Friday, June 03, 2011

Family Feud?

"I didn't leave the Democrat party. The Democrat party left me." ~ Ronald Reagan

Tonight, I went too far, it appears. On Facebook, my lovely niece, who unfortunately, is an avid Obama supporter and a "progressive", posted a link to the following video with the accompanying comment, "Um.....Haha???" on her brother's (my Liberal Doctor nephew) wall:



Afterward, her Liberal friends posted these comments:

"Her ignorance is astounding!! I feel dumber just hearing her jabber :-D" -- (This from a woman who is a "Christian minister". Real Christian, eh?)

Then another comment from my niece: "Haha...me too! She was just making it up as she went along...she should really not speak to people when she's in public."

The last comment came from my nephew: "Maybe she should have written the Paul Revere poem on her hand?"

(Note to myself: Maybe my learned nephew should study his history instead of simply taking what amounts to poetic license as fact)

I couldn't resist responding. I posted a comment (without even viewing the video first) pointing out that their hero, Barack Hussein Obama once remarked that the United States has 60 states. He said, and I'm sure my two readers will remember, he had been in 57 states with one left to go and that he wanted to go also to Alaska and Hawaii, but his people wouldn't let him. That makes 60 states in all. I then wrote something like "everyone makes mistakes, but the difference between Obama and Palin is that Obama hates his country, and Palin doesn't."

I say I said "something like" because later, when I checked back, I found my comment had been deleted.

I later posted a link to the article linked below, but that,too was deleted.

I guess I went too far. I don't want to anger my relatives, of course, but they drew first blood, so to speak. I must admit I was a bit surprised that no one attempted to argue with me, and instead, took the cowardly way out. It embarrasses me to admit that these are my blood relatives, with college degrees (My nephew even has a PhD), and they display this type of ignorance.

So, since I obviously wasn't going to be allowed to post further comments there, I posted my thoughts in my own status. But not until after I found this story.

After I watched the video she posted, I became angry, to say the least. This is what I wrote on my status, along with the above article:

"I get really sick of "progressives" launching hateful, vitriolic, ad-hominen attacks against Conservatives. These cowards can't refute the message so they attack the messenger. Sarah Palin is a patriot. Their "hero" is a Marxist. They can't deny either of these facts."

I had more, but I went over the word limit, so I added a couple of comments to my comment, to wit:

"Can they point to anything Sarah Palin has ever said that indicates she hates America? No, but we can point to quote after quote that indicates Obama does. Does this make "Progressives" anti-American? Not necessarily, but it certainly makes them look ignorant. Now, we have proof that Palin was historically correct, and the egg is on the "progressives" faces. Payback's a bitch, aint it?"

And, lastly:

"Is there anyone who can tell me what exactly is it about Sarah Palin that so frightens Liberals? Is it because she loves America? Is it because she believes in God? Or is it because she proudly speaks the truth about the Marxists who are trying to destroy our country? What is it? I really want to know."

Still feeling righteously indignant, I continued with another post, with another link to accentuate my point:

"More on the media's lies about Sarah Palin. Are the Liberal's embarrassed to be proven wrong yet again? No. They lack the gene to blush."

I fear I have created a rift in my family. I may never be invited to Christmas Dinner again.

But, I can't sit back and take it. And, I won't.

11 comments:

Jim said...

"I found this story."

Nice try on that "story". It is clear that Palin was in no way referring to the events cited in the "story" which occurred AFTER his ride.

"He who warned the British that they weren't going to be taking away our arms by ringing those bells and making sure as he's riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells that we were gonna to be secure..."

This CLEARLY suggests that Revere was riding through town ringing bells and sending "warning shots" to warn the British.

Maybe your comment was deleted because you said the following untrue statement:

"but the difference between Obama and Palin is that Obama hates his country, and Palin doesn't." To state that Obama hates his country is a vile suggestion and not demonstrated in any way. You are surprised that any decent person would be offended by this comment? Why would they want to argue with a relative who spews that kind of vile nonsense?

And then this: "Their "hero" is a Marxist." You say, "They can't deny either of these facts." They can't deny that Palin is a patriot because there are no facts one way or the other. They can and apparently do deny the second.

"we can point to quote after quote that indicates Obama does."

No you can't.

"Now, we have proof that Palin was historically correct". Um, no you don't. See above.

I don't know that any liberals are frightened of Sarah Palin. She's really more of a laughing stock. What is perhaps frightening is that some people take her seriously at all. Why would you think that anybody is frightened because she claims to love America or that she is a Christian? Most of us are Christians.

"[I]s it because she proudly speaks the truth about the Marxists..." But she doesn't. What's frightening is that some people thinks she does.

"Are the Liberal's embarrassed to be proven wrong yet again?"

But they are NOT proven wrong. See above.

Mark said...

Jim, you idiot.

What's clear here is that Palin stumbled slightly over her words, but her message was historically accurate as the links I provided plainly show.

Of course, since Palin got a little tongue tied, as we all do at times, and the wording didn't come out quite as she intended, Liberals will always attack her, while giving the guy that said there are 60 states a pass.

Even if she meant it the way you say (which she didn't, and you know that)it's easier to mistake some facts of ancient history than it is to not know facts that are current.

Mark said...

"This CLEARLY suggests that Revere was riding through town ringing bells and sending "warning shots" to warn the British."

Wrong. You left out an important word: AND.

When you add the "and" it comes out significantly different than the way you interpret it.

He warned the British they weren't going to take away our arms, AND he rode through town to send those warnings...
Read it as it was intended and not the way it came out and even a moron such as yourself can see what she was saying was historically accurate.

This isn't the first time the media made fun of her for getting facts wrong and found out later she was right, by the way. Remember how they howled when she made reference to the Boston tea party in 1773? Yeah. Turned out she was right.

I know you aren't embarrassed to be proven wrong. Again. As I said, Liberals lack the gene to blush.

Lone Ranger said...

Liberals have dark hearts. That is why they are always so vicious in their interactions with people who don't believe what they do. And, no matter whether it's Stalin or Kim or Mao, or Jim, all their brains are wired alike. They cannot tolerate the truth.

If you want to anger a conservative, lie to him. If you want to anger a liberal, tell the truth.

Trader Rick said...

LR said "And, no matter whether it's Stalin or Kim or Mao, or [the anonymous troll] Jim, all their brains are wired alike."

Not so fast, oh masked one.

Stalin, Kim and Mao may have brains wired alike. But they weren't idiots. The anonymous troll "jim", on the other hand has a brain with tangled up, unhooked wires, at best....

Trader Rick said...

The reason the obama traitors and libtards fear Palin so much, and they should, is not so much because she is an articulate champion of Americanism, or tells it like it is and shows them for the evil fools they are, but because she is

LIKEABLE

Like Ronnie Reagan, Will Rogers, George Burns, William Shatner, --
She has CHARISMA, and that gives her POWER.

People LIKE her. They know she is real and honest. They TRUST her.

Traits you don't find in the Washington of Edwards and Weiner very much these days.

And watch out traitors, cuz Marco Rubio's got that "IT" factor as well...

What? Why do they like her so much? one of the reasons is they see themselves in her...She may be special, but after all is said and done she is just one of the folks.

Jim said...

Mark, you idiot! :-)

Only a worshiper of Ms she's one of the folks could possibly connect "warned the British...by ringing those bells" and "as he's riding his horse through town to send those warning shots and bells" to what occurred at a British road block in the woods.

Furthermore, why would ANYONE, especially "one of the folks", recount the ride of Paul Revere as a warning TO the British?

Historically accurate? What a laugh! There is no evidence that Revere rang any bells, fired any shots or warned the British of anything. He apparently DID divulge with a gun to his head that Americans were gathering.

"a moron such as yourself can see what she was saying was historically accurate. "

No, a moron would ACCEPT what she was saying as historically accurate. Your syntax/grammar "lesson" aside, she says he warned the British and rode through town ringing bells and "sending those warning shots".

"I know you aren't embarrassed to be proven wrong." I might be if I were, but obviously I haven't been proved wrong.

Mark said...

Jim, try to wriggle out of this one if you can:

The colonists were British. Paul Revere's ride took place before there was a Constitution, before there was a United States.

He warned the British that the regulars were coming. He warned the regulars that the colonists were poised to stop them. Something you won't read in "Paul Revere's Ride", the poem by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow.

Everything Palin said was historically accurate. I understand you learned revisionist history from your Liberally deranged mentors, but facts are facts, no matter what you want to believe.

Jim said...

Keep trying, Mark. :-)

She says, "He who warned the British that THEY weren't going to be taking away our arms..."

How does THAT fit into your explanation?

Even reading Revere's own account of being stopped by the British at a roadblock, it is not clear that he "warned the British" about anything, much less that THAT was the intent of his mission. He was forced to divulge the gathering of colonists at the point of a gun. Call that a "warning" if you like, but that was not the mission. And why would he voluntarily "warn" the British that colonists were poised to oppose them.

I'm willing to bet that neither Palin nor you (nor I) nor 99.9% of Americans knew that Revere was stopped by the British, much less told them of gathering colonists.

The fact that he was stopped and questioned is such an obscure and small part of the overall story makes it is nonsensical to believe that PALIN or anybody else would characterize the events of April 18-19, 1775 as a warning to the British.

The truth is that Palin was trying to make a point about early Americans, their fight for freedom, and their desire to be secure (and bear arms, I'm sure). Nothing wrong with that. But she was in Massechucetts so she tried to tie in her location with that point but used a tortured version of "history" to do so.

And she does that a lot.

Trader Rick said...

THE MONSTROUS TROLL "jim" proves he is a clueless idiot with every comment. It just keeps coming. Why, oh why does he endure the abuse of being shown to be wrong over and over and over again??? He is surely blind to logic and reason. I wonder if his heart has been hardened like Pharoah's?

Thank God we have patriots like Sarah Palin who sacrifice all to help keep our heritage alive. Shame on those evil traitors who are trying to destroy her and tear down our civilization.

Jim said...

Morning, Dick!