First I must apologize to desh, and I must defend him. It comes from YEARS of Indoctrination. I keep forgetting that Liberals are SO desirous of having "The Government" do everything FOR them, cradle-to-grave, womb-to-the-tomb, that some people don't understand what "This article is taken from the Washington Post" means. They need FURTHER instruction and "help". They need to have everything provided for them.
Me? Personally, it doesn't even MATTER to me WHERE something comes from, if it is opinion. If it is a well-known FACT, I don't NEED a "link". But some want EVERYTHING PROVIDED. I'm telling you for the LAST TIME, "desh", I am NOT "Big Daddy Government", I am NOT here to do YOUR homework for you. If someone told me the PAPER something was FROM, I would have enough BRAINS, as an ADULT, to LOOK IT UP, type "Washington Post, Brilliant Fraud" into Google, and you're done, if I "cared so deeply"!
Personally, I think you are so intimidated sometimes, you can't think of anything ELSE to say. You can't say a FACT is not a FACT, as in the case with Barack Obama sitting, listening, nodding his head and applauding for Twenty Years, while his Racist, Anti-American Pastor ranted on, can you!
There, now, aren't you glad you keep trying your ridiculous attacks of "Link, Nazi", or "Link, Racist", or whatever stupid ad-hominem attack you Liberals substitute for facts? But the POINT is, that I must say, I DID mean to put in the Author's name, Charles Krauthammer.
I notice the Enlightened, Kind Liberals immediately made a RACIAL SLUR ON A HANDICAPPED,WHEELCHIAR-BOUND MAN, calling him Charles Kraut-hammer, a Racial Slur regarding his German Surname. I suppose NEXT, Liberals will call him "Rubberlegs", "Gimpy", or "CrippleDick". Just LIKE Liberal Hypocracy. Par for their course. But it is Mr Charles Krauthammer, that I REALLY must defend. This man is one of the FINEST writers I have ever seen. He is TOTALLY factual, without being boring. He MAKES HIS POINT SO WELL, I wouldn't be surprised to see Liberals second-guessing themselves. A very short excerpt proves what I am saying:
"It's the Jesse Jackson politics of racial grievance, expressed in Ivy League diction and Harvard Law nuance. That's why the speech made so many liberal commentators swoon: It bathed them in racial guilt while flattering their intellectual pretensions. An unbeatable combination. "
What POWERFUL words! I should make that my new signature, so we can Always read it! And, the REAL point:
"But Obama was supposed to be new. He flatters himself as a man of the future transcending the anger of the past as represented by his beloved pastor. Obama then waxes rhapsodic about the hope brought by the new consciousness of the young people in his campaign. Then answer this, Senator: If Wright is a man of the past, why would you expose your children to his vitriolic divisiveness? This is a man who curses America and who proclaimed moral satisfaction in the deaths of 3,000 innocents at a time when their bodies were still being sought at Ground Zero. It is not just the older congregants who stand and cheer and roar in wild approval of Wright's rants, but young people as well. Why did you give $22,500 just two years ago to a church run by a man of the past who infects the younger generation with precisely the racial attitudes and animus you say you have come unto us to transcend?"
GENIUS!! PURE GENIUS!!! Ha!
Me? Personally, it doesn't even MATTER to me WHERE something comes from, if it is opinion. If it is a well-known FACT, I don't NEED a "link". But some want EVERYTHING PROVIDED. I'm telling you for the LAST TIME, "desh", I am NOT "Big Daddy Government", I am NOT here to do YOUR homework for you. If someone told me the PAPER something was FROM, I would have enough BRAINS, as an ADULT, to LOOK IT UP, type "Washington Post, Brilliant Fraud" into Google, and you're done, if I "cared so deeply"!
Personally, I think you are so intimidated sometimes, you can't think of anything ELSE to say. You can't say a FACT is not a FACT, as in the case with Barack Obama sitting, listening, nodding his head and applauding for Twenty Years, while his Racist, Anti-American Pastor ranted on, can you!
There, now, aren't you glad you keep trying your ridiculous attacks of "Link, Nazi", or "Link, Racist", or whatever stupid ad-hominem attack you Liberals substitute for facts? But the POINT is, that I must say, I DID mean to put in the Author's name, Charles Krauthammer.
I notice the Enlightened, Kind Liberals immediately made a RACIAL SLUR ON A HANDICAPPED,WHEELCHIAR-BOUND MAN, calling him Charles Kraut-hammer, a Racial Slur regarding his German Surname. I suppose NEXT, Liberals will call him "Rubberlegs", "Gimpy", or "CrippleDick". Just LIKE Liberal Hypocracy. Par for their course. But it is Mr Charles Krauthammer, that I REALLY must defend. This man is one of the FINEST writers I have ever seen. He is TOTALLY factual, without being boring. He MAKES HIS POINT SO WELL, I wouldn't be surprised to see Liberals second-guessing themselves. A very short excerpt proves what I am saying:
"It's the Jesse Jackson politics of racial grievance, expressed in Ivy League diction and Harvard Law nuance. That's why the speech made so many liberal commentators swoon: It bathed them in racial guilt while flattering their intellectual pretensions. An unbeatable combination. "
What POWERFUL words! I should make that my new signature, so we can Always read it! And, the REAL point:
"But Obama was supposed to be new. He flatters himself as a man of the future transcending the anger of the past as represented by his beloved pastor. Obama then waxes rhapsodic about the hope brought by the new consciousness of the young people in his campaign. Then answer this, Senator: If Wright is a man of the past, why would you expose your children to his vitriolic divisiveness? This is a man who curses America and who proclaimed moral satisfaction in the deaths of 3,000 innocents at a time when their bodies were still being sought at Ground Zero. It is not just the older congregants who stand and cheer and roar in wild approval of Wright's rants, but young people as well. Why did you give $22,500 just two years ago to a church run by a man of the past who infects the younger generation with precisely the racial attitudes and animus you say you have come unto us to transcend?"
GENIUS!! PURE GENIUS!!! Ha!