Big Dogs House

Left Only Tolerant Of Those On The Plantation

Nov 14, 2011 Political

The liberal Democrat party in America claims to be tolerant. It has rewritten history to ignore or change the fact that the Democrats supported slavery and were anti civil rights. The left has brainwashed generations of minorities into believing that only the liberal establishment loves them, cares for them, and will help them.

Until the day after Election Day. Then, those minorities get some “goodies” to placate them and they are pushed into the background and regaled with stories about how wonderful liberals have always been to the minorities. We love you women, you blacks, you Hispanics, and you gays. We are there for you now vote for us and shut up.

The left keeps harping on how tolerant it is but the reality is that the left is only tolerant of those who stay on the plantation.

The left loves blacks unless the blacks are conservatives. Then the real racism rears its ugly head and the racial slurs begin. Women, the liberals love you and will defend you unless you are conservative and then no liberal organization INCLUDING NOW will defend you. Gays, we love you and want you to have everything you want unless you happen to be a conservative. Then you are a turncoat who needs to be assaulted. Gay conservatives can be assaulted and will not be held up as examples of intolerant bullying like a Matthew Shepard was.

Intolerant liberals do not believe they can ever be guilty of racism, hate crimes or intolerance because they claim not to be. They claim it so it must be true.

A gay TV star named Taylor Garrett can tell us all about intolerance. He happens to be a Republican and conservative. According to Garrett, he was recently targeted by the so called tolerant left, because he is conservative. Garrett was beaten by a man who Garret discovered defacing his car. Some thug was scratching a vulgarity aimed at Ann Coulter whom Garrett was supposed to meet with to discuss gay marriage and to show that just because you do not support it (like Coulter) does not make you a bigot.

Garrett confronted the man who was scratching the words into his car and was assaulted.

How dare this guy stray from the plantation? Does he not know that the liberals own him along with the others who have been enslaved?

The violence of the Occupy crowd, the violence of the left toward TEA Party members, the racist remarks by the left, and the attacks on gays and blacks who happen to be conservative are examples of the intolerance toward those who do not follow the orthodoxy of the left. The violence is even more pronounced when the person involved is of a protected class the liberals have claimed as their property.

Truth be told, the liberal establishment is only mildly tolerant of those who remain on the plantation. As long as they know their place they are tolerated. The ones who stray get whipped by the liberal taskmasters. Those who leave the plantation get pummeled.

You just don’t see that coming from conservatives. We fought to end slavery so we don’t think we own anyone or are entitled to own anyone.

The left, on the other hand, considers them bought and paid for.

Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: ann coulter, blacks, gays, liberals, plantation, racism, taylor garrett

Obama Supporters Deserve The Money

Feb 12, 2010 Political

Barack Obama and his Democrats took over where George Bush left off and bailed out banks and other financial institutions to the tune of billions of dollars. These entities were “too big to fail” and were spared the consequences of their bad decisions, decisions fueled by greed. Fueled by greed and knowledge that they would be bailed out if they made bad mistakes.

The financial giants reap huge rewards when they make investments and then get taxpayer money to save them when they gamble and lose. Ann Coulter has a great piece this week laying this all out. In it she describes what happened with regard to Goldman Sachs and other institutions that packaged bad loans and then insured them through AIG which could not cover the losses. Taxpayers bailed out AIG which was the same as bailing out Goldman.

During all of this, Obama went on the blame the bankers tour and discussed the greedy guys and how their salaries needed to be capped. There were tours by the homes of AIG executives, Congress worked on legislation taxing bonuses at 90% and the citizens of America were worked into a frenzy over the greedy bankers.

But these people helped put Obama in office. Obama received huge sums of money from the financial industry and they have been friends of the Democrats for a long time (as Coulter points out, Clinton bailed them out during his presidency). So it came as no surprise this week that Obama said he did not begrudge the bonuses of savvy bankers (particularly the ones who are his supporters):

Whatever Obama has in mind for punishing the financial industry, I promise you, he won’t punish his friends. After JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon took a $17 million bonus this week, and Goldman CEO Lloyd Blankfein got a $9 million bonus, Obama said he didn’t begrudge them their bonuses, saying, “I know both those guys.” Ann Coulter Human Events

What happened to people not getting huge bonuses? What happened to Barney Frank and his desire to cap salaries and bonuses of all of them even if they took no TARP money? What happened to the outrage generated by Obama and his minions over these greedy bankers?

I have no problem with bankers (or any private business people) making huge sums of money for doing a good job and I have no problem with huge bonuses. I did not have trouble with the AIG bonuses particularly because the Obama administration knew about them and people worked for a dollar a year in salary on the promise of the bonuses (which the administration then reneged on). I also have no problem with a business failing if it can’t make money and that includes financial giants and auto makers. If they can’t cut it then they can fail.

However, I am not the one who ran around whipping the country into a frenzy over greedy bankers. How dare Obama call these people greedy and rail against them last year and then step up to defend their huge bonuses this year? How can he do this and remain consistent?

He can’t, but he does not have to. If he says it is good his base will blindly follow. They will ignore Obama’s words and deeds of the past and focus on what the messiah says now. They will not draw the connection between Obama and the campaign dollars he gets from these people.

When Obama said he knows these people he meant the bankers but it could apply to his base.

Interestingly, David Reilly at Bloomberg has a piece that basically says Obama needs to man up and knock a few heads to show people who is in charge (note to Reilly, coequal means that he is not in charge of Congress). He writes about several issues which are better saved for another time but he does address financial regulation. Reilly spells out a number of tactics that Obama can use to threaten the banking industry into submission. The tactics look like something one would expect from Tony Soprano and not the leader of the US but Reilly is encouraging the kinds of tactics the left would scream fascist or Nazi over if a Republican did them.

The government owes the private sector about 7 trillion dollars. Suppose the banks called those markers all at once? Suppose the banks stopped lending for a week. I imagine if they tried hard they could send the economy in the Great Depression range so perhaps the mafia style tactics would be a poor idea.

Then again, Reilly is like typical supporters who decry strong-arm politics when Republicans use them but espouse them in order to push the Democrat agenda. This is typical of the left and we see it in Congress whenever they are in charge. We can’t knock heads of terrorists or it is torture but we can do what we want to those who oppose us…

I think the hypocrisy of Obma has been exposed in the past and it is very clear in his latest support of the huge bonuses. I also think we have a number of leftists in the media calling for him to get tough because they are worried about a Palin presidency.

Whether she will run or not or could even win is not the point.

Just the idea of that drives liberals and the progressives nuts.

And that is a joy to see.

Tags: aig, ann coulter, bailout, bonuses, goldman, hypocrisy, Obama, savvy

Ann Coulter Meets The View

Jan 13, 2009 Political

Ann Coulter was on The View and the sparks were flying. Ms Underestimated captured the video.

Be sure to visit her site for the full scoop and while you are at it go vote for her in the weblog awards.

Tags: ann coulter, harpies, sparks, the view, video

Ann Coulter Banned From NBC

Jan 5, 2009 Political

Ann Coulter is a feisty conservative who believes in no holds barred politics and she is spot on in her analysis nearly every time she speaks. She understands the liberal mind and she knows what makes it tick as well as how to pluck its last string. She has more testicular fortitude than some of the so called men in the Republican party and she is fearless. I admire her intelligence and her talent to tweak the left. The fact that she is nice looking is a plus as well.

Coulter was supposed to go on the NBC Today show tomorrow to discuss her new book; Guilty: Liberal “Victims” and Their Assault on America. She was unceremoniously dropped from the show with the cowardly claim that it was overbooked (though they booked her months ago). The overbooked show then went out and got Perez Hilton who will appear and hawk his new book. Hilton is openly homosexual and true to his pansy ways, he once offered $1000 to anyone who would throw a pie at Ann Coulter (according to Drudge). A real man would have thrown the pie himself but I guess it is hard to keep from dropping the pie when one has a limp wrist.

Insiders at NBC say that Coulter has been banned from the network permanently because:

“We are just not interested in anyone so highly critical of President-elect Obama, right now,” a TODAY insider reveals. “It’s such a downer. It’s just not the time, and it’s not what our audience wants, either.”

They are not interested in someone critical of Obama? This makes sense since none of the MSM has been critical of him since he walked across a pond to become the messiah. God forbid anyone should be critical of Obama.

This is, of course, the same network that had no problem in bringing people on who were critical of George Bush. For the past eight years NBC has had one Bush basher after another on to be “highly critical” of him. This is the network that employs tingly leg Chris Matthews who I don’t believe has ever had a kind word about President Bush and Keith Olberman who is nothing more than a rabid idiot who spews vile from his mouth every time he opens it. He has insulted President Bush every time he has been on the air and he makes no bones about his hatred for the president. So NBC has no moral high ground when it comes to talking critical of a president (or in this case the president elect).

Now NBC did say that it is not what its audience wants. I imagine that is correct. The people who watch NBC are a bunch of losers who sit around all day eating bon bons. The only exercise they get is walking to the mailbox to see if their welfare check has arrived. The people who watch Matthews or Olberman are mental midgets who could not empty a bucket if the directions were written on the bottom. These are the kind of people who are so slow it would take them an hour and a half to watch 60 minutes. Anyone who gives Olberman any credibility is not mentally capable of being out in public alone. He is a moonbat on acid and should be thrown in a room with Perez Hilton on a Viagra overdose.

Ann Coulter has six New York Times best sellers. If NBC wants to exclude her from appearing it will not affect sales. In fact, the publicity will probably help them.

However, NBC has demonstrated why most people (except the morons who drool while watching NBC) do not trust the MSM.

I don’t watch much, if anything on NBC. I will continue to avoid that network. If we are fortunate it will go bankrupt and disappear. Just say no to NBC.

I will, however, be buying Coulter’s new book.

Tags: ann coulter, guilty, media bias, messiah, nbc, Obama, savior, the one

Ann Coulter Mentions the Dog

Jul 17, 2008 Political

I have always enjoyed reading Ann Coulter’s work. I think she is witty and relevant and her items are well reasoned. I particularly like what she wrote this week because she gives this blog a mention right up in the first sentence:

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, or as she is called on the Big Dogs blog, “the worst speaker in the history of Congress,” explained the cause of high oil prices back in 2006: “We have two oilmen in the White House. The logical follow-up from that is $3-a-gallon gasoline. It is no accident. It is a cause and effect. A cause and effect.”Townhall [emphasis mine]

So, if any of you folks reading this blog made your way here from Ann’s post, welcome. If you are a regular reader and have not seen her post yet, head on over and give it a look-see. It is very good, as usual.

Tags: ann coulter, big dog, townhall