Get The Latest!

 Subscribe Via Feed!

Enter email address to subscribe:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Follow scottfactor on Twitter

Posts Tagged ‘Liberalism’

They’re ugly and liberal anyway, so who cares if they walk off? Maybe they will fall off a cliff.

Warning! Strong language, including the F-word. This mosque supporter decides to show the true colors of the liberal lefties.

The following was written by Gina Miller. Her opinions don’t necessarily reflect those of, but because they’re here, they probably do.


Trading Values For Money!

It’s disappointing to see that conservative writer and speaker, Ann Coulter, has decided to accept a speaking gig next month for a so-called “conservative” homosexual group called GOProud at their New York conference, Homocon.   Ms. Coulter had been scheduled in the lineup of speakers for WND’s Taking America Back Convention in Miami on September 16th through 18th.  But when it was revealed that she had agreed to headline the homosexual conference on September 25th, Joseph Farah of WND had a “gut-wrenching” choice to make: take her or leave her for the WND convention.  He left her. 

Mr. Farah said the decision was very difficult, because they are fond of Ann Coulter as a person and speaker-writer.  WND carries Ms. Coulter’s columns and will continue to do so.  Mr. Farah said, 

“Ultimately, as a matter of principle, it would not make sense for us to have Ann speak to a conference about ‘taking America back’ when she clearly does not recognize that the ideals to be espoused there simply do not include the radical and very ‘unconservative’ agenda represented by GOProud.  The drift of the conservative movement to a brand of materialistic libertarianism is one of the main reasons we planned this conference from the beginning.” 

Mr. Farah asked Ms. Coulter why she is choosing to speak to the homosexual conference, and she said, 

“They hired me to give a speech, so I’m giving a speech. I do it all the time.” 

He then asked her, 

“Do you not understand you are legitimizing a group that is fighting for same-sex marriage and open homosexuality in the military-–not to mention the idea that sodomy is just an alternate lifestyle?” 

She responded,

“That’s silly. I speak to a lot of groups and do not endorse them. I speak at Harvard and I certainly don’t endorse their views. I’ve spoken to Democratic groups and liberal Republican groups that loooove abortion. The main thing I do is speak on college campuses, which is about the equivalent of speaking at an al-Qaeda conference. I’m sure I agree with GOProud more than I do with at least half of my college audiences. But in any event, giving a speech is not an endorsement of every position held by the people I’m speaking to. I was going to speak for you guys, [and] I think you’re nuts on the birther thing (though I like you otherwise!).” 

Well, Ann Coulter can tell that to herself all the way to the bank, after getting paid to speak for GOProud.  What she fails to realize—or to care about—is that by appearing and speaking before this group, she is lending it an air of legitimacy with the credibility of her name.  It’s not the same as speaking on a college campus where there are many messages represented.  The message of this group focuses on the homosexual agenda, and the defense of those who practice it. 

According to GOProud’s website, the organization represents homosexual conservatives and their allies.  They claim to be, “…committed to a traditional conservative agenda that emphasizes limited government, individual liberty, free markets and a confident foreign policy.” 

They hold that they promote their “traditional conservative agenda” by influencing politics and policy at the federal level.

Here is a subtle group.  The terms “traditional conservative” and “homosexual agenda” are moral and polar opposites and cannot coexist.  This is another crafty move by the left to create this “conservative” homosexual organization.  We’ve known that they intend to infiltrate our ranks to create division and trouble, so here it is—one example. 

Traditional conservative American values do not just include limited government and fiscal responsibility; they also include morality and traditional institutions like marriage and family.  The homosexual agenda targets for destruction the timeless definitions of marriage and family. 

WND’s David Kupelian notes some far-reaching consequences of legalizing homosexual marriage: 

“Schools required to teach that homosexuality is normal and acceptable; the criminalization of traditional Judeo-Christian beliefs regarding homosexuality as pastors and rabbis fear preaching their faith’s core moral values; [and]  the inevitable legalization of polygamy and other new and bizarre forms of ‘marriage.’” 

Ann Coulter is making a bad choice here, and I don’t see how this can go well for her in the end.  But she’s not the only conservative to fall prey to wishy-washy moral positions on homosexuality.  WND reported on Monday that during an interview with Bill O’Reilly, Glenn Beck brushed off the issue of the homosexual judge in California overturning the voter-approved ballot initiative Proposition 8, rightly defining marriage as being between a man and a woman. 

To Mr. Beck, homosexual marriage is no big deal and not a threat to our country.  He said we have bigger fish to fry.  That kind thinking is part of the problem, and part of why we find ourselves in the despicable place our country is in today.  The erosion of morality is a poison that infects our entire culture.  We are seeing the fruits of moral erosion throughout our government, our society—pretty much everywhere we look. 

If we’re going to take America back, we’re going to have to restore our moral foundations, not continue to compromise on the principles we know to be true.  Ann Coulter is not helping our cause by agreeing to legitimize this homosexual group.  She’s being used to hurt the conservative movement, whether she knows it or not.  I hope she’ll reconsider her foolish decision. 

Originally from Texas, Gina is a graduate of William Carey College in Gulfport, MS, with a Bachelor of Fine Arts. Gina currently presents an audio blog on News Radio 104.9 FM in Biloxi, MS. Her blogs can be heard twice weekly on the Kipp Gregory morning show.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg can read the Constitution, or at least part of it. He took to the podium to defend the rights of members of the violent religion and followers of Mohamed the terrorist to build a mosque two blocks from the World Trade Center site, better known as Ground Zero.

As Bloomberg spoke to defend the violent jihadists, he spoke of having respect for one’s neighbors, the same respect that has been ignored by the group of jihadists that wish to build their tower of victory over the site of America’s reminder of its darkest day. Bloomberg has defended these people without investigating what terrorist camp the money to build this mosque comes from. He defends these people as if they were his best friends.

Bloomberg’s curious thumping on the United States Constitution has me asking some questions of the Mayor. Why does the Mayor go out of his way to recognize and defend the First Amendment rights of these jihadists to worship when and where they want, yet he stands up and proudly tries his very best to take away the Second Amendment rights of Americans that would proudly defend our nation? Does the not-so-honorable Mayor not realize that the First Amendment and the Second Amendment are part of the same bill of rights that constitutionally protects both groups?

The Mayor is quoted in this video as stating, in part, “…this is the free-est city in the world.” It sure is, if you are a violent jihadist. “This is the free-est city in the world.” It sure isn’t if you’re a gun owner. “This is the free-est city in the world.” Maybe Bloomberg has his own Constitution to define that. Or maybe he’s just a worthless socialist in the image of our President.

California, being the land of fruits and nuts, has given to the American people this nutjob of a Congressman. Pete Stark, better known for telling people he wouldn’t pee on their leg, now says the feds can do anything. That includes enslaving you…

As I’m sure all of my readers are aware, the flap over the video of (former) USDA employee Shirley Sherrod the last two days seems to be focused more on the man that posted it rather than what the content represents.

Andrew Breitbart, a conservative activist, commentator, blogger, and owner of the site, posted the original clip of the video of Sherrod making racist comments at a gathering of the NAACP. Her comments, later shown to be taken out of context, were used as a reason to fire her from her job and receive condemnation from the Obama administration for the racist tone of those comments. The entire video, however, shows that her comments were being made to relate to a past incident and how she has learned from that incident and supposedly changed her ways.

People….you missed the point. If you look at the video posted on my blog, I titled it, “NAACP Racist? Nooooo”. The title reflects the racist tone, not of Sherrod’s words, but of the reaction by the audience to her words. As she stated that she acted in a less than honorable manner toward a white farmer…because he was white…you can hear the crowd react with approval. The point of the video clip was not to bash Sherrod, but to prove that the NAACP are nothing but a bunch of white-hating racist pigs who masquerade as a poor, oppressed class of people, meanwhile living the American dream bought and paid for by the blood of their ancestors who fought and died for civil rights. Dr. King is probably rolling in his grave because of this video.

The NAACP has insisted on painting the Tea Party movement as that of a bunch of racists. The NAACP has gone as far as to release videos that show racists at Tea Party gatherings, but having edited out the negative reaction to these racist participants. In short, the other Tea Party members send these racists packing. The NAACP fails to mention that.

These charges of racism that are flying from the liberal lefties are a sure fire way to send this country in reverse. The NAACP thrives on this type of controversy and hopes to keep the image of the “poor, oppressed peoples” alive and well for many years to come. Quite simply put, they think they can gain political power from it and hence, enrich it’s leadership. The NAACP no longer is a civil rights organization. It has become a group of power-hungry people hell-bent on rising to the top, no matter the expense to our Nation or its citizens.

Breitbart get’s it right in this video. I only hope that others can see past the controversy that the liberal media and the Whitehouse have bought into, and see the NAACP for what they really are…nothing.

Custom Search
Wanna Help?
We The People!
  • #518 - God Will Cause You to Remain
    Jesus said in John 15, "I am the vine; you are the branches. If you abide in Me, you will bear much fruit and your fruit will remain." In life, you may face bumps in the road. You may have had a lot of ups and downs, struggles in finances, or difficulties in relationships that have lasted year after year. You're thinking, "Is it ever goin […]
Referral List