Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘Idiots’


Wonder what you would find if you frisked the liberal protesters from today’s Tea Parties in Oregon and Wisconsin? 

Answer: The left’s new “civility”. 

This is absolutely disgusting and pathetic. These people have no class what so ever.

If a few Tea Party members did this, their faces would be plastered all over the major news networks and newspapers.

Click the links for more videos: Video #1 | Video #2 | Video #3.

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked the anti-Koch brothers protest in Palm Spring, CA last weekend?

Answer: Leftist protesters calling for the deaths of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, Fox News executives, and Glenn Beck.

This is absolutely pathetic and disgusting. It is interesting that the mainstream media has no problem with blaming famous conservatives (e.g. Sarah Palin) and the Tea Party for the tragic shooting in Tucson, Arizona. Meanwhile, they blatantly ignore the actual hatred being spewed from individuals on the left.

So much for that new tone of “civility”.

Oddly enough, these leftist idiots were out in the California sunshine protesting Charles and David Koch for being conservative and rich. Big Government points out the protesters’ ignorance and hypocrisy:

Unfortunately several “haves” have missed the memo that you’re not to be both rich and conservative at the same time, and that bankrolling your pet causes is an extra no-no if you’re conservative—thus exempting left-wing billionaire philanthropists George Soros (from whom Common Cause has received $2 million over the past eight years) Peter Lewis, John Doerr, Julian RobertsonNicolas Berggruen, and many others from being yelled at too.

At the morning panel event featuring UCI Law Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, activist Jim Hightower, Center for American Progress journalist and “Koch Brothers expert” Lee Fang, California Nurses Association co-president DeAnn McEwan, and President Obama’s former green jobs czar Van Jones, we were forewarned of the impending demise of both the environment and democracy at the hands of corporate lobbyists and their government shills.

There was eerily no mention of GE, AEP, Goldmann Sachs, Pfizer, Aetna, Alcoa, Xerox, Google, Motorola, IBM, or several other corporate giants who profit at taxpayer expense via their K Street connections to the Obama White House as well as the very economic and regulatory policies they lobby that these Common Cause panelists commonly endorse. But I’m sure that’s only because no one wanted to point out the obvious. Right?

It is sad that these people can’t argue the issues without resorting to demonization, racist remarks, and death threats. They should all be ashamed of themselves.

As for the mainstream media, the conservative blogosphere is still waiting for you to report this vitriolic hatred. After all, you are fair and balanced right?

*UPDATE* – February 7, 2011 – 10:02 AM.

Not even the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) will defend Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. The Daily Caller reports:

The NAACP won’t directly address the racism displayed by progressive protesters outside a summit hosted by billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch at the end of January in Palm Springs, Calif., but the organization did call for an end to all “vitriolic language.”

In response to The Daily Caller’s request for comment on a video showing progressive protesters calling for somebody to “string up” African American Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas, or “send him back into the fields” or “cut off all his toes and feed them to him one-by-one,” NAACP spokesman Hilary Shelton pointed to the organization’s recent resolution calling for a “civil political discourse.”

“Last summer, the NAACP passed a resolution calling for a civil political discourse,” Shelton said in an e-mail to TheDC. “We continue to call on all Americans to abandon vitriolic language. It serves as a distraction from the real issues our society need to address and distorts the challenges we as Americans have to confront to make our nation greater still.”

Shelton would not, however, address the content of the video directly.

Shocking…

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked the so-called Princeton Committee for Palestine?

Answer: They are mad that the school-run stores sell Sabra hummus.

Why are they so worked up over hummus? Well, the hummus is owned by a business that supports the Israeli military.

Greg Gutfeld – from Big Hollywood – reports:

So in case you missed it, the big news in 2010 was in Princeton, NJ where students voted on expanding the schools hummus offerings.

Yes, hummus.

A group, called the Princeton Committee for Palestine, want the school-run stores to sell more than one brand of the chick pea concoction. They claim that the one offered, Sabra, is owned by a business that supports the Israeli military.

And, I think we can all agree: since Jews are bad, a Jewish military is really bad!

[…]

Yes, I apologize for scarring your retinas, but it must be done. You need to be reminded how foolish students can be – but also, how entertaining their foolishness is, provided you aren’t close enough to smell their unshaven pits.

So, the gist: in these students misguided brains, hummus is worse than… Hamas.

I only hope that the idiocy they flaunt in that clip is more than matched by the sheer embarrassment of their parents.

Note: If these shameless creatures are your offspring, please stop paying their tuition, and force them to fend for themselves. My guess is any hummus will start looking tasty, for it will be all these hopeless sacks of self-congratulating cretins can afford.

Welcome to Liberal University La-La Land. Do I really have to elaborate more on this group of students’ extreme idiocy?

This video is just another example of why I really dislike dirty hippies.

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked Suffolk County in New York?

Answer: They want anyone under the age of 19 to be banned from buying non-alcoholic energy drinks.

NBC New York reports:

Anyone 19 or younger would be banned from buying non-alcoholic energy drinks under a proposed law now before the Suffolk County Legislature.

The proposed ban would be the first of its kind in the nation, according to bill sponsor, county legislator Lynne Nowick.

“These drinks can potentially be dangerous for teens,” said Nowick.  “Why put foreign things in your body when you don’t know what’s going into them?  The drinks are not regulated.”

[…]

The Suffolk legislature could vote on the proposed ban early next year.

NANNY STATE ALERT! First, the government goes after my Four Loko and now they are starting to attack plain ol’ energy drinks!? Granted, I am well over the age of 19, but this is starting to become ridiculous.

The article mentioned that an average energy drink contains about half the caffeine of a similar size cup of coffeehouse coffee. In order to be consistent, coffeehouses better start investing in I.D. scanners, because they will have to start carding customers.

If this ban becomes law… It will be a sad, sad day.

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked President Obama’s failing economic stimulus package?

Answer: $823,200 of economic stimulus funds were used to teach African men how to wash their “packages” after having sex.

🙄 You have to be kidding me! CNS News reports:

The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), a division of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), spent $823,200 of economic stimulus funds in 2009 on a study by a UCLA research team to teach uncircumcised African men how to wash their genitals after having sex.

The genitalia-washing program is part of a larger $12-million UCLA study examining how to better encourage Africans to undergo voluntary HIV testing and counseling – however, only the penis-washing study received money from the 2009 economic stimulus law. The washing portion of the study is set to end in 2011.

“NIH Announces the Availability of Recovery Act Funds for Competitive Revision Applications,” the grant abstract states. “We propose to evaluate the feasibility of a post-coital genital hygiene study among men unwilling to be circumcised in Orange Farm, South Africa.”

Okay liberals… Go ahead and defend this! How does this so-called “study” boost the American economy!? EPIC FAILURE!

*UPDATE* – September 13, 2010

Hmm? I wonder if the National Institute of Health (NIH) paid for Axe’s new commercial with some of that economic stimulus money:

It’s quite possible, because nothing is surprising anymore with this current administration.

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked President Obama’s health-care reform bill (aka. Obama-Care)?

Answer: It might end student health-care insurance at universities and colleges!

Once again, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was correct when she told America that we had to pass this gigantic health-care reform bill in order to find out what’s in it.

McClatchy reports:

Colleges and universities say that some rules in the new health law could keep them from offering low-cost, limited-benefit student insurance policies, and they’re seeking federal authority to continue offering them.

Their request drew immediate fire from critics, however, who say that student health plans should be held to the same standards that other insurance is.

Among other things, the colleges want clarification that they won’t have to offer the policies to non-students.

Without a number of changes, it may be impossible to continue to offer student health plans, says a letter that the American Council on Education sent Aug. 12 to Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, signed by 12 other trade associations that represent colleges.

Additionally, the colleges say that some provisions of the law don’t apply to their policies, including those that require insurers to spend at least 80 percent of their revenue on medical care and that bar them from setting annual coverage caps.

Ed Morrissey – from Hot Air – sums this up nice for us:

In ObamaCare, policies can no longer be tailored to clientele, nor can consumers make choices that best fit their lives.  All policies must look mainly alike, thanks to the top-down command “reforms” in ObamaCare, which mandate coverages regardless of risk or need.  Needless to say, a comprehensive policy designed to cover Americans in their 50s would be vastly unnecessary for almost everyone who attends college in their youth, and vastly more expensive than they can afford.

Thus, universities and colleges have a conundrum.  They can either offer policies that are so expensive that only a few can afford to buy them, which creates all sorts of problems in managing a risk pool, or they can simply get out of the health-insurance business altogether.

Hmm, I wonder which decision they would pick if they were forced to choose? Personally, I think it’s a no brainer. Unfortunately, the Obama-Zombie (students) demographic didn’t bother to indulge themselves in some old-fashion common sense before they headed to the polls back in November of 2008.

My generation can be extremely frustrating at times, because we will be paying for their ignorance for years to come.

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Wonder what you would find if you frisked a liberal’s knowledge about basic economics?

Answer: They do not have any.

It’s all starting to make sense now!

The Wall Street Journal reports:

Who is better informed about the policy choices facing the country—liberals, conservatives or libertarians? According to a Zogby International survey that I write about in the May issue of Econ Journal Watch, the answer is unequivocal: The left flunks Econ 101.

Zogby researcher Zeljka Buturovic and I considered the 4,835 respondents’ (all American adults) answers to eight survey questions about basic economics. We also asked the respondents about their political leanings: progressive/very liberal; liberal; moderate; conservative; very conservative; and libertarian.

Rather than focusing on whether respondents answered a question correctly, we instead looked at whether they answered incorrectly. A response was counted as incorrect only if it was flatly unenlightened.

Consider one of the economic propositions in the December 2008 poll: “Restrictions on housing development make housing less affordable.” People were asked if they: 1) strongly agree; 2) somewhat agree; 3) somewhat disagree; 4) strongly disagree; 5) are not sure.

Basic economics acknowledges that whatever redeeming features a restriction may have, it increases the cost of production and exchange, making goods and services less affordable. There may be exceptions to the general case, but they would be atypical.

Therefore, we counted as incorrect responses of “somewhat disagree” and “strongly disagree.” This treatment gives leeway for those who think the question is ambiguous or half right and half wrong. They would likely answer “not sure,” which we do not count as incorrect.

In this case, percentage of conservatives answering incorrectly was 22.3%, very conservatives 17.6% and libertarians 15.7%. But the percentage of progressive/very liberals answering incorrectly was 67.6% and liberals 60.1%. The pattern was not an anomaly.

The other questions were: 1) Mandatory licensing of professional services increases the prices of those services (unenlightened answer: disagree). 2) Overall, the standard of living is higher today than it was 30 years ago (unenlightened answer: disagree). 3) Rent control leads to housing shortages (unenlightened answer: disagree). 4) A company with the largest market share is a monopoly (unenlightened answer: agree). 5) Third World workers working for American companies overseas are being exploited (unenlightened answer: agree). 6) Free trade leads to unemployment (unenlightened answer: agree). 7) Minimum wage laws raise unemployment (unenlightened answer: disagree).

How did the six ideological groups do overall? Here they are, best to worst, with an average number of incorrect responses from 0 to 8: Very conservative, 1.30; Libertarian, 1.38; Conservative, 1.67; Moderate, 3.67; Liberal, 4.69; Progressive/very liberal, 5.26.

Americans in the first three categories do reasonably well. But the left has trouble squaring economic thinking with their political psychology, morals and aesthetics.

To be sure, none of the eight questions specifically challenge the political sensibilities of conservatives and libertarians. Still, not all of the eight questions are tied directly to left-wing concerns about inequality and redistribution. In particular, the questions about mandatory licensing, the standard of living, the definition of monopoly, and free trade do not specifically challenge leftist sensibilities.

Yet on every question the left did much worse. On the monopoly question, the portion of progressive/very liberals answering incorrectly (31%) was more than twice that of conservatives (13%) and more than four times that of libertarians (7%). On the question about living standards, the portion of progressive/very liberals answering incorrectly (61%) was more than four times that of conservatives (13%) and almost three times that of libertarians (21%).

The survey also asked about party affiliation. Those responding Democratic averaged 4.59 incorrect answers. Republicans averaged 1.61 incorrect, and Libertarians 1.26 incorrect.

Adam Smith described political economy as “a branch of the science of a statesman or legislator.” Governmental power joined with wrongheadedness is something terrible, but all too common. Realizing that many of our leaders and their constituents are economically unenlightened sheds light on the troubles that surround us.

To be honest, I wish I could say I was surprised… But I can’t. I am not trying to say that Republicans are always correct, but the left really needs to set aside their ideology and start considering actual evidence, rather than feelings, when making economic decisions in the future. If they can do that, perhaps we can start getting this economy and country back on track.

Please pass this blog post or actual article on. Those voters who don’t like making hard decisions must see this information so they are not easily persuaded to support liberal “fantasy-land” solutions to tough economic problems.

Click to become of a fan of Frisk A Liberal on Facebook!

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »