The New York "Liberal" Times Endorses John McCain & Hillary

If there was any question left about Republican presidential hopeful John McCain's lack of across the board conservatism and the fact that he often leans left, the doubts should now be throughly laid to rest.

The "Liberal Times," oops I meant the "New York Times" has now officially endorsed John McCain as their choice for president on the Republican side.

"Senator John McCain of Arizona is the only Republican who promises to end the George Bush style of governing from and on behalf of a small, angry fringe. With a record of working across the aisle to develop sound bipartisan legislation, he would offer a choice to a broader range of Americans than the rest of the Republican field," the newspaper said.

They also went on to praise his dedication as an early advocate of behalf of global warming and the fact that he "argues passionately" about "a country's treatment of prisoners in the worst of times."

I'm still reeling over the fact that this guy managed to pick up South Carolina. Thanks again for that Fred Thompson.

They stated that they could not endorse former NYC mayor and Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani because they see him as a "narrow, obsessively secretive, vindictive man" whose "arrogance and bad judgment are breathtaking."

Congrats to you Rudy on the anti-endorsement.

On the Democrap, oops sorry there I go again, I meant DEMOCRAT side, they eagerly endorsed presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton.

"Hearing her talk about the presidency, her policies and answers for America's big problems, we are hugely impressed by the depth of her knowledge, by the force of her intellect and by the breadth of, yes, her experience," the newspaper said.

Oh yes. That's Hillary. Big government answers to big problems.
--
ref:http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN2429487020080125?feedType=RSS&feedName=politicsNews&pageNumber=1&virtualBrandChannel=0,http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/25/opinion/25fri2.html?ref=opinion

If It Were A Mosque, It Would Be A Hate Crime

The liberal tolerance of all religions with the exception of Christianity and Judaism has never been more apparent than it has today. It also appears more and more each day that an increasingly immoral society is moving beyond lack of tolerance and is starting to wage war against God in America in sadistic ways that were once unimaginable.

On December 9, 2007, two separate shootings incidents took place in Christian institutions in Colorado.

The first incident took place place at Youth with a Mission, where young people are trained to become Christian missionaries. Four people were rushed to area hospitals where two people died. Three of the four people have been confirmed as being staff members of YWAM.

The suspect escaped and Peter Warren, the Director of Youth with a Mission Denver said the following regarding the shooter. "The young man – I don't know who he is; I don't think [the victims] knew him – but he must be going through a lot personally in his own life to do something like this,"

The second incident took place at a nearby church by the name of New Life Church. An estimated 7,000 shots were fired, leaving one person dead and four others were wounded.

"What happened today was a real tragedy," said the pastor Brady Boyd. "People lost their lives today. People came to church to worship. ... People came to church with their families."

This time however, the second amendment saved the day and lives. The shootings from the gunman came to a halt. Even though the shooter was said to be dressed with a tactical helmet and body armor, he was shot and killed by an armed female security guard.

I can't help but wonder how liberals would perceive these sad events, had they taken place in any other house of worship outside of a church or a synagog. The reactions from the media and the lack of action from liberal politicians is total hypocrisy.

Let's consider for one moment if this had happened in a Muslim mosque for example.

Odds are conservatives in general would receive a thorough raking from the liberal media for their so-called intolerance and prejudice towards other religions.

Additionally, liberal politicians all across America would be found siting the incident as a reason for tougher penalties for specific crimes and more restrictions on the average American's ability to legally purchase a firearm.

After all, wouldn't that be a "hate crime?"

references:http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=82457, http://www.9news.com/news/top-article.aspx?storyid=82473, http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/12/09/church.shooting/index.html
http://www.denverpost.com/money/ci_7679696, http://www.9news.com/assetpool/images/071210122146_22.jpg

CNN Defends Use of Dem Activist at GOP Debate

On Thursday Novemeber 29, 2007, CNN released statements defending it's use of Democratic activist in the GOP debate it hosted on November 28, 2007.

"The whole point of these ground-breaking CNN/YouTube debates is to focus on substantive questions of concern to real people and to throw open the process to a wider range of Americans all around the country. CNN cared about what you asked, not who you were. This was the case for both the Democratic and the Republican CNN/YouTube debates.

The issues raised during last night's debate were legitimate and relevant no matter who was asking the questions. The vested interests who are challenging the credibility of the questioners are trying to distract voters from the substantive issues they care most about. Americans are tired of that discredited low-road approach, and throughout this election campaign CNN will stay focused on what the
candidates are saying about the pressing issues facing this country at a critical time in our history."

GOP Presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee, who took part in the debate, had a different view on the situation.

"I think it compromises the integrity of what it was supposed to be and that is a very objective people's kind of debate," he said. Huckabee added that he's happy to answer anyone's questions, but it's a bit untoward if the advertised purpose of the debate was to give Republican voters a chance to question with their candidates.

If the stated purpose is to give the people a chance to ask Republicans what Republican voters are interested in (in) the primary, I'm not sure that Democrat activists for other campaigns for Democrats are going to know best what Republicans are thinking for their nominee. And that's what does in fact somewhat compromise or even corrupt the process," he said.

Personally, it is my understanding that we are not yet in a general election. We are at the point in our political process where voting blocks are given the opportunity to choose a candidate that best represents the party that they support.

I had hoped that CNN would do their part to provide Republican primary voters with answers to issues deemed important to them and hence enable them to make a more informed decision on who they decide to support.

Apparently that was not part of the script. Instead they pandered to the interest of those not voting in the primary and even allowed one liberal activist floor time to preach his anti-conservative agenda.
ref:http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,314002,00.html

See related articles:
General At GOP Debate Receives Marching Orders From Hillary?
Edwards and Obama Also Given Representation At CNN GOP Debate

Edwards and Obama Also Given Representation At CNN GOP Debate

According to a fox news report, retired Brigadier General Kerr (a member of the a Hillary Clinton steering committee for homosexual rights) was not the only one to quiz GOP presidential while having an undisclosed connection to the campaigns of Democratic presidential hopefuls. (READ RELATED KERR STORY)

Ted Faturos, 20, a student at University of California, San Diego, asked a question about corn subsidies. It turns out the urban studies and planning major also worked as an intern for Democratic Rep. Jane Harman.

A woman who identified herself as Journey from Texas asked the candidates about whether they would prosecute women and doctors if abortion were made illegal and the practice continued. After the debate, she promptly posted a YouTube video wearing a John Edwards '08 T-shirt.

Leeann Anderson, asked about the danger of lead toys from China. Anderson, an activist on the issue, is reportedly an assistant to Leo Gerard, president of the United Steelworkers of America. The union endorsed Edwards earlier this month, and Anderson's question is posted on the steelworkers' YouTube page next to a picture of Edwards.

David McMillan, a screenwriter from Los Angeles who asked the candidates why they thought the vast majority of African Americans don't vote Republican, has pictures of himself on his website attending a fundraiser for Barack Obama as well as several parodies bashing current and former Bush administration officials Dick Cheney, Karl Rove and Alberto Gonzales.

As developments continue, many viewers are left wondering if CNN was more concerned about stacking the deck against the GOP candidates than obtaining answers for voters with legitimate interests in the candidates' positions.
ref:http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,313681,00.html

General At GOP Debate Receives Marching Orders From Hillary?

The Republican debate shown on CNN on November 28, 2007 was supposed to be a debate in which YouTube users were allowed to ask questions via video.

Yet at one point the floor was turned over to audience member and openly gay Retired Brigadier General Keith Kerr for a lecture against the U.S. military "don't ask don't tell" policy.

The fact that Brigadier General Kerr is from "LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) Americans for Hillary" was not revealed during this question-turned-lecture.

Hillary Clinton's campaign announced the formation of this committee in a press release on June 27, 2007. The release contained a list of steering committee leaders including the name Keith Kerr, retired Colonel., U.S. Army; retired Brigadier General, California National Reserve.

Has Hillary grown weary of planting her own questions? Maybe it is not without reason that CNN is so often referred to as the "Clinton News Network."

Below is a video of the incident along with the responses of candidates.
If you have trouble viewing this video, click here.


Below is a video of the initial response from CNN.
If you have trouble viewing this video, click here.

ref:http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/release/view/?id=2196