Wednesday, April 29, 2009
Stompin' in my Air Force One
Just as a quick note, I can't even imagine what kind of an outcry we would have seen if the flyby over NYC of Air Force One had happened during our previous president's tenure. Of course 9/11 happened during Bush's presidency, so doing something that would remotely conjur thoughts of that awful day in history would never ever be tolerated by his administration. The incident Monday only demonstrates further the incompetency of those who Obama has chosen to surround himself with. I am not blaming Obama for the event, but just gawking in disbelief that this administration has done everything possible to distance themselves from the military ethos of Bush that this sort of event would happen. Thousands of the same people who had to experience first hand the tragic events of 9/11 were thrown into hysteria because of the insensitivity of someone trying to get a good PR shot. Bad job, boys. Simply outrageous.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
That's great. You go ahead and delude yourself that the previous administration was so humane, so pro-life and militarily responsible.
I'll celebrate when Obama gets the war crimes tribunal going and roasts Rice and Cheney (and God willing Bush too) for the utterly outrageus torture and un-American treatment of prisoners. Electrocuting innocent Iraqis covered in black bags? Cool,no prob. Yay for that military ethos! Condemning the abortion of a child carried by a nine year old? Hell, yeah!
Whatever you want to think, Sarah.
Were you not affected by 9/11 at all Clare? I just remember that after hearing about it in school and having to go on like everything was normal, I came home, sat in front of my TV and just cried for the rest of the night wondering how such evil could happen. But thanks for knowing everything about everything that has gone on in the last 8 years. I forgot that you sat in with our countries leaders when they made whatever decisions they did about US military tactics, etc.
Clare, I don't understand why you decided that this is a place for you to rant with claims based on little facts and fully on emotions. Save it for your own blog.
I'm always amused whenever Clare posts on here. I almost look forward to hearing her emotionally-charged unsubstantiated claims. It gives me fuel to keep doing what I am doing to clear out the cobwebs of ignorance that pervades liberal society. God forbid anyone questions, even in an indirect way, the lord and savior Obama. Do that and you are sure to receive a fiery response filled with derogatory references to G.W. Bush. (Being against Obama means being for Bush? Do I have that right?) I love how liberals like Clare love to preach tolerance as long as you agree with them, but the minute you step off the liberal platform, they turn around and try to mute your freedom of speech. I love it, Clare. Keep doing what you are doing. Don't address the issues at hand but instead resort to beating that tired old punching bag, Bush, and spewing Catholic hate speech. Maybe some day I'll find the time to intellectually debate with you once you decide to bring intelligence to the playing field. Until then, just continue being my source of entertainment by becoming the butt of my jokes on the (un)intelligence of liberal thought.
-Scott
Intellectual debate my eye. That's precisely both of your problems. Not that you have the opinions that you have, but that you refuse to even look at the other side because you're so convinced that you are right.
I will stop posting here because, yes, I 100% agree that when I post a comment I am indeed emotionally overwhelmed by your utterly myopic world view. So long.
Clare, I would be fine debating an issue with you, but you have constantly proven that you do not wish to discuss and only attack me here. The way you convey a thought is just as important as the content behind it. It is hurtful when you call me names and use emotionally based arguments. If you want to bring facts to the table, go ahead, but you have yet to do that once. I've had more productive conversations with strangers than I have had with you with the way that you've constantly commented on my blog. When you are ready to bring something constructive, I'll be ready to discuss.
Also, I know that this is back tracking in our discussions, but here is a comment from an African bishop yesterday in regards to the AIDS in Africa issue:
By Archbishop John Onaiyekan, Archdiocese of Abuja, Nigeria
April 30, 2009 - As an Archbishop, dealing on a daily basis with people infected and affected by HIV/AIDS, I know that the Pope is speaking the truth. I suspect that those who were so vociferous in condemning the Pope have never touched an HIV infected person, let alone rendered any care and attention. It is so much easier to distribute gadgets, especially at other people's expense.
What reduces infections is less casual sex, not more condoms. That is the truth. Those who accuse the Pope of being "unrealistic," that young people will have sex anyway, have no respect for the young people. When they are given true orientation, they freely respond with far greater sexual responsibility that the armchair social experts can ever imagine.
As an African Archbishop, it is my nephews and nieces that are in danger of dying of HIV/AIDS. Let no one ever suggest that they are more concerned about them than I am. The condom distributors should listen to the truth coming not only from the Pope and Bishops, but even from impartial and serious scientific research. The facts are there, as Cardinal Pell has briefly illustrated. To ignore these facts is the greatest disservice anyone can do to the future of Africa. The struggle continues, and we are overcoming!
Post a Comment