saying, “The devil you know is better than the devil you don’t”, that may help explain the dichotomy between voters’ hatred of Congress in general, and their subsequent re-election of their representative.

              • I suspect it’s also because people hate seeing Congress “waste” money in other states, but love it when their Congressman/woman brings home the pork and brags about it.

                • Kinda like dissing all lawyers but your own. isn’t it? Hard to blame a Congressman for bringing in the bacon; we are not evolved enough, I feel, to seek to deprive our district with a new stadium or whatever, in order to balance the country’s books.

                • You know what’s scary? I suspect Joe might even be in agreement with us on this point, as is Reuel over on my site. And yet the problem remains.

            • I’d call it status quo and people being too lazy to learn the facts about who they are voting for. Old people vote Democrat because they’ve always voted democrat. Bad idea as the Democrat Party has changed significantly since your daddy voted democrat. And the same applies to the other party too, before you get all bent out of shape.

          • So? I also criticize you for being intellectually lazy and petty, in addition to being a liar. All three are true–so what’s your point?

      • If you believe in the principles espoused by the true liberals, Thomas Jefferson and his cadre, THEN you are a liberal, not a right wing anything.

        Those progressive Democrats today, that claim to be liberals are LIARS. Oh yeah, “progressive democrat” is an OXYMORON! They are in truth just COMMUNISTS ! Their kindred spirits have murdered 70-100 million persons in the last century !

        DO NOT use the liar’s terminology, otherwise you have already lost the argument.

  2. Not frustrating at all, James but it doesn’t mean I’m wrong, it only means that most of the country is too brainwashed to see the reality.

    • Patriots are awakening and rubbing the sleep from their eyes.

      We are re-learning our g-d given birthright.

    • “it doesn’t mean I’m wrong, it only means that most of the country is too brainwashed to see the reality”

      That may be true. And I’m glad that you–unlike Joe and Augger, apparently–are smart enough to see that you’re not in the majority, at least for now.

      • “Ah Daniel…Not that I’m a fan of Glenn Beck, but he’s as much a journalist or reporter as Tom Brokaw, Bob Scheiffer or Andrea Mitchell.”

        What he said. 🙂

    • Yes, he IS a reporter. He reports a story and supports it with all the information you need to follow it up and make sure he is telling the truth.

      Now, if you are unable to separate his editorializing from his reporting of objective fact, then I would suggest you have been indoctrinated. Most of us can tell the difference, but many who have come through the public schools under the Dewey model have been taught to think people are too stupid to think on their own and need “experts” to explain things for them, and then told that the “MSM” are the only “acceptable” experts. THAT, my friend, is propaganda and indoctrination.

      Besides, I find it telling that – every time Beck’s name comes up – all I hear/read are silly ad hominem attacks. Well, expecting people to accept that you’ve made a salient point when you’re just begging the question certainly doesn’t do much for your desire to be seen as serious or intelligent. Heck, Larry the Cable guy can do better than “hahahaha.” 😉

    • “Glenn Beck, a real reporter? Hahahahahahahahahahahah, now that’s funny”

      And before we get another twisted lecture from James (see the one about political scientists), what are your credentials compared to Becks, or even those that James claims to own?

      • Sorry, pitiful dreamers, but Beck has himself said repeatedly that he is not a journalist. Perhaps you’ll take his own words for it, in an example from his own site: “I’m not a journalist. I never claimed to be a journalist. I am an opinion person.” http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/24124/

        As for my own credentials, of course they’re easier to check than those of any of the anonymous nitwits who frequent these sites.

        • He’s not a journalist, correct. He’s a truth seeker and a researcher and gets it right more often than anyone out there if you bother to give him a legitimate chance. Most who diss him, have never listened too, or read any of his material.

          • >—–>@

            HOWEVER, I would suggest that Beck IS a journalist – that is, if the English language is still the English language:

            Definition of JOURNALIST

            1a : a person engaged in journalism; especially : a writer or editor for a news medium b : a writer who aims at a mass audience

            2: a person who keeps a journal

            [That definition was aimed at James, not you, Chad 😉 ]

            • So what does it mean to be “engaged in journalism”? By your definition, Joe, you and Michele Bachmann could be considered journalists. Much like your definition of communism, it’s so broad that it doesn’t mean much.

              I’ll let Beck define himself in this case, and he has repeatedly declared himself not to be a journalist.

              • SO James attacks people for being “self-proclaimed experts,” then comes on and proceeds to tell us all that the dictionary is wrong.

                I see your point — NOT! (James is a living illustration of the 180 degree rule in practice)


                • Try again, Joe. You didn’t answer the question of what it means to be “engaged in journalism.” So are you and Bachmann now journalists?

          • “Most who diss him, have never listened too, or read any of his material.”

            How would you know that? I, for one, listen to him from time to time. I find him highly entertaining, in a clown-car-crash sort of way, though it does bug me that his “true believers” sometimes vote.

            • “From time to time” is pretty vague and dismissive for that matter. Making judgments before you give something a fair shake is typical of a lot of people. It’s not for everyone, just those who actually want to learn the truth. While I cannot make you like him and don’t intend to, you really should drop the dismissive behavior towards something you know so little about.

              • “you really should drop the dismissive behavior towards something you know so little about”

                Are you trying to shut down the blogosphere? 😉 On the other hand, I only had to watch 2 or 3 episodes of “Wonder Pets” with my grandson to find out that every episode is pretty much the same. And, like Ming-Ming the ducking, I know that every day Beck is going to tell me someing is “see-wious.”

                “It’s not for everyone, just those who actually want to learn the truth.”

                That sounds pretty “dismissive” of non-Beck fans, Chad. 😉 And not many people are into Beck’s version of “truth,” apparently–even Fox News gave him the boot.

                “While I cannot make you like him.”

                True. Though as I said, I do fine him entertaining. In small doses. From time to time.

                • I’m simply making the point that you don’t know anything about Beck. I’m glad you are entertained when you stop in from time to time. But your opinion carries very little actual legitimacy to anyone who might be interested in Beck. Condescending remarks are your game; I get it. I’m surprised it took you 2 or 3 episodes of Wonder Pets to finally figure that one out. Far more complex than Glen Beck I’m sure. 🙂

                • Nothing new to add, Chad, other than letting you know I approved your comments over on my site–thanks for contributing (and for offering a nice word of support for my most faithful conservative commenter).

                  I just got to a computer for the first time today, or I’d have approved your comments sooner. After the first time, though, comments aren’t held so anything else should go through without delay. Thanks again.

    • That’s exactly what he told Whoopi Goldberg on “The View”: “I’m not a reporter I’m a commentator, I don’t check facts.”

      But he does apparently sell a lot of gold to conspiracy theorists who buy his act as real.

      • “conspiracy theorists” don’t buy gold because of Glen Beck.
        Beck is not a journalist, he’s an opportunist, prior to Obama it was, Glen who?.

        • Prior to Obama, he was still the 3rd most popular talk radio host in America. He started with his predictions around 2006, and he was attacking Bush long before Bush was out of office.

          But then, I suppose none of this matters any more than whatever else we disagree with matters… 😦

  3. I had a liberal buddy defend BHO and say he was taken out of context. Well if so, then why isn’t he re-stating and getting the word out that he never meant to offend anyone? Why do we need to interpret correctly what he says if he’s such a gifted orator? I think it’s all a bunch of hogwash and if you want a fired up version of this deal, Mark Levin offers a free podcast of his shows. Yesterdays was awesome. I highly recommend. He’s also got an app for Android and I assume IOS.

    • Denying that they said what they just said is part of their MO. Yes, Levin is great, but to illustrate the point you hit upon, do you remember the skit Limbaugh did where he started the show telling people he was going to vote for Clinton (or was it Gore?), then, after 30 minutes of explaining why he was going to vote that way, he started to deny he said it? It took less than an hour of denying he said what he had before his callers – people who heard him actually say it – were doubting their own ears and starting to believe Rush’s denials.

      It was classic, but also damning of our society – especially given the education level of his audience (for the libs here: Rush’s audience has been certified as the most knowledgeable and educated in public radio – not the least).

  4. Rush’s audience has been certified as the most knowledgeable and educated in public radio
    By whom, Rush? That’s a low bar to hurdle anyway.

    • Pew. Also the national association that tracks talk radio programs and is funded and run by the station owners confirmed it after Pew first reported it.

      But then, I’m sure they were both paid off by Rush (at least, I’m sure it is easier for you to believe that).


  5. Well, I know he COULD buy them off, but I doubt that he did But hey! I just went and looked at the Pew site, and Rush wasn’t compared to radio personalities other than O’Reilly. His listeners do rank higher than NPR listeners, however.

Talk Amongst Yourselves:

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.