Obama's Chief Constituency

Obama's Chief Constituency

  President Barack Hussein Obama has a number of powerful and loyal constituencies in his camp, ranging from white guilters to the homosexual lobby to food stampers to labor unions and to the Jewish lobby, all of whom–except for those belatedly suffering from white guilt and Jewish voters–have benefited greatly from Obama’s policies over the past 3 3/4 years. 

However, none of those voting blocs have been more faithful to the president than African-Americans most of whom still support him even though, like the white guilters and Jews, he has done nothing worthwhile for them.   Growing black unemployment and poverty rates to historic levels is hardly a plus.

The millions of whites who voted for Obama in 2008 out of a bizarre, misplaced guilt over slavery or because they felt it was time for a minority to rule the country have been rewarded with a blatantly racist administration and Jews who voted for him mainly because they have always voted Democrat have been rewarded with an overt antipathy toward Israel. 

Still, in a sad commentary on America’s electorate, it looks as if the majority of those two groups will cast their ballots for more of the same on November 6th.

I guess some people just enjoy being abused.

Even sadder is the case of African-Americans who by all accounts will vote for Obama based on the fact he is one of their own, sort of.

It’s doubtful the president will again win 95% of their vote but close to 90% is still a safe bet despite the 3,700 member Coalition of Black Pastors condemnation of his “evolved” position on same-sex marriage. 

  Black actor Samuel L. Jackson, black Brooklyn rapper Jay-Z, an unidentified black woman protesting against Mitt Romney in Cleveland, even white entertainer Madonna all back Obama, Jackson and Jay-Z because he’s semi-black, the protestor because he gave her a free cell phone, and Madonna because she’s losing her marbles and believes “We have a black Muslim in the White House.”

Barack Hussein Obama may be a lot of things but to my knowledge he hasn’t joined crazy Louis Farrakhan’s crazier Nation of Islam as of September 30th, 2012. 

Maybe after November.

  Another known crazy, Sirius XM shock jock Howard Stern, occasionally meanders into shocking, political reality.  Last week, Stern dispatched his field crew, Sal and Richard, to Harlem . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=28222.)

Interpreting Four Winkers

Interpreting Four Winkers

A knowing wink can denote many things and connote far more. 

Drudge.com recently featured an un-related collection of four notable winkers– President Barack Hussein Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, Barack’s wife First Lady Michelle Obama, and Russian  tyrant Vladimir Putin, all of whom share the common trait of being proven dissemblers.

Now, interpreting the meaning–if any–behind a wink or a nod is an iffy proposition but making educated guesses on what the winker was contemplating based on his or her past history, future aspirations, and known personality is very possible and not mere idle speculation.

  It’s not known to or at whom the president was winking in his Drudge picture but, considering his ambitions and constant campaigning and fund raising, he is clearly reflecting approbation or agreement probably with someone on the Obama re-election team since winning four more years has been Obama’s fixation for the past 3 3/4 years.  

Still, it’s a grimacing wink, possibly indicative of his awareness that he has screwed up royally and that his background primarily as a radical community organizer hardly qualified him for the presidency in the first place.  It certainly couldn’t reflect Obama’s discomfort with his plans to sell out our country to the Russians when he has more “flexibility” because that realization would make him grin, not grimace. (See below)
    
  Hillary Clinton is famous for a number of questionable accomplishments but friendly winks aren’t among them.  In fact, her Drudge-photo is more suggestive of a grandmother in urgent need of Gas-X than it suggests any degree of friendliness. 

Hillary’s gastrointestinal issues may be attributable to a grudging acceptance that daughter Chelsea will never bless her with a grandchild or, more likely, to a gnawing regret that she now works for a man both she and her hubby  consider incompetent and that, in 2016, she will be almost as old as John McCain was in 2008. 

Maybe poor Hillary would have been better off had she “stayed home and baked cookies and had teas,” as she said 20 years ago.  It’s conceivable that she might have been able to protect Bill from the sexual ravages of that orally-obsessed tart Monica Lewinsky. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=28208.)

Liberal Poll Dancing

Liberal Poll Dancing

Mark Twain’s famous line effectively equating ”lies, damned lies, and statistics” could have included “and political polls, too!”

  It’s doubtful either Mitt Romney or Barack Hussein Obama are much into “Sopranos”-style pole dancing but it’s sure as tootin’ that the Obama team and his media surrogates have been dancing around opinion polls as if they were maypoles and reveling in their ability to manipulate them like gyrating strippers while pretending they’re not campaigning for Obama’s re-election.  

The myriad polls this election season generally have Obama beating Romney by a few points, except for those reporting the governor beating the president by a few and others showing it’s pretty much a horse race. 

We don’t hear about the latter two, however.

The obvious point is that opinions recorded six weeks before Election Day are about as meaningful and reliable as the promises Obama made in 2008 yet the polls showing he will win in November are interpreted by the MSM as absolutely, indisputably accurate indicators of Obama’s victory. 

Polls can be and often are skewed by pollsters in order to arrive at their desired results, a ploy now being  used by liberals to persuade the electorate that the president is a shoo-in on November 6th to dissuade Republicans from even bothering to vote. 

If it were not such a momentous election, the recent poll indicating Obama is leading Romney by 49 to 42 percent among NASCAR enthusiasts could be seen as comical.

Now, granted Mitt probably has as little real interest as Barack in Richard Petty and Jeff Gordon but to conclude that predominantly right wing  NASCAR aficionados favor by seven percentage points the radical Obama over the quasi-conservative, middle-of-the-roader Romney suggests the pollsters were on drugs, drunk, out to make a statement on the election, or all of the above. 

Dick Morris, a known toe-sucker but nevertheless an astute political analyst,  capsulized the poll situation in his recent piece titled “Mitt Romney Pulls Ahead.” 

He wrote, “The published polling in this year’s presidential race is unusually inaccurate because this is the first election in which who votes determines how they vote.  Obama’s massive leads among blacks, Latinos, young people, and single women vie with Romney’s margin among the elderly, married white women, and white men.” 

Morris clarified that view by pointing out that ”most pollsters are using [deceptive] 2008 party preferences to weight their 2012 survey samples.”  (http://tiny.cc/4q19kw)

Closely related to the underhanded tactic of twisting poll findings is the manipulation of the news by the liberal mainstreamers who have frequently been proven to be deeply and unethically ensconced in the Obama camp for at least five years.  

Not that it needed confirmation but CBS confirmed that bias on Sunday. . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=28187.)

"All This Just for a Damn Flag?"--Michelle Obama

"All This Just for a Damn Flag?"--Michelle Obama


I’ve been told it’s merely a dastardly rumor that First Lady Michelle LaVaughn Robinson Obama disdainfully whispered to President Barack Hussein Obama  during solemn ceremonies observing the tenth anniversary of the 9/11 Islamic terrorist attacks on the United States, “All this just for a damn flag?” and the POTUS  supposedly reacted with a sneering nod and facial expression unmistakably denoting agreement with the FLOTUS’ contempt. 

In the brief clip from a year ago, which somehow went un-reported by the mainstream media, Lady O is seen turning to her husband and mouthing  something sotto voce to him as the mournful strains of bagpipes are heard in the background. 

In case the reader didn’t hear the bagpipes and see Michelle’s mouthing, catch the clip here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_OCjMaWZKWU .  Another site shows the scene in three speeds http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OJgWMI0hch8. 
  Over the past year, precisely what Mrs. Obama said has been disputed by the Obama Camp which denies she could possibly be so shallow, insensitive, and disrespectful toward the emblem of the United States of America by saying “All this just for a damn flag?” as if honoring America’s flag at a September 11th  commemoration could ever be problematic. 

Even more outrageous is that the president could concur with her.  

In the public interest and in my ceaseless quest for truth, justice, and the American way, I wouldn’t post the YouTube links without verifying what the woman who finally became proud of her country four years ago at the age of 44 had really said. 

I therefore turned to a trusted family member, a highly-experienced speech therapist skilled in lip reading, to determine what the FLOTUS whispered to the POTUS while the nation was remembering the horrors of September 11th, 2001. 

After a painstaking review of the videos and reading Lady O’s lips, our family speech therapist concluded . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=28143.)

Chick-fil-A: Lies, Truth, Confusion, and Abandonment

Chick-fil-A: Lies, Truth, Confusion, and Abandonment

For years, MassResistance.com has performed yeoman’s service on behalf of the institutions of the American family and traditional marriage. It has valiantly, almost uniliterally, fought against concerted efforts by the Lesbian-Bisexual-Gay-Transgendered movement to subvert both those institutions and to seduce the youth of America into the sick,smarmy world of homosexuality.

 

(See “Chick-fil-A and Homosexual Intolerance,” http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=3526 and “Chick-fil-A versus the Loonie Left,” http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=27284.)

 

MassResistance hasn’t surrendered in that ongoing struggle but has announced it will cease in its efforts to defend Chick-fil-A but not for the reasons you might suspect.

Despite widespread reports to the contrary, Chick-fil-A hasn’t reneged on its commitment to supporting organizations working on behalf of the American family and traditional marriage but the company’s confused dealings with those calculatedly-false reports have frustrated the good folks at MassResistance to such an extent that they are giving up.

Far too much to summarize, the full MassResistance explanatory e-mail follows in its entirety:
 UPDATE: New information on the accusations that Chick-fil-A caved in to the homosexual movement’s demands.

 In our last email, dated Sept. 21, we excoriated Chick-fil-A and its CEO Dan Cathy for allegedly caving in to the demands of the homosexual movement. Our title was: Chick-fil-A caves in to homosexual pressure. Agrees not to donate to pro-family groups in exchange for permission to put restaurant in Chicago. Slap in the face to pro-family supporters.

It appears that this is largely not true. We’ve published the truth below. But finally finding that out wasn’t easy. This is definitely one of the most exasperating news stories we’ve ever covered. Getting to the facts has entailed wading through a lot of confusion generated by the homosexual movement, the pro-family movement, and especially Chick-fil-A itself.

What was reported in the press

Our email quoted from the New York Times, Chicago Tribune, Washington Times, Huffington Post, and a homosexual press release. They all basically reported the following: Chick-fil-A officials had told Chicago Alderman Joe Monero in writing that the company would no longer donate any money to “anti-gay,” pro-family groups.

Chick-fil-A also allegedly showed documentation that they had not recently given money to such groups.

The company supposedly also promised to make an internal statement about non-discrimination on sexual orientation. In doing this, Chick-fil-A reportedly had negotiated with Moreno and also a Chicago homosexual activist group called “Civil Rights Agenda.”

In return, as Monero gleefully announced, he would not block Chick-fil-A’s efforts to open a restaurant in his trendy Chicago district. He termed this a “great victory for the gay rights movement.”

Several newspapers contacted Chick-fil-A for their comments on this, but the company refused to respond except to direct them to a statement on their website. . .

(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=28145.)

The Slippery Slope Toward Sodom Part Two

The Slippery Slope Toward Sodom  Part Two

Part One of this mini-series addressed the inordinate influence that homosexuals and their cohorts in the entertainment industry have had on the almost palpable deterioration of American morality, our slippery slope toward a biblical or figurative Sodom. 

Americans have grown almost immune to stories out of Leftist Hollywood such as those discussed in Part One and director Nick Cassavetes’ endorsement of brother-sister incest in his latest film, “Yellow.”  Cassavetes succinctly stated his disturbed, disturbing philosophy: ”Who gives a [bleep] if people judge you?”  

Unfortunately, there are other forces greasing the Sodom-slide skids as much as, or more than, twisted movie directors and overt and covert homosexuals–namely overt and covert members of NAMBLA and similar pro-pedophilia individuals and organizations like public school labor unions.  

For example, the headline on Gawker.com last Friday: “Born This Way: Sympathy and Science for Those Who Want to Have Sex with Children” should have been a shocker.

The article, written by Gawker’s West Coast editor Cord Jefferson, called for greater understanding of the plight of pedophiles.

According to the article, Leslie Walker, a prisoner’s rights activist, pleaded on behalf of convicted, imprisoned pedophiles who “usually don’t make it” without protective custody.  Walker moaned, ”[Child sex offenders] are at risk of being murdered, having their food taken, having their cells defecated and urinated in. Their life is truly a living hell.”

Gee, that’s almost as awful as the lifelong pain suffered by the innocent victims of pedophiles. 

Being an insensitive conservative, my heart doesn’t go out to convicted child molestors or people like “Terry” who admitted to having sex with his 7 year old stepdaughter and felt really bad about it in retrospect. 

“Terry” should not have endured such dastardly treatment.  Rather, he should have been castrated with a rusted bayonet and forced to share a cell with a maniacal ax-murderer whose sister was raped by a pedophile so that he could experience both a living and an everlasting hell.  

Jefferson makes an impassioned case for understanding, accepting, and forgiving pedophiles who destroy kids’ lives, spirits, and futures. 
He mentions ”a growing number of [unidentified] researchers” who claim ”that pedophilia is an illness deserving of the public’s sympathy the way any brain disorder is” and that some [of his selected researchers] “say pedophilia is a sexual orientation, meaning that pedophilia is ”unchangeable, regardless of how much jail time or beatings or therapy someone is dealt. . . that pedophiles are born that way, and that some of them will suffer through entire lives.” 

Jefferson firmly believes society should protect the perverts ”from angry mobs, cellmates, and themselves.  That bears repeating: “[P]edophilia is an illness deserving of the public’s sympathy . . . pedophilia is a sexual orientation. . . ” (http://gawker.com/5941037)

This too bears repeating: When anyone advocates so passionately for the protection of twisted people who sexually violate defenseless children, something is radically amuck with that advocate as well as with a country that tolerates such bizarre notions without indicting the twisted advocate. 

Someone should investigate Cord Jefferson to determine his sexual proclivities, his criminal record, the number of children in his family and their health.
Regrettably, people like Jefferson are all too common in Sodom-bound America.

Lauren Thompson wrote a scathing piece on Newsbusters.com titled, “Wife of Jason Biggs Jokes about Child Rape; Defends Husband’s Misogynistic Tweets.” 

Thompson clarifies what most rational people already know, that most Hollywood-types are weird but that the absolute dregs of Tinseltown reside . . .
(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=28043.)

The Slippery Slope toward Sodom (Part One)

The Slippery Slope toward Sodom (Part One)

Along with “kick the can down the road” and “throw him under the bus”, the clichéd phrase “slippery slope” is often misused and overused.  What particular ”can”, “road”, “bus”, or “slope” are we talking about? 

Still, few expressions better capture the essence of what’s been going on in America over the course of the last few years than the image conjured up by the expression ”slippery slope”.  Apply some imagination and the term connotes the sense of an inexorable, national slide down from a majestic peak into a noisome swamp.  

Only those totally oblivious of reality would deny that our nation has been rapidly slipping, sliding, even plummeting from a variety of high and lofty pinnacles achieved over centuries into various treacherous political, cultural, and moral swamps.  Not the least of that slippage is our rapid descent into an immoral morass at the bottom of which is national oblivion. 

From the point of view of a layman and not a religious minister–and hardly a moralistic, moralizing layman at that–to deny the United States of America has radically changed in almost every way over the last four years is to deny the truth of your lying eyes.  To deny America is on the path to becoming a modern-day Sodom represents an excursion into a fool’s paradise of the worst order.     

Understandably, few of us think much about Genesis’  gory details of the obliteration of Sodom and Gomorrah, ancient cities  destroyed because of gross and grossly un-repentant sins against God and nature committed by their residents.  According to the Old Testament, Sodom and Gomorrah were reduced to ashes because they had become the quintessential antitheses of what the Almighty planned when He created our universe and our planet.

By all Hebrew, Christian and Muslim accounts, fire and brimstone rained down on Sodom and Gomorrah reducing them to ashes and Lot’s wife was subsequently reduced to a pillar of salt.  The cities were universally populated by evil people  and Lot’s unfortunate wife became a human salt lick due to her insatiable curiosity.  

There are many degrees and types of evil and the specific nature of Sodomite evil is rarely detailed today since it’s politically incorrect to identify the precise cause of Sodom’s destruction as rampant homosexuality.  That cause is illustrated by this passage from Genesis 19:5: ”Then all the men of the city surrounded Lot’s house and said, ‘Where are the men who came to you tonight?  Bring them out to us so that we can have sex with them.’ “ 

Lot offered to give Sodom’s homosexuals his two virgin daughters instead, a very generous offer the mob furiously rejected and tried to break down his door to get at the male visitors inside.  What happened to those visitors is unclear but the Lot family fled and the rest is biblical history.  

However, back to the matter at hand, America’s dismal swamp where homosexuals and other deviants don’t need to break down doors to get at their prey.  Our culture has become so immersed in every variety of sexual depravity that the depraved need only advertise on Craig’s List or to find their victims. 

The homosexual rape and torture of 13 year old Jesse Dirkhising in 1999 is a prime example not only of depradation but of the media’s complicity in such evil by selective reporting which effectively condones the evil.  TIME magazine published an article back then that would never make it into MSM print today. 

“Why One Murder Makes Page One and Another Is Lost in the News Briefs” attempted to explain . . .

(Read more at http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=27999.)