"Offensive Statements" Call for the Liberal Taliban to Cut Off Some of the Right Heads

Shawn Mitchell
|
Posted: Jul 01, 2013 12:01 AM
"Offensive Statements" Call for the Liberal Taliban to Cut Off Some of the Right Heads

Of course they’re brilliant; I wrote them. Please enjoy.

Man, I miss the 60s...when "anti-authority" was cool.

Okay, lefties. After the offenses of Bill Maher, Alec Baldwin, and many others, the game is up; it can't be denied:

Outrage over offensive statements is a one-way racket meant only to harm conservatives.

If anyone right of center crosses a line, then call in America's head-hacking Taliban. But anyone left of center crosses lines equal or worse, then, what? Did you hear that tree in the forest? No, did you?

It's a despicable play. You've gotten away with it so far, but maybe not much longer.

How does it work that liberals demand attention to unique minority issues at the same time they condemn racism because we're all exactly the same?

I’m tired of waiting to see if the president will unconstitutionally thrust us into hostilities, or if McCain will senescently hector us there.

Will no one in Congress lead by introducing a resolution declaring the US does not have a vital interest taking sides in the byzantine, infernal bloodletting in Syria?

Doom! is pronounced for Republicans if they don't pass the Schumer Rubio immigration bill. But just who is doing the pronouncing?

Polls of Latino voters show a much lower priority on immigration "reform" than on day-to-day bread and butter concerns...the kinds of things that can improve quality of life for all of us.

It is lunacy for Republicans to fearfully allow the liberal-media complex to define what they have to do to show they respect Hispanic Americans. No, conservatives, you don't have to pass Chuck Schumer's immigration bill to prove you're not racist.

You...we...do need to show genuine interest and concern for the things that matter to Latino families, which, it turns out, aren't much different from what matters to all families.

And, when explaining concepts like international borders, Constitutional societies, and the rule of law, avoid inflamatory buzz words and insults. With malice towards none and charity towards all, stand on our principles, decently explain them, avoid cheap gaffes, and we'll be just fine.

The liberal media complex will shoot, but they'll miss, if we don't give them fat targets.

Let's speculate...based on little. What if George Zimmerman is a racist? What if he creepily followed Trayvon Martin for no good reason?

At the moment that Martin sits astride Zimmerman, pummeling his face with blows and chops, slamming his head into the sidewalk, does Zimmerman loose the right to protect himself by any means available?

The president aims to raise your power bill steeply...because he totally supports working Americans.

Incompetent? Corrupt? Are you punks talking to me? Ha!

I'll hang unprotected diplomats out to die, then lie about it if I want to. I'll spy on reporters if I want to. I'll sic the FBI, IRS, EPA on anyone I want! I'll target ordinary Americans for demonizing if I want.

I'll spy on every damn communication you author in your life, if I want.

You think I'm busted? You think the game's up? Ha, again! I'm just getting started!

Why, I'm so weak I think I'll unilaterally declare your energy sources are unacceptable! You need to pay more for Unicorn gas so I can skim your tribute and make my buddies rich. Is that a new scandal? NO!! It's catnip for liberals and the New York Times! They love me!!

What are you going to do about it? The media won't chase me on anything for more than two news cycles. My mini-me Holder has my back! Holder? You thought he was toast? Ha, again! He's my main man! Nothing will stick! Nothing!

I'll do whatever I want in this playpen while I control it! You can't touch me!

When will they remember that a vibrant, growing economy is infinitely better than a managed, redistributive economy, especially for the bottom economic half.

Why is this worse than Watergate? Because in 1972, the administration targeted a few of its powerful rivals.

Today, the administration targets mass sectors of the citizenry who disagree with it.

It's the difference between dirty politics and authoritarian suppression.

Liberal wailing the Voting Rights Act "was gutted" is absurd. Every legal standard and protected right remains in place. Individuals, organizations, or the federal government remain free to challenge in federal court any election policy or practice.

All that has changed was the now-degrading relic that the governments of historically discriminating states have to ask federal officials for permission before changing any election laws. That's right. As a result of yesterday's ruling, duly constituted sovereign governments of American states don't have to crawl to Eric Holder—Eric Holder!!!--to say "Mother may I?" before they update election laws.

Now that spectacle is an offensive requirement. Yet, national talking heads blather it must be preserved to uphold all that is good and right, but letting state governments make their own laws--subject to any applicable legal challenge--is a leap backwards to Jim Crow.

The coverage reveals much about how vicious and dishonest is our modern political class.

The world's nations pay about as much attention to Obama's stern demands as America's media pays to his disastrous governance.

This can't end well.

Do any Americans remember what growth was like? When opportunity came from new trends, jobs and companies, not from new policies, benefits, and programs?

For those who don't remember, here's a clue: Politicians can't mandate it; Free people create it...while they're trying (horrors) to make a profit.

Gun violence in general and mass shootings in particular are on a historical decline. Civilization is winning. In the mean time, many states have liberalized their carry laws, with little noticeable consequence.

More carriers; no increased violence = media silence. But, when something hideous happens...

Increasingly rare atrocity = "OMG!!! What are we going to do about the end of civilization??!! Why haven't we banned guns and jailed Sarah Palin yet?!"

It's amazing how many liberal pundits claim to want to save Republicans from oblivion:

"This is critical! It's historic! Pass this bill or else you're doomed! Pass it now! Never mind Friday's 1,190 page Amendment! Didn't your staff brief you on it?! Vote now! Harry 'Romney paid no taxes' Reid is demanding a vote!"

Truly pathetic and embarrassing for the greatest power earth's nations have ever known. Despicable and obscene, really.

In the big picture, what Edward Snowden did may be a good thing for America whether or not he turns out to be a good guy, bad guy, or a dupe who cooperated with sinister forces.

The merits of a national spying apparatus don't much rise or fall on the virtue or consistency of the guy who blows the whistle.

I propose a constitutional amendment and conforming candidate pledge for all states and the United States: No big bill or amendment can be sneaked and rushed. For every 20 pages, there must be at least one day after introduction before a vote, in order to allow adequate scrutiny and debate.

For example, a 1,000 page bill or amendment can't be voted on until 50 days after introduction. Is that too long, politicians? Then write shorter bills.

It's a given that liberals and conservatives disagree. The gut check for liberal good faith is whether they're committed to debating those differences on a free playing field. Or, do they support an administration's use of every Department and tool at its disposal to harass and stifle its critics?

That is not just unAmerican; it's antiAmerican. If you don't condemn the present abuses, then whatever else good you think you're fighting for, it is not the land of the free or the home of the brave.

A border fence is not the Berlin Wall--not morally, symbolically, or aesthetically. All the world knows the difference between protecting your own territory against outside intrusion and holding people confined.

Only America's sophisticates at home and enemies abroad pretend otherwise.

Progressives are sure things would be better if we could just corral and control humanity for good causes.

They fail to grasp that the applicants for the controller positions are also humanity...indeed, the slice of humanity who wants to control other humans.

What could go wrong?

Obama’s approach to governing has deepened and embittered every division in culture and politics.

How can anyone approve?

Mr. Snowden betrayed
his government, but I’m inclined to think he served his nation well.


After all, the president said he welcomes this debate, didn’t he? Right...the debate we’re having only because of the guy the president wants to put in prison till the end of his natural life.

Welcome, indeed.

Liberal Salon writer Michael Lind thinks he has a killer question: If libertarianism is such a good way to run a country, why has no nation adopted it?

Fail! That might have seemed like a killer question at the time of the founding, too: If limited, constitutional government is such a good idea, why aren't any countries doing it?

As it turns out, the founders were brave and visionary enough to bet on freedom and limited government. In not long, America was the most prosperous, stable, powerful nation on earth.

Just think what miracles might develop if we turn the freedom dial up further.