Friday, January 28, 2005
He calls Condoleeza Rice, Bush, Cheney and all the rest "liars".
This is a guy who got drunk, picked up a piece of tail, drove off a bridge because of his drunkeness, abandoned this woman and let her drown, crawled out of the water and disappeared until he sobered up enough to speak with the authorities.
To this day he will maintain that he was only giving Mary Jo a ride home and that he wasn't drunk.
But he's not a liar. Just ask him.
And now he trashes the elections in Iraq, three days before they happen.
These elections may be what's needed to stop attacks which are killing Iraqi civilians every day. But Teddy Kennedy is opposing them for no reason other than his hatred of George Bush. Like all of the Democrats in Washington, he continuously speaks of his work "for the people", but he's perfectly willing to let Iraqi people die to further his party's agenda and to satisfy his vendetta against Bush.
What would happen if we were to pull our troops out? There would be a civil war and a blood-bath, that's what.
These terrorists (not insurgents) would sit back and wait for us to leave. They'd hang out in Syria and Iran and just wait for us to bail out. Then they'd come in shooting. We'd have a new Saddam Hussein in power and have to deal with the bullshit all over again. Not to mention the thousands upon thousands of people who would die in that civil war.
But Teddy is perfectly willing to sacrifice those people just to satisfy his ego. He has been driven absolutely mad by watching his party lose power and the people who are his exact ideological opposite gaining that power.
He feels that that power is his birthright and, that by some fluke, it has been taken away from him by a bunch of pretenders!
What he is doing is treason.
He's harming our troops by giving these terrorists a reason to keep fighting. They'll only stop when they realize that we will never leave until they give up, whether that takes two years or 200 years.
It's been 60 years since we sent troops into Germany. We're still there. It's been 50 years since we sent troops into Korea. We're still there.
But, less than two years after we went into Iraq, this buffoon is saying that we should get out.
Thursday, January 27, 2005
I know that, as a Republican, I'm supposed to be sexist and racist, but Condi is an amazing woman. She's poised, very intelligent and obviously a hard worker to be able to get where she's at.
Can you imagine the reaction at Hillary's camp to the announcement? The shriek would be heard on the moon. That alone would be reason enough to do it.
But wait, there's more!
If Condi were to run for President, we could destroy the Democrat party for ever.
They would have no choice but to go after her, thereby showing their true underlying racism. We got to see Senator and former KKK member Robert Byrd blocking the door to this black woman's office of Secretary of State for a couple of days during her confirmation hearing. Can you imagine what a year or two of that during the campaign would look like? People would be utterly disgusted with them.
In addition, we'd get a larger share of the women's vote and a larger share of the black vote than we usually do. It's a dirty little secret that if the Democrats lose just a few percentage points of either group, they're finished. For good.
And much, much more!
Republicans would be remembered forever as the party that elected the first woman and the first black person to the White House.
Hillary is planning on using her gender much more than her ideas to rally the troops for her run in 2008. This would stop that dead in it's tracks. She would have nothing to run on other than her ideas (and we saw in the past election how well those go over) and her well-documented past.
She is now trying to reposition herself as a centrist, but if you think that John Kerry's past came back to haunt him, you ain't seen nothin' yet! Hillary is going to be shredded; deservedly so. She is just a phony, self-centered, bad person. Just like her husband, she has never made a decision without first analyzing how it would help her.
Condi is a classy, honest, dependable, principled person. Can you think of any other Republican who could be in the running in 2008 that would be better? Me either.
Start writing to the Republican National Committee, your Republican Senators and Congressmen, talk shows, friends, relatives, enemies, pets...anyone that you can think of. Tell them that this could be the greatest opportunity the Republican Party has ever had and now is the time to jump on it.
- The Exile
Wednesday, January 26, 2005
What's the worst thing in the world that a little kid can call someone?
"You big dummy!"
What do Democrats and liberals call all Republicans? That's right: dummies.
It used to be that they'd just call Republican Presidents stupid. Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, Bush I, Bush II. For some reason the American people were fooled again and again into voting for complete idiots.
But in the last few years, and especially since the last election, the extreme lefties have taken over the Democrat party and now call anybody who voted for Bush a dummy. Now we're all a bunch of "knuckle-dragging, mouth-breathing, gap-toothed idiots" from Red States.
It's really what they thought all along, but in years past they were at least smart enough to realize that the way to bring people to your side wasn't to call them idiots. Now the fanatics have taken over and, like the kids they are, they're throwing a tantrum because they keep losing, not realizing or caring what the consequences of that tantrum will be. Again, liberals can't link and can't look ahead to see those consequences, just as a little kid can't.
And, as kids, they don't believe what their eyes tell them. They have to look around them and see people who voted for Bush all over the place. I really doubt that these Bush people even faintly resemble idiots. But, just as kids can be convinced that Santa Claus exists despite all of the evidence to the contrary, so too can liberals believe that all Republicans are stupid. It doesn't matter what they see every say. Their leaders (read "mommy") tell them that it's so, and they couldn't possibly be wrong!
I'd be willing to bet large sums of money that if you took 50 Democrats and 50 Republicans at random and tested their IQ's, the Republicans would win, hands down. Why do I believe that? Because that's what my experience tells me. Not what Rush Limbaugh tells me.
Alright, let's talk "environmentalists".
Awhile back I had to cut down a tree in my back yard because it was dying and killing other trees around it. When it came down, my daughter cried her little eyes out. I explained to her why it had to go, but she really didn't understand.
Shortly thereafter I was watching the local news and saw a story about a bunch of protestors who had been trying to save some trees that were in the way of rerouting a highway. Their court appeals had run out and the Sheriffs had to literally drag them away from those trees.
The footage on the news showed these people crying their little eyes out as the trees came down. No different than my daughter, who was 4 at the time.
Next: little kids will tell you the most outrageous lies right to your face and expect you to believe it. Al Gore, Bill Clinton, John Kerry, anybody?
A child will break something in the other room in a house with just the two of you in it and, when you go to find out what that 'crash' was, will deny that they did it.
Al Gore: Internet, Love Canal, Love Story, Texas fires, etc.
Bill Clinton: "I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinsky", "I'll only raise taxes on the rich", "That depends on what the meaning of the word "is", is".
Hillary Clinton: Claimed to be named after Sir Edmund Hillary, even though she was born years before anyone knew who he was. "Lost" Rose lawfirm billing records for months before they just happened to show up on the dining room table.
John Kerry: Was in combat for four months (one of which would have been training) and received three purple hearts and a silver star, which would have made him the most decorated hero in American history.
Teddy Kennedy: wasn't drunk and was just giving Mary Jo a ride home when he skidded off the bridge.
The really sad thing is that so many people in this country actually believe them and defend them, which tells you where their heads are at.
Liberals need someone to take care of them (i.e. the Government) just like a kid needs his parents. Mommy and daddy are supposed to take care of them and fix everything that they don't like, just like the Government is supposed to take care of everything and fix everything (usually through one person on the court) that liberals don't like.
I'm sure that we'll get back to this subject. I'd love to hear any examples that you may have.
- The Exile
Monday, January 24, 2005
Liberals are really very easy to figure out. Go hang out in any elementary school for a while and you'll see the exact same behavior. Liberals are nothing more than people whose emotional state hasn't progressed beyond childhood. You'll see that theme pointed out over and over again throughout this blog. It is, in fact, one of the main themes of this blog.
A few examples.
What do liberals hate more than anything? Why, unfairness, of course. To them everything must be fair. The rich have too much money and the poor don't have enough. Everyone should have the same amount of everything no matter how hard they've worked. Oddly enough, my five-year-old daughter has the same viewpoint. So do Communists. Apparently my daughter is a Communist. I suppose all children are Communists if you think about it.
I've heard a lot of conservatives mistake liberals' attitudes for communism. Liberals aren't communists except in the sense that the equal distribution of wealth seems like a good idea to someone who is, emotionally, six years old. What six-year-old doesn't want other kids' candy/taxes shared with him? In fact, the theory of communism is itself rooted in the mindset of a six-year-old. Karl Marx was, obviously, emotionally stunted.
If only that poor person had as much money as that mechanic, life would be good. It doesn't matter that the bum chose to spend his life doing nothing while the mechanic learned a trade. It doesn't matter if that welfare mom chose to have four kids and spend her life sitting on the couch watching 'Jerry Springer' while the carpenter got up at 5:00 A.M. every morning and went to work. They should still have the same amount of everything.
Speaking of "unfairness", I've heard more than a few liberals criticize America because our big, strong army went into poor, little Iraq and beat the hell out of their army.
These same people incessantly mouth the words, "We support the troops", but they'd apparently rather have the enemy's army be the same strength as ours so that we'd lose just as many troops as they do. Apparently what they mean is that they support the enemy's troops.
Obviously nobody ever told these people that life isn't fair. Some people just naturally have more brains, talent and/or ambition than others.
That's the one big reason that Communism has failed and always will fail. The more intelligent and ambitious will always try to get ahead of others. Always. It's hard-wired into us over thousands of years of evolution.
For people who are so convinced of Evolution's truth, they sure don't seem to put much stock in it.
Of course, they don't see the hypocrisy, because that's another trait of both libs and children. As one local radio show here says, liberals can't link. They can't see connections between actions.
Then again, they don't much care whether evolution is the truth or not, as long as they can use it to put down religion.
Of course they hate religion. It speaks about "right" and "wrong". Just like my daughter, these people can't stand being told that they're wrong. Which is the same reason they hate people who are "judgmental".
And, of course, once again they can't see the link between calling Conservatives "evil", "mean-spirited", "warmongers", "greedy", etc. and being judgmental. That is their judgment of me, but they really can't see it.
Just calling someone "judgmental" is a judgment!
Another manifestation of liberals' inability to see connections, is there inability to foresee consequences.
Just as a child doesn’t think about the consequences of throwing a rock through a window, the liberals don’t think about the consequences of their actions. They think things out to the point where they feel good, and then they stop. They never think beyond that.
Take welfare, for example. Giving poor people other people’s money made the liberals feel good. (STOP THINKING HERE IF YOU’RE A LIBERAL). They never thought about what would happen if you paid people not to work.
40 years and 3 TRILLION dollars later and the poverty rate is exactly the same as it used to be. The only difference is that now our crime rate and illegitimacy rate has skyrocketed!
This was Democrat Lyndon B. Johnson’s “War on Poverty”. To paraphrase Ann Coulter, his war in Vietnam went a lot better.
Another example? OK.
Just today, a couple of days after President Bush's 2nd inauguration, the evil, right-wing-extremist radio program that I was listening to played a tape recording of a bunch of protestors.
It occurred to me that these protestors' chants sounded an awful lot like the nursery rhymes my daughter likes to chant.
"Hey, hey, ho, ho, (your cause here)
"Like father, like son, one term and Bush is done" (Heh).
"Peter, Peter pumpkin eater, had a wife and couldn't keep her".
They're short, they're easy to memorize, they rhyme, they're kind of fun to say, they don't take a whole lot of thought...you get the picture. If you listen to just the cadence and not the words, you can't tell the difference.
(An interesting sidenote: have you ever thought about what "Ring around the Rosie" was about? It's actually about the bubonic plague. "Ring around the rosie" was actually describing the ring that formed around the sores when one caught the plague. People used to hold flowers (posies) to their nose in the belief that it would ward off the plague. "Ashes, ashes, all fall down!" kind of speaks for itself. Just as you've probably never thought about that, liberals don't really think about what they're chanting.)
This whole "libs as kids" theory was just kind of a vague notion and almost a joke between my friends and I until the last couple of school shootings. What did they blame them on? Every child's nemesis: bullies!
That's when all of the pieces came together.
These "poor kids" killed a bunch of bullies in their schools. They deserved our sympathy, not our reprimands.
I don't think that it's a coincidence that, if you look at these liberals, you can see inside them the kids in school who were constantly picked on. They all look "off" somehow.
An old boss of mine had a theory that they were actually aliens. "Just look at them!" he'd say. "It's obvious". But I think that what he was seeing was actually just the invisible target pasted on these people. These people were all of the misfits in your school and mine.
A psychologist I once knew told me that a lot of people's emotional progression stops at a certain traumatic point in their lives. Maybe these bullies traumatized these kids to the point where, even as adults, they can't grow up.
That would also explain why my daughter's public school sends home endless fliers on the subject of bullying. The people who are running the public school system are some of the biggest liberals in the country. I'd also bet that they were picked on when they were kids.
It would also explain their whole culture of "victimhood".
I'm sure that you'll see many, many more examples as I blather on in this blog
From now on, whenever you hear a liberal speak, think about what they're saying and try to link it to childhood behavior. Once you start seeing the pattern, you can see it in everything that they do. It's actually a lot of fun for those of us who actually think.
- The Exile
Saturday, January 22, 2005
It's typical liberal hypocrisy: you're too stupid to have firearms around, but I'm smart enough to handle the situation.
Guns are only evil when they're in the hands of the unwashed masses. Come to think of it, Michael Moore is an unwashed mass.
I wonder if his bodyguard had that gun while Michael Moore was sitting next to former President Jimmy Carter at the DNC.
It's the same thing that happened to poor, little (OK, not so little) Rosie O'Donnell. She railed against guns, but apparently wasn't concerned that her own bodyguards carried guns.
Her message, too, was clear: I hate guns, but I'm more important than you are. It would be awful if I weren't able to protect myself. It's no big deal if you're not able to protect yourself.
It's hypocritical, but it also shows just exactly what liberals think of you. And I'm not just talking about Republicans. They believe the same thing of the Democrats who keep them in their luxurious lifestyles.
They made it big. If you didn't, you must be a moron.
The truly frightening thing is, that these people did make it big. Obviously, in Hollywood, what you believe is more important than whether or not you have actual talent.
Friday, January 21, 2005
They don't get it.
They think that it is, above all else, a religous issue.
It's really not so much a religous issue as a common sense issue.
Granted, that common sense may come from a religous basis, but it is older than any Bible.
Common sense told people that anyone who had gained 3 Purple Hearts in Vietnam in 4 months (of which one month would have been spent in training), would be the greatest war hero in American history. That certainly wasn't John Kerry.
In other words, he was lying to gain power. Not much of a "moral value" there.
Common sense told us that a man who would come back from a war and turn on his "brothers in arms" for purely political reasons was not the guy that we wanted in office. Especially in war time.
Common sense told us that George Bush, a guy with degrees from Harvard and Yale, was no dummy as the Left likes to portay him.
Common sense told us that Sadaam Hussein, who had done everything that he could, including trying to assasinate a former President, to bring America down was in full support of any terrorist who was willing to harm America. He had, in fact, written checks to the families of suicide bombers in Israel. Doubtless from money that he had skimmed from the U.N.'s oil-for-food program.
What it comes down to is that the Democrats are increasingly seen as a party that will say whatever is necessary to regain power, even if what they say defies what you know.
And, therein, lie your moral values. It's not religous. It's the fact that Democrats will say or do anything to get thenselves back in power, and the American people are starting to realize that. And, no matter how much we are disparaged as "red-state" morons, we realize that these are not the kind of people that we want in power.
So let's let them install Howard Dean as DNC chairman. Let them ensconce Michael Moore as their disheveled icon.
Give 'em enough rope....
Thursday, January 20, 2005
Joe Biden calls her a liar and says that Donald Rumsfeld is incompetent.
There you have the perfect definition of what Democrats mean when they say that they want to get rid of the "incivility in politics".
They can say and do anything that they want to, but Republicans have to be nice to them in order for there to be civility in Washington. It's so childish.
I say it's time for us to take their example of "civility" and tell it like it is.
These people are nothing but cowards who will do whatever it takes to get re-elected.
It's no wonder that people say that "politicians are all the same". During campaigns, the time that most people are paying attention to politics, Republicans are running as Republicans and Democrats are running as, well, Republicans!
If it weren't for the "527's" like MoveOn.org, you would have thought that John Kerry & George Bush were ideological brothers. Thanks to the fanaticism of Kerry's Leftist supporters you got to see the real face of today's Democrat party.
And (thank God for the internet) his opposition pointed out the many, many inconsistencies of what Kerry was saying with his actions of the past 30 years.
And therein lies the difference between elections past and future. Now there is an alternate media that will highlight those differences.
I believe that the internet (and FOX news) has destroyed the ability of Democrats to run as Republicans and govern as liberals. Their losses will just keep getting worse.
I got my first computer in 1994 at about the time that the web really got going. That was also about the time that Democrats started losing big. I don't think that that's a coincidence. For once the masses had an alternate view of reality from what ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, etc. had been telling them for the past 30 years. *
And a lot of them, myself included, were absolutely disgusted by what we found. The newspapers and network news had been slanting their coverage for years. Walter Cronkite, "The Most Trusted Man in America", was lying to us! If the most trusted man in America was lying to us, then who in the media could we trust? Is it any wonder that news people are trusted on about the same level as lawyers and used-car-salesmen?
Well, we compared what we knew with what we were being told (and what we weren't being told) and decided that certain media outlets gave us more of the truth than the "Mainstream Media". Townhall.com, Heritage.org and many, many others were telling us things that we never would have know had we listened to nothing but The StarTribune or CBS News.
And not nearly enough can be said about talk-radio. It took about 6 years for people to realize that Rush Limbaugh was giving the country what it really wanted: a source for news and commentary that was completely missing from what everyone saw on TV, read in the newspapers or had shoved down their throats by the politicians that the MSM decided deserved to be heard.
I remember in the early days of Rush's show, the first thing that most of his callers said was, "You are saying what I have been thinking for years!". In other words, Rush was enunciating what a whole lot of people were thinking: the "News" didn't match what they saw happening in their own lives.
The "homeless" people that they ran into weren't a family of four living in a station-wagon. They were bums. The religious people that they knew weren't a bunch of fanatics. They were very nice people. AIDS wasn't killing the heterosexuals that they knew, just the gays or the drug addicts.
You could go on forever with what the MSM was telling you vs. what your own experience was. In other words what the MSM was telling you was, "Who ya gonna believe, me or your lyin' eyes?"
For you "Democrats" out there, just look around you. Welfare reform was supposed to leave kids dying in the streets. Did it? AIDS was going to wipe out heterosexuals along with homosexuals. Did it? "Concealed carry/Shall issue" gun laws would lead to America being one big O.K. corral. Did they? Medicare cuts were supposed to force our senior citizens into eating dog-food. Did they?
In other words, nothing that the Democrat party has said to try to scare the hell out of you has come true, has it? Did Ronald Reagan nuke the Soviet Union? Did they nuke us because of his "inflammatory" statements? Did all of these so-called "cuts" in social programs made by Republicans actually result in a lowering of funds to Democrat social programs?
Again, you could go on forever. Nothing that Democrats ever propose fixes the problem. Never! Ever!
To paraphrase Ann Coulter (and they say that Republicans don't like strong women), Vietnam worked out better than Lyndon Johnson's "War on Poverty". In that context, the War in Iraq is a downright miracle.
*This was also about the time that FOX news began to really ramp up.
Monday, January 17, 2005
Jesse Jackson's philosophy is a far cry from what MLK preached.
Jesse Jackson is in it for the power and the money.
Jesse Jackson is a multi-millionaire.
If Jesse Jackson were truly serious about helping poor blacks, he wouldn't be living a life of luxury.
Let's make a very, very conservative estimate and say that he's making $1 million a year.
If he were really serious about it, he could keep $50,000 per year, give 32 families $30,000 a year and lift them right out of poverty.
I live on a lot less than $50,000 a year. Not much more than $30,000 a year as a matter of fact. I get by. I'm raising a daughter who was born of a dead-beat mom. Jesse could get by on $50,000.
(I'm pretty sure that we'll get to the subject of dead-beat mom's pretty soon, too. Odd how "dead-beat dad" rolls right off the tongue after hearing it repeated a million times, but dead-beat mom seems kind of awkward...)
But Jesse Jackson is flying around in private jets, wearing custom tailored suits, staying in the best hotels and generally living like the rich, white guys that he so disparages for "keeping the black man down".
In other words, he's your typical liberal, black or white. He says that he wants to fix all of these problems, but he certainly doesn't want to use his money for it. He wants to use yours.
And, quite frankly, if he were to fix the problem, he'd be screwed. If there weren't any racism, what would Jesse do? He has no desire to fix the problem. He'd have to get a real job and live on only half a million dollars a year.
Does anybody out there really believe that "racism" is causing all of the problems in the "black community"?
Well, I guess that depends on how you define the word, "racism".
When MLK was alive, there were still blacks being hung from trees for no other reason than the color of their skin. Now, that was racism!
Nowadays, the definition of racism has been defined as: anyone who disagrees with a protected minority (thanks, Rush).
Have you ever noticed that Jackson, Mfume, Sharpton and all of the rest of the "race industry" people never, ever, ever, speak of the progress that has been made since blacks were lynched?
When is the last time that you've heard of a black person being hung by a white person? No, really. Think about it.
30 years after the last "lynching", and we're still in the mindset of 1960's racism!
MLK, roll over.
Saturday, January 15, 2005
Friday, January 14, 2005
I'm sure you've heard people on the left call Conservatives "arrogant". They say this because we actuallly believe the things we say and don't just say things to gain votes, popularity, etc. In other words, we have principles that we believe in. Their only principle is "Power at any cost".
Well, how's this for arrogance? The left wants to overcome and change about 1 million years of evolution in their puny lifetimes!
For tens of thousands of years, the man went out and worked while the woman stayed home and took care of the home and the children. It worked out pretty well.
Now most women work outside the home. All you have to do is compare the kids of today with the kids of any time before the sixties to see how well that worked out. With no parent at home to raise them, drugs, sex and other assorted anti-social behavior exploded.
That's because lefties think that women are no different than men. For thousands and thousands of years, everyone understood that men were physically and mentally different than women. Liberals think that they can overcome that in the 50 or so productive years of their lives.
And ever since society really got going, people understood that marriage between a man and a woman was the best thing for that society. Especially when it came to raising kids. Now, the left thinks that gay marriage is perfectly acceptable.
And, with deference to the title of this blog, for the vast, vast majority of our evolution, a child's parents were responsible for taking care of him or her. Now, left-wing nuts think that it "Takes a Village". Well here's a newsflash: the other people in my "village" don't have my child's best interests in mind. I'll raise her by myself, thank you.
Ever since humans began walking upright, the man was the more aggressive of the two. It was bred into him so that he had the skills and the temperament to hunt and keep the tribe from starving. It was a good thing. Now, if a little boy shows any sign of that aggression, he's punished and put on drugs. Only a liberal would think that putting a kid on drugs would fix the problem!
It's just like their love of throwing other people's money at problems: it might alleviate the symptoms, but it won't fix the problem. And aggressive little boys are not a problem. It's been going on for a million years and it'll be going on for long after these uninformed, unthinking people are dust.
War's have been going on since one monkey threw a rock at another. Now the left thinks that they can stop them from ever happening again. At least the few that America gets involved in. The other ones they don't seem to care about.
Religion, scientific and industrial progress...I'm sure you can think of many more examples.
They may actually come to achieve, at least on paper, some of their objectives, but human nature will take a lot longer to change than they will live.
Yes, they got most women to work outside of the house, but look at what it did for us. The divorce rate has skyrocketed and kids are on the streets killing each other. They, of course, blame it on "society". Well, the fact is, that that society is the one that they created!
How's that for arrogance?
Wednesday, January 12, 2005
The only other people that come close to her history of self-interested actions are Teddy (hic) Kennedy and Tommy (I want to be a little girl) Daschle.
One down one to go. Liver failure or cholesterol should take care of the last.
I don't intend this blog to be a log of Hillary's actions, but rather a discussion of Democrats and liberals and they're motivations.
Not all Democrats are liberals. Most of the ones who aren't liberals just haven't realized that, by default, they've become Republicans.
Every year in November, like the majority of guys in Minnesota, I go deer hunting "up north".
(Coincidently, it happens to be about 20 miles from where Senator Paul Wellstone's plane crashed. Apparently nobody told him that you couldn't fly without a "right wing".)
Now, "up north" in this case, happens to be on the "Iron Range" of Minnesota where they've mined iron ore for about 150 years. They've also voted Democrat for about that long. They've also been in a recession for about 25 years. Some people might see a connection there.
The guys that I hunt with appear to be everything that the "blue state" elites describe as being "red state" people.
They are everything that the liberals and Democrats hate.
They own guns.
They are tramping around in "Mother Earth's" pristine forests.
They drove SUV's and huge pickups to get into these forests.
They drive their "4-wheeler" ATV's in Mother Earth's forests.
They kill poor, defenseless animals and eat them.
A few of them have gun-racks in their trucks.
Some of them have poor dental work.
In other words, these are the same people who are being disparaged by the liberals in the media as being the "gap-toothed, knuckle dragging red-staters".
Here's the problem: of about 20 guys, 19 VOTE DEMOCRAT!!!
These people are really not paying attention to what their party is doing. The get their news from the local liberal newspapers and TV stations. When you confront them with the other side of the story, they have no arguments because they've never heard the other side. They weren't even aware that there was another side.
The funny thing is, all you have to do is show them the other side of the story that they're not getting from the Mainstream Media.
I've converted a few people. Now it's time for you to do the same. If every Republican out there can point out the Democrat hypocrisy to at least one person, we've won forever.
Of course that will bring in the reign of the jack-booted, fascist, nazi Bushies, but hey, it's a start.
- The Exile