CrispAds Blog Ads

Tuesday, August 30, 2005



So silence must not be golden according to the Sh Sh Sh liberals who are taking their loud whining act on the road to Washington, backed by the liberal media who will be divided between them and the old anti-war horse, Hanoi Jane Fonda.

Image hosted by Photobucket.comYou'll remember that it was Jane Fonda who traveled with John Kerry to Vietnam to denounce America during their favorite 1960's revolt that catapulted them to fame, while our soldiers were still POW's being tortured and killed by the Vietnamese being egged on by Jane and John. Kerry confesses to war crimes

It is these pretend kind of people who have only their selfish interests at heart. The camera is their god and they worship it like their lifeless fans do them.

Sheenhan meets with Sheen while a Sharpton surprise arrives with his Jesse Jackson imitation to supply some silly summations. SSSHHH!

Sharpton couldn't get there fast enough
A car carrying the Rev. Al Sharpton led sheriff's deputies on a nine- mile chase at speeds up to 110 mph before state troopers stopped the vehicle and arrested the driver, authorities said. See: Sharpton Driver Arrested for Speeding

Chief Deputy Charles Sullins said driver Jarrett B. Maupin, 43, was rushing Sharpton to Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport after Sharpton visited anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan on Sunday at her camp outside President Bush's ranch in Crawford.

The pretenders
Image hosted by Photobucket.comSo if the real president and the real Jesse Jackson won't be seen with Sheehan, she can always find substitute liberals who love to pretend that they're real people. But take the cameras and scripts away and she'd be left with zilch.

Martin Sheen who has made a fortune on the backs or true war heroes, claims that he hates war. Ok Mart, how about donating all that "blood money" to a good cause, say the Red Cross if you really hate the war so much? Sheen is a huge hypocrite, but typical of the leftist losers who profit from the sacrifice of others, then rationalize it by protesting against the very thing that made them rich while they laugh at the suckers who follow them. The gall and selfishness of these pretenders is enough to make anyone puke, preferrably all over them.

Will liberals ever wake up and see these hollywooden fakes for who they really are? It's doubtful they're smart enough, but certain they'll continue blinding themselves to reality as they prefer to focus on actors than real people.

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


Wednesday, August 24, 2005


Cindy's False Freedom Fighters

As we noted in the previous post, Cindy Sheehan would start ranting in favor of the terrorists'. The same terrorists' that killed her son, and many other Americans, she now calls "freedom fighters." She claims that we have "decimated Iraq and created more terrorism." But that is all she'll let herself see, while blinding herself to the progress being made for the Iraqi people.

Reporters who heard Ms. Sheehan's remarks, declined to include the outburst in their coverage. A video unearthed Tuesday by FreeRepublic.com captured Sheehan's comments on tape.

Image hosted by Photobucket.comHow insane is this woman? She's in a constant state of tears, on demand. The emotionally messed up misfits love it. But in reality, most people are sick of seeing her false emotions. She dropped her sick mother quickly to get back in front of the cameras so she didn't lose her adoring fans who love to cry with her. She's pathetic!

She only cares about being in front of the camera and bashing the president. It's all about her. You can bet your life that if a democrat was in office now under the same circumstances, you wouldn't of heard of peep out of her or the media about how "bad" the war is. In fact we'd all be hearing nothing but praise for the job being done for the president and his administration. The hypocrisy of the left stinks to high heaven!

This goes to show the utter bias of the left who only care about their selfish desires at any given time, no matter the consequences to the nation as a whole.

The latest old-media darling Cindy Sheehan, has now gone over to the other side and joined the terrorists' who flew jets into the World Trade Center and Pentagon buildings on 9/11/01, murdering over 3000 innocent lives. Yes, the same terrorists' that Saddam Hussein was supporting and financing. The same terrorists' who willingly blow themselves up to kill innocent others, including children in order to force their backward ways onto civil societies. They've done it all over the world with the most recent in London. Yet this is what Cindy believes to be 'freedom fighting.' It isn't. It's terrorism and murder, period.

How would she feel if terrorists' blew up more buildings here in America, maybe in her home town or in her mothers? It's obvious now that she'd love it, and agree with it because she's insane as are the rest of the infantile liberals. Furthermore, it's clear that Cindy loves the publicity more than she loves her son and family. Exactly what the liberals and media want! She is now their "mother". Gawd they're embarrassing!

Are you starting to feel it? Next thing you know, they'll be calling for Cindy to run for a senate seat, the same way they did with John Kerry during his Vietnam protest back in the early 70's that were lies he made up to cover for his murders of innocent civilians. It's the same script folks, and it's coming soon. Read the Swift Vets and POW's for Truth, website for the proof!

Soon their will likely be calls by democrats in congress for her input into the "tragedy" of this war, as if any war is tragic-less. The emotions will be moved up incrementally by the media until the Mommies event dwarfs the coverage of Michael Jackson's trial. But the facts and the soldiers fighting the war will hopefully stop that from happening. See: Iraq is no Vietnam

Reported on Wednesday, July 13, 2005 in the Wall Street Journal by Claudia Rosett, Mr. Stephan Hayes of the Weekly Standard wrote, since the fall of Saddam, the U.S. has had extraordinary access to documents of the former Baathist regime, and is still sifting through millions of them. Mr. Hayes takes some of what is already available, combined with other reports, documentation and details, some from before the overthrow of Saddam, some after. For page after page, he lists connections--with names, dates and details such as the longstanding relationship between Osama bin Laden's top deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, and Saddam's regime.

So if anything, Mr. Bush in recent times has not stressed Saddam's ties to al Qaeda nearly enough. More than ever, as we now discuss the bombings in London, or, to name a few others, Madrid, Casablanca, Bali, Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, or the many bombings in Israel--as well as the attacks on the World Trade Center in both 1993 and 2001--it is important to understand that terrorist connections can be real, and lethal, and portend yet more murder, even when they are shadowy, shifting and complex. And it is vital to send the message to regimes in such places as Syria, Saudi Arabia and Iran that in matters of terrorist ties, the Free World is not interested in epistemological debates over what constitutes a connection. We are not engaged in a court case, or a classroom debate. We are fighting a war.

Kathleen Parker noted in her column published in Monday's Houston Chronicle that Sheehan has no corner on moral authority. "On Saturday, a caravan of military families who support the war in Iraq is scheduled to arrive in Crawford. The backlash battalion, which is calling itself the 'You Don't Speak For Me, Cindy' tour, started in San Francisco Monday and is composed of parents whose sons and daughters are in Iraq and Afghanistan."

Cindy Sheehan is a traitor to her son, her country, to those who've died for it, and all people who desire freedom in the world because that is what terrorists' want to take away.

While she rants on, most of America is turning away from the Vietnam type rhetoric being screamed by the left. The democrats are divided, with the rational groups avoiding the extreme anti-American ones. But it could be only a matter of time before someone from the far left, such as Hillary Clinton, (the temptation must be killing her) would step-up and take over Cindy's mantra.

As reported on Drudge Wednesday night, President Bush today took direct aim at Cindy Sheehan, the anti-war protester who has set up camp near the Bushes Texas ranch and purports to speak for military moms who, like her, have lost a son in the Iraq war.

Speaking to hundreds of Idaho National Guardsmen, the president singled out military mom Tammy Pruett of Pocatello, Idaho, whose husband and five sons have all served in Iraq.

"Tammy has four sons serving in Iraq right now with the Idaho National Guard: Eric, Evan, Greg and Jeff. Last year her husband, Leon, and another son, Aaron, returned from Iraq, where they helped train Iraqi firefighters in Mosul.

"Tammy says this -- and I want you to hear this -- 'I know that if something happens to one of the boys, they would leave this world doing what they believe, what they think is right for our country.'

"And I guess you couldn't ask for a better way of life than giving it for something that you believe in. America lives in freedom because of families like the Pruetts."

"Our nation is involved in a global War on Terror that affects the safety and security of every American," Bush said. "We'll complete our work in Afghanistan and Iraq ... an immediate withdrawal of our troops in Iraq or a broader Middle East, as some have called for, will only embolden the terrorists and create a staging ground to launch attacks against America and other free countries. So long as I am president, we will stay and we will fight and will win the War on Terror."

The crowd, made up mostly of military family members, broke into cheers and chants of "U-S-A! U-S-A!"

It is not a question of if, but how many and when rational democrats will be swayed by the media attention seekers to join their revolt against America, and further divide the nation against winning the war on terror. The consequences of which would be like no other time in America's history, as the Sheehan, Moore, and Hollywood elitists' invite terror to our cities, schools, churches, synagogs, mosques, restaurants, businesses, etc., et al, which has been kept at bay since 9/11/01 due to the diligence of our nations protectors and the resolve of our president to stay the course and fight for freedom, and good against evil.

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


Monday, August 22, 2005


Windy Cindy's Shenanigans

From what we've been reading about Cindy Sheehan and her anti-war protest outside of the president's ranch, it's clear that she's made a complete debacle of this orchestrated media stunt, which is just another paranoid "group think" disaster from the left.

Her angry hate speech was misguided and misplaced. It was not George W. Bush who killed her son, it was terrorists' who are trying to drive us out of Iraq and keep the Iraqi people oppressed under Islamic fundamentalists' rule. Why is Cindy not putting the blame where it belongs? Answer: Because the democrats and their liberal media cohorts have gotten her to launch this ill-conceived effort to fill in the August dold-drums while congress and the president are on vacation.

With her marriage suddely in shambles due to her outrageously wild clamourings, Cindy and her soon to be ex-husband have unwittingly exposed the polarization inside the democratic party.

They're both democrats, but he is not as liberal or radical enough for her. Going by the following statement, neither is her family.

"The Sheehan Family lost our beloved Casey in the Iraq War and we have been silently, respectfully grieving. We do not agree with the political motivations and publicity tactics of Cindy Sheehan. She now appears to be promoting her own personal agenda and notoriety at the expense of her son's good name and reputation. The rest of the Sheehan Family supports the troops, our country, and our President, silently, with prayer and respect."

The base of the democratic party are the same type of irrational liberals that normal people steer clear of, Michael Moore, MoveOn.org., Air America, Dick Durbin and Howard Dean not withstanding.

The more she whines, the less votes democrats will get. But the far-left fringe of the party is covered by the media who think they're helping democrats. In reality, they are having the opposite effect. Why do I say this when it could help democrats? Because it won't really, as they're stuck in the cesspool of liberalism, and nothing will help them out of it, not even Hillary Clinton trying to push herself to the center. The slime is so thick, she can barely move at all, not that she has any desire to do so anyway. After all, she dove head first into that swamp long ago, but now she's being pulled under, and taking the democrats down with her.

Who Cindy should really blame...

If the soon to be former Mrs. Sheehan wants to blame anyone in America, it should be Bill Clinton, for not doing his job while president. It wasn't president George W. Bush who let Osama bin Laden go twice in 1996 and 1998 it was Bill Clinton.

It was Bill Clinton who denied there were any problems in the middle east, and that terrorists' being trained to launch attacks against America were any real threat to the nation, including being funded by Saddam Hussein. It was Bill Clinton who did not want to deal with the things his oath of office required of him, so he just ignored his responsibilities and used the military as a distraction for his reckless personal conduct, disgracing the nations highest office.

Jamie Gorelick for putting up a wall between the CIA and FBI.

Hillary Clinton for hiring Gorelick to cover for the shaky Attorney General Janet Reno for being incompetent and totally inept.

Sandy Berger for not accepting intelligence on Al Qaeda warning of attacks, and then stealing and destroying classified documents to coverup for his and Clinton's massive failures.

The 9/11 Commission, who knowingly withheld vital information of the Able Danger investigation.

Herself for voting for Clinton. Then someone should print this out and take these facts and reality to Cindy. Maybe she can read it on Oprah or Prime Time Live with squinty pain feeler Diane Sawyer.

Next thing you know, Cindy will be crying about how those "innocent" terrorists' are being killed because all they want is dead Americans and Jews. Oh, guess she already has..., "You tell me the truth. You tell me that my son died for oil. You tell me that my son died to make your friends rich. You tell me my son died to spread the cancer of Pax Americana . . . You get America out of Iraq, you get Israel out of Palestine." –– Cindy Sheehan

Then Cindy went so far off the deep end, even the media pulled the plug on her. "America has been killing people on this continent since it was started. This country is not worth dying for." Suddenly, she has to leave for home because her mom reportedly had a, hmmm, how should I put this? "Conveeeenient" stroke. Off she ran, but of course the camera's have become her best friend, so she won't be gone for too long.

Does she really mean her son volunteered and died for nothing? Most parent's who've lost their son or daughter in this or other wars over the years are outraged at her anti-American insanity. Casey was a good man who gave his adult life for an honorable cause. It is too bad his mother's unstable protest has destroyed his memory already.

It is doubtful that Cindy will return to Crawford this month, as she has left to be with her mother, who had a stroke about her daughters blind rage bordering on schizophrenia, concerning her grown grandson's sacrifice to the nation he volunteered to defend. Casey's death was indeed tragic as all of them are, but his mother has turned the very thing he lived and died for, into a disgraceful mockery that only those on the far left would love and approve of.

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


Wednesday, August 17, 2005


Clinton's 9/11 Failure & Coverup of Able Danger

UPDATE: Senate Considers Hearing on Able Danger Findings

Committee chairman Tom Kean seems to be stalling the inevitable exposure of the coverup, by trying to pass the buck to the current administration, and therefore not get egg on the commissions faces.

"The files are in the possession of the Defense Department, so really nobody else besides the administration can get to the bottom of it ... if there exists a file on Able Danger," said Chairman Kean.

But Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., said the commission is passing the buck.

"I'm not going to let them blame the Pentagon because the military officers that offered to brief them offered on two different occasions," he said.

Now read about this outrage about how Clinton Lawyers Fretted Over Bin Laden's Comfort
"The lawyers were more concerned with bin Laden`s safety and his comfort than they were with the officers charged with capturing him," former Bin Laden desk chief Michael Scheuer told MSNBC's "Hardball.

Surprising in itself, the New York Times came out today with a damning article written with newly de-classified information concerning how the Clinton administration knew of Osama bin Laden's terror group in 1996.

"State Department analysts warned the Clinton administration in July 1996 that Osama bin Laden's move to Afghanistan would give him an even more dangerous haven as he sought to expand radical Islam "well beyond the Middle East," but the government chose not to deter the move, newly declassified documents show.

Image hosted by Photobucket.com
Prime Minister Rafik Hariri and Clinton shown after denying OBL warning

Two years after the State Department's warning, with Mr. bin Laden firmly entrenched in Afghanistan and overseeing terrorist training and financing operations, Al Qaeda struck two American embassies in East Africa, leading to failed military attempts by the Clinton administration to capture or kill him in Afghanistan. Three years later, on Sept. 11, 2001, Al Qaeda struck the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in an operation overseen from the base in Afghanistan." Full article continued

According to this article by the Associated Press, An Army intelligence officer said Wednesday he told staff members from the Sept. 11 commission that a secret military unit had identified two of the three cells involved in the 2001 terrorist strikes more than a year before the attacks.

Lt. Col. Anthony Shaffer, who said he was associated with the "Able Danger" unit, said that during a 2003 meeting in Afghanistan, he mentioned that the unit had identified Sept. 11 ringleader Mohamed Atta along with three other hijackers as terrorist suspects.

Three months later, in January 2004, Shaffer said he was back in the United States and offered to follow up with the commission, but his offer was declined.

"I just walked away shocked that they would kind of change their mind, but I figured someone with equal or better knowledge ... probably came and talked to them, so they must've taken care of it," Shaffer said.

Shaffer said he was told the commission obtained only two briefcase- size loads of documents from at least 15-plus boxes of information on Able Danger.

Lt. Col. Chris Conway, a Pentagon spokesman, said Wednesday an investigation into Able Danger was under way.

9/11 Wall of Lies

Image hosted by Photobucket.com The 9/11 Report has been confirmed as a massive deception by democrats wanting to protect ex-president Clinton and his administration of misfits.

The following is critical information concerning evidence about how 9/11 was allowed to happen by certain people in the U.S. government, and exposes who is actually at fault for the worst attack on American soil in history.

The cover-up is still going on in the liberal media who try to blame republicans for everything democrats have done wrong. They've been using Cindy Sheehan's lame protest at Bush's ranch as a distraction from this damning evidence.

It also confirms what many (including myself) realized it in 1991.

Here's what this author said then: "Bill Clinton would be (and now is) the worst president in the history of America."

I urge everyone who has an interest in the truth to read the following and then go to the rest of the article that is linked.

Please Remember these facts when you vote!

"This is a critically important story that demands public attention. It will not be seriously investigated by many reporters, because the mainstream (read: leftist) media is not interested in exposing how its favorite president in decades enabled terrorists to pull off the worse act of domestic terrorism in U.S. history." – FrontPageMagazine.com

Her infamous 1995 “wall” memo produced much of the harmful lack of intelligence coordination that the Commission then used to criticize the Bush administration. As FrontPage Magazine’s Jean Pearce wrote last May, the intelligence wall Deputy Attorney General Gorelick put in place smothered ongoing investigations into Chinese contributions to Bill Clinton’s presidential campaigns. Specifically the Department of Defense and the CIA were prohibited from exchanging relevant information with the FBI.

Image hosted by Photobucket.com Was it Ms. Gorelick who steered the Sept. 11 Committee hearings away from the evidence connecting the Clinton administration? Obviously Gorelick was a plant by the Clinton's on the 9/11 commission.

Not all were happy at the time with Gorelick's action. Gutsy New York City-based U.S. Attorney Mary Jo White was appalled by the Gorelick directive, sending two of her own memoranda back to Janet Reno and Gorelick protesting, “The most effective way to combat terrorism is with as few labels and walls as possible so that wherever permissible, the right and left hands are communicating.” Her recommendations were ignored. According to the New York Post, White was so incensed by their actions that she wrote a second, scathing memorandum warning that the “wall” hindered law enforcement efforts to combat terrorism. “It will cost lives,” she reportedly warned. This second memo is still kept secret.

The Full article is here: 9/11 Coverup Commission

Also see: "Dean's New Admissions, 9/11 Commission" posted below.

Please pass this vital information along for the sake of continued freedom in America, and to keep democrats out of the White House forever.

The New York Times


© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


Friday, August 05, 2005


Waiting On Terror

Over the past five years, while democrats and others against the Iraq war have continued their incessant attacks on republicans, president Bush, the war on terror and even our military men and woman fighting to free an oppressed people, there has been looming somewhere over the horizon another disaster that a clear majority of the public feel is only a matter of time.

We've just heard once again from Osama bin Laden's second in command WARning that more attacks on America, Iraq and the UK are on the way. In a message broadcast Thursday on the pan-Arab satellite channel Al-Jazeera, Al Qaeda No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahiri warned Britons and blamed Blair. Of course blaming others for actions you endorse and instigate is a time honored tactic also used mostly by liberal extremists here in the U.S..

"Blair has brought to you destruction in central London, and he will bring more of that, God willing," al-Zawahiri said.

He did not claim responsibility for the attacks.

Blair said it was impossible to negotiate with Al Qaeda leaders.

"You only have to read the demands coming from Al Qaeda to realize there is no compromise possible with these people," Blair said.

Image hosted by Photobucket.comThe major concerns range in the form of the pending attack from Nuclear to Chemical, Biological, and Radial with Nuclear at the top. A crude dirty bomb that is easy to make is also a strong possibility. Reports of an American Hiroshima are circulating on the internet.

This clearly legitimizes the War on Terror being waged in Iraq, no matter how much liberals whine to the contrary. Most American's (7 in 10, 69%) are expecting some sort of an attack to come within the next Five years according to a new Zogby poll of adults nationwide conducted on 26 July, 2005.

Since the 9/11/01, terrorist attacks on Washington and New York, the day that changed the world forever, one party has been steadfast in its commitment to combating further threats from Islamic radicals, while the other has egged them on by bashing everything in the administration's and military's policies, by calling for the pre-mature withdrawal of our troops, mainly for short-term political gain.

Image hosted by Photobucket.com More warnings are coming from oppressive countries like Iran who has just resumed their production of nuclear energy with Russia's help, despite European diplomacy and Unitied Nations IAEA restrictions. See: Iran resumes atomic work, escalates crisis. North Korea has threatened to use nuclear weapons after reneging on their pledge to abandon weapons production in lieu of the Clinton administrations appeasement policy during the 1990's, claiming they now posses the bomb, is also a top concern for the civilized world.

Remember Illinois democratic senator Dick Durbin's nasty remarks on the senate floor comparing our volunteer military's men and woman to the Nazi's and Communists' of WWII. He was clearly chosen by the DNC to give a John Kerry Vietnam type speech, which was so full of lies as to backfire on him and the democrats almost immediately. The real problem for dems is that they get caught up in their emotions, never seeing the big picture or consequences of their words and actions.

Had any republican said the same thing, the DNC and the liberal media would be calling for his removal if not also his head, which clearly proves the left's ultra-hypocrisy, and care-less attitude by making shrill comments about fighting this war and protecting the American public, thus provoking the enemy into keeping up their aggression, no matter the cost of American lives while giving lip service in attempts to deceive the electorate by claiming transparent support for the war effort.

Will America's resolve hold?

There is yet another politcally biased AP-Ipsos poll showing president Bush's approval for the war at a low point, which no doubt makes terrorists' and liberal democrats happy campers, at least until the next attack when they will likley blame Bush for it instead of the terrorists', proving once again how backwards and un-American they are. "This country is a monarchy," said Charles Nuutinen, a 62-year-old former democrat turned independent from Greenville, Wis. "He's turning this country into Saudi Arabia. He does what he wants. He doesn't care what the people want."

Notice how these polls come out just after terrorists' kill more of our troops in Iraq, and after the democrats have launched more attacks on president Bush and those in his administration, as they recently did with the previously debunked Wilson/Plame smear attempt against Karl Rove that the Senate Intelligence Committee concluded had no foundation in fact. Most polls are manufactured for a pre-determined outcome, bought and paid for by political operatives and should not be relied on by the public for real information.

To pull out now would come at the expense of leaving the Iraqis defenseless against the Al Qaeda terrorists and insurgents coming into Iraq from other muslim countries before they're ready to fend for themselves against such extremism, and in-turn launch a massive wave of new recruits for the radical fundamentalist's cause to eradicate Christians and Jews from the world.

President Bush was elected by the people who trust him to do what is necessary for winning this war on terror that was left to fester for 8 years before his election. Again, those who put their emotions ahead of logic are being displayed for partisan gain, no matter the cost to America by the DNC bought liberal media.

The president has told the American public that this war would be a long one, and that there is a need to be resolute in winning it while it is on foreign ground, rather than in America's heartland. The protesters of the war didn't hear it, and still won't until they're faced with this reality up close and personal.

Image hosted by Photobucket.com

After the Thud

Should the other shoe drop between now and the next few years by whatever means, there will be calls for more security which will no doubt lead to further tightening of our liberties by the government, thus lessening our own freedoms while combating people who cannot be reasoned with. A police and/or military state may eventually be invoked, depending on the severity of the terror strike(s). To be sure, the economic impact will be devasting to the financial and travel sectors as to how they react, likely to include calls for even higher security.

If U.S., citizens lose their mojo, as they did in Vietnam, the result this time will likely be far worse than any could imagine, as Islamic terrorists' would punish this nation and world by pushing it back centuries to conform to their fundamentally oppressive ideology ruled by the threats of a few by Islamic decrees. Make no mistake, this is a religious war that has been fought by the Muslims for centuries against all others and they will not stop until they are either defeated permanently with whatever means necessary, or they win through terrorism.

To lose our resolve now will invite death to our door.

Sources: Zogby, Newsmax.com, Associated Press, Fox News, WorldNetDaily

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


Monday, August 01, 2005


Dems to ruin Judge Roberts?

Already it seems democrats have dug in their heels and started-in against Bush's new nominee, appellate court Judge John Roberts for the Supreme Court. Democrats want a litmus test for any conservative judge, but feel it isn't necessary for a liberal judge to be questioned at all. The hypocrisy stinks so bad, city sewers smell sweet.

In a well thought out decision for Sandra Day O'Connor's replacement, president Bush has nominated appeals court Judge John Roberts to fill the U.S. Supreme Court vacancy. The only question remaining for his approval is, "How low are the democrats willing to go in trying to smear Mr. Roberts to make their liberal base of baby killers happy?"

What they should be asking themselves after the nation got a chance to see and hear him is, "How many voters are they willing to risk losing if they do?"

Image hosted by Photobucket.comMr. Roberts is already being attacked for co-writing a Supreme Court brief for the first Bush administration arguing the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision that overturned state laws banning abortion, was wrongly decided. But that was for a client while working as a lawyer, not making a decision working as a judge.

We don't know too much about Mr. Roberts, but what we do know is that he is a fine man by all accounts, even democrats give him that. And since his approval to the appellate court, dems will have a hard time in stopping his ascension.

Democrat attack machine

The attacks by democrats are up and running. NewsMax.com reports that the Bean town rag Boston Globe has just come out with a hit piece on Robert's wife, claming she is a pro-life woman. OUCH! She wants to save babies lives? OH, NOOOOOO, say the baby killing liberals.

In fact, the pro-choice liberals at "Planned Parenthood" (the ultimate oxymoron) said they are studying a new strategy that will drop the word "choice" in order to divide people by confusing what the choice is, thereby mixing up what abortion actually means. According to sources, in one forthcoming brief obtained by Newsweek, Third Way (a democrat think tank) divides voters into abortion "polars." But in reality, this is simply another evil tactic used against woman for murdering the life within them.

Democrats want to "reframe the abortion issue." As if killing innocent babies is some kind of game to be played like chess.

"We've gotten a little far away from talking with people very much from the heart," admits Karen Pearl, interim president of Planned Parenthood.

The Roberts hearings could test the new "strategy," reports Newsweek Deputy Washington Bureau Chief Debra Rosenberg in the Aug. 8 issue (on newsstands Monday, Aug. 1).

What kind of heart do those who desire the murders of innocent babies have? These are the types of women who put their sexual pleasures above the lives of all others. If they can willingly kill their own baby, they are at least as heart-less at their core as any other murderer on death row or serving a life sentence for their crime.

The abortion pushers at Planned Parenthood should be tried for abusing women and fostering the genocide of over 45 million innocent lives since Roe vs. Wade. They cannot hide the evil they've done and are continuing. Their arguments are wrong on all counts and they must pay the price for their deceptions which will no longer be tolerated by a civil society.

For her part, Mrs. Roberts served as an executive vp for "Feminists for Life" whos mission statement according to Carl Limbacher says, "Feminists for Life recognizes that abortion is a reflection that our society has failed women. We are dedicated to systematically eliminating the root causes that drive women to abortion - primarily lack of practical resources and support - through holistic woman-centered solutions.

"Women deserve better than abortion," the mission statement continues.

"Feminists for Life continues the tradition of early American feminists such as Susan B. Anthony, who opposed abortion."

So liberals now have a target, only she wasn't nominated by the president.

Having already cleared 5 FBI background checks, democrats will have a hard time finding anything of substance to smear him with. All Judge Roberts has to do is answer questions in the simplest of terms because the democrat senators are not nearly as smart as he is. The issues that Ultra-liberal senator Teddy Kennedy said were important on Wednesday's Today Show was a dodge from the real issue of abortion that he can't wait to attack with.

"what these hearings are about are really the question and the challenge to make sure that we’re going have someone who stands on the side of working families, the middle class, of ordinary people, when you get right down to it.

The American people during this process want to know is he [Roberts] going to be on the side of the major corporate interests or is he going to be on the (side of the) consumers’ interest? Will he be on the side of the polluters or will he be on the side of those that believe that the Congress had the right to pass important legislation on the environment? And will he be on the side of workers, or is he going to be on the side of the bosses? Those are the issues..."

Senator Chuckles Schumer of New York said that Roberts has refused to answer "important questions." Gee Chuck, like what? How about asking this question: "What is your position on driving a pair of pliers into an innocent babies head and pulling out it's brains just as the living baby is being born in order to murder it as requested by the mother in a partial birth abortion procedure?" Schumer is as evil as one gets and looks to be Kennedy's liberal successor to continue the role of making a mockery of America.

You know Teddy, you're really getting up there in age and your time is getting very close now. Will you be making your final mistake, or will you try to repent of your past evils? And don't forget about Mary Jo, who you left to die in your car on a bridge after you crashed in a drunken stupor. So which way will you go this time, Mr. Lifer on the taxpayers dole?

Dissent from the left, and the right writers

From the "Informed Comment" comes this liberal load of b.s., "George W. Bush's nomination of John Roberts, Jr. is a setback for American women, just has his policies in Iraq have produced a setback for women's rights in the Arab world. Indeed, Bush has been bad for women all around the globe." That's the liberal brain at work folks. Bush has freed the Iraqi woman from their taskmasters and this liberal writer Mr. Juan Cole has the gall to say that Bush has set them back? The women in Iraq have just voted for the first time EVER! So does Mr. Cole feels that woman should not be allowed to vote? Talk about a partisan fool, this guy takes the cake.

But Roberts may have some problems coming from the right as well. Conservative columnist Ann Coulter chimed in with a stinging rebuke of Bush's pick, saying that he might be another Souter, picked by president Bush the first, that turned out to be a disaster for the court. She added: "We don't know much about John Roberts," Coulter writes in a column shortly after the nomination. "Stealth nominees have never turned out to be a pleasant surprise for conservatives. Never. Not ever."

Most people who know Judge Roberts have only good things to say about him. He seems like a decent man who cares about family and faith. Let us all hope and pray he is the man his appearance has shown him to be while arguing for clients in front of the court, after being confirmed to give judgments sitting behind the court.

© Copyright 2005-2008 The Creative Conservative, All Rights Reserved.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?