Pamela Geller, pathological liar, hypocrite and bigot

As opposed to radical Islam as I may be, and as offensive as I find many Islamic dogmas to be, I would never lie to try to either discredit Islam or attack Muslims or people who do not hate Muslims. But Pamela Geller, a right-wing extremist who would have been at home in the John Bitch [pun intended] Society of the 1950s (when it accused President Eisenhower of being under Communist influence), would lie and in the worst way.

http://www.rightwingwatch.org/content/pamela-geller-obama-says-isil-deceive-and-disarm-americans

Anti-Muslim activist Pamela Geller believes that President Obama and other administration officials use the translation “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” (ISIL) instead of “Islamic State of Iraq and Syria” (ISIS) to describe the Middle Eastern extremist group because he wants to trick Americans who don’t know what or where the Levant is. After telling conservative talk show host Janet Mefferd yesterday that Obama aided Islamic extremists, Geller alleged that the president is trying to trick the American people by using the translation “ISIL.”

“He says ‘ISIL,’ and why ‘ISIL’ over ‘ISIS’? In my opinion, because it’s to distract, dissemble, deceive and disarm the American people,” Geller said. “The Islamic State of Levant, if anyone looks it up they see Levant and they are like, ‘What’s Levant?’ He knows this.”

 

If Geller’s analysis is correct, she has also been aiding the group, as she has regularly used the terms “ISIL” and “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” on her blog Atlas Shrugs, where she repeatedly wrote that ISIL, and not ISIS, is the correct name for the group:

The media had amended the name of the Islamic army tearing through Syria and Iraq to ISIS (Islamic State of Syria and Iraq). But the correct name is ISIL (Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant). What is the the Levant? The geographical area they mean to rule. The Levant includes Egypt, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan, Cyprus and parts of Turkey.

What else can this bitch say wrong? How about:

http://pamelageller.com/2014/08/obama-sends-defense-secretary-hagel-turkey-supporter-isis-build-coalition-willing.html/

Bush had close to 50 countries in his “Coalition of the Willing.”

Obama has so alienated and abandoned our allies, he has no one.

He is sending Hagel to Turkey to build a coalition to fight the Islamic State.

Note to Obama: Turkey is supporting the Islamic State.

But he knows this, too. Obama says he has no strategy to defeat ISIS. He doesn’t because he has provided tacit support for the Islamic State — especially in Syria.

Really? Is there any evidence for ANY of those above assertions?  If not, why make them?  Oh, because when it comes to Muslims or those who do not hate Muslims as much as Geller does, honor and truthfulness are not issues, are they?

And how seriously can you take someone who names her blog after one of the most notorious writings of the extremist loon Ayn Rand?

To see what kind of people take that nutcase seriously, just listen to this:

http://janetmefferdpremium.com/2014/08/26/janet-mefferd-radio-show-20140826-hr-2/

What if the American Civil War had never been fought?

The election of Abraham Lincoln to the Presidency of the United States in 1860 triggered the succession of most of the southern states where slavery was legal, because the wealthy whites who dominated those states feared that the federal government would force them to give up slavery. The result was the four bloodiest years in all of American history. But what if cooler heads had prevailed and the Civil War had never happened? What if instead the South had remained in the Union?

For one thing, the fact that so many young men had not died in battle meant that the USA would have been able to conquer the western regions much faster than it actually did, and the Native American tribes living on those lands would have been even more brutalized in the process. Anti-immigrant sentiments would have been greater in the late 19th Century then they were, since there would be no perceived need for more people to come to the USA from other parts of the world. States that entered the Union after the Civil War might still have had slaves if they were in the southwest, but the Industrial Revolution of the late 19th Century would at the same time had made slavery largely unprofitable. Both northern abolitionists and European states opposed to slavery might have succeeded in putting enough pressure on the United States for it to pass a Constitutional Amendment abolishing slavery, but the southern states would have been able to block amendments granting citizenship and voting rights to freed blacks. As a result, the Supreme Court of the United States would have had no legal basis to condemn the Jim Crow laws and procedures of the South, resulting in racial segregation continuing to this very day. Many aspects of American culture, such as rock & roll and hip/hop music, would never have become popular among white youths. The United States would have regarded Mexico as an invader due to so many of its people coming undocumented across the border between them and this might have eventually led to another war with Mexico by the end of the 20th Century. The Cold War between the United States and the Soviet Union would have lasted much longer and been more damaging to the interests of the USA around the world because most other nations would see the Soviets are more enlightened and honorable than the racist Americans. Most black Americans would have been far more supportive of Communism and this in turn would have made capitalist supporting whites hate blacks even more.

.So the ultimate result would have been an America that was even MORE racist than today!

The downfall of Eric Cantor

A lot of ink (and pixels) has been used in reference to the stunning upset of a Tea Party challenger defeating House Majority Leader Rep. Eric Cantor. Some thoughts of my own about that:

1. No politician should ever take his position in office for granted. You should be willing to fight tirelessly for your office against any challengers.

2. It really does not matter how much money is spent on your campaign. If your constituents have lost faith in you, then you should go down to defeat. So maybe there is hope for us after the Citizens United decision of the U.S. Supreme Court, even though it is still one of the worst such decisions in its history.

3. David Brat, the professor who defeated Cantor, is a Tea Party activist who is a hard-liner against immigration reform, and claimed that Cantor was too willing to compromise on it. Of course, that only means Brat is a bigoted @$$hole who does not deserve to be in Congress. Damn him!

4. Remember this I wrote years ago? I love being proven right!

5. Primaries of political parties tend to be dominated by hard-line supporters of that party, but then the winner of those primaries must then appeal to the general population, perhaps resulting in flip-flopping on certain issues.  All Democrat Jack Trammell, who will face Brat in the general election, has to do is present a moderate stance on the issues he supports from start to finish and thus come across as the candidate who will represent the most people in his district, as well as someone who is NOT A HYPOCRITE!

Wayne Christian and Todd Staples, libeled!

Texas politicians are overwhelmingly Conservative and Republican, which as a liberal often makes me feel like an alien in my own state, despite being born and raised here. In looking at the candidates running for office in Texas, I stumbled upon some propaganda against them. Specifically, Wayne Christian and Todd Staples. Continue reading

Insanity on the Telephone

One of the most hilarious videos I’ve ever seen is this:

In only 1 1/2 minutes, this caller spits out plenty of bullcrap. What is really ironic is that there is also so much bullcrap out there that is Republican party dogma, such as that President Obama is a Socialist, that socialism is bad for America, that Obamacare must be repealed, that ultra-high military spending is good for Americans instead of spending more on our infrastructure, and that keeping taxes low on the rich helps our economy. ALL of those claims are baseless too! So why tolerate any of it?  Just because a lie is popular does not make it any less false!