Big Dogs House

Be Careful When You Draw First Blood

Feb 24, 2011 Political

In the movie First Blood, John Rambo (played by Sylvester Stallone), was a Vietnam veteran who was harassed by a small town sheriff and mayhem ensued. When Rambo’s old commander shows up and communicates with him, Rambo explains that they drew first blood. John was telling his former commander that he did not start the fight and was fighting back because of that.

Representative Michael Capuano, a Democrat from union heavy Massachusetts, told union members that they needed to get bloody in their battle.

“I’m proud to be here with people who understand that it’s more than just sending an email to get you going,” Capuano said, according to the Statehouse News. “Every once and awhile you need to get out on the streets and get a little bloody when necessary.” The Hill

One would think that the way the media went nuts over a map with cross hairs on it (that Sarah Palin used) and the call for civility by Barack Obama, the media would be all over this. Who am I kidding though, the same media ignored all the Nazi, Hitler, and cross hair signs in Wisconsin.

No doubt because Democrat supporters were the ones carrying them. If it had been a Tea Party rally the media would still be talking about it.

But I digress.

Capuano has issued an apology stating that he wished he had chosen better words. Too late because the damage has been done. The union thugs have their marching orders and there will, no doubt, be thuggery in the future.

Before the union thugs and their partners in the Democrat Party decide to get bloody in the streets they should remember John Rambo’s words, “they drew first blood…”

They would also do well to remember what happened when Rambo decided to retaliate and draw a little blood himself.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: cross hairs, first blood, john rambo, Massachusetts, michael capuano, sarah palin, unions, violence

ABC News Has It Backwards On Palin

Jan 13, 2011 Political

Shortly after the tragedy in Arizona the main stream media and the liberal world (but I repeat myself) were throwing accusations and blaming conservatives for the shootings that took place. To be clear, only one person is to blame and that is the nut who pulled the trigger but this reality does not sit well with the morons who would politicize it for political gain and for profit. From fund raising to overreaching bills designed to further inhibit freedom, the left has come out in full force. The right is not blameless as politicians on that side look to enact legislation to assist in the freedom grab.

The favorite target of the left when anything happens is Sarah Palin. The left is so afraid of her that it must, at all costs, smear her. The cretins on the left immediately dragged her into this tragedy and blamed her for it. The left took issue with a map that had cross hairs on it that was published nearly a year ago and was part of political speech. It was no different from any of the political imagery used by the left but pointing that out would not fit the agenda. No, Palin was to blame and that was that.

Keep this in mind, Plain was dragged into this issue by the left hellbent on smearing her and pinning it on her. She did not inject herself into this issue, she was brought into it and of that there can be no doubt.

But ABC News sees it differently. Palin, after five days of being skewered, released a video condemning those who are pointing fingers of blame when the only blame for this rests on the shoulders of the deranged nut who shot those people. ABC News reported this and then said that Palin injected herself into the issue:

BOTTOM LINE: Sarah Palin, once again, has found a way to become part of the story. And she may well face further criticism for the timing and scope of her remarks.

How in the name of all that is sacred did Palin find a way to make herself part of the story. The lowlife cretins on the left made Palin part of this story. After being beaten around for five days she responded with dignity and facts to clearly lay the blame where it belongs, on the gunman. She also condemned those who would use such a tragedy to push a political agenda.

Somehow, in the twisted world of ABC News, Palin was the one who injected herself into this.

I wonder when ABC will start blaming rape victims for what someone else did to them…

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: ABC news, blood libel, lies, sarah palin

Death Panels Return Under Cover Of Christmas

Dec 28, 2010 Political

When the Democrats were ramming Obamacare through they hit a roadblock in the name of Sarah Palin who rightly pointed out that the end of life counseling mandated in the original plan amounted to death panels where the most vulnerable among us would be swayed to forgo needed medical care under pressure from health care providers receiving incentives to provide such counseling. The counseling would have been accomplished every five years and would pressure those in poor health to die peacefully.

Ousted Democrat Congressman Alan Grayson of Florida once called the Republican health care plan; if you get sick, die quickly.

The reality is that the Democrat plan was designed to accomplish this task.

But public uproar forced the Democrats to remove the end of life provision from Obamacare and then the bill was rammed through. Unfortunately, the law allows the people in charge to make rules governing Obamacare and Medicare chief Dr. Donald Berwick (Dr. Death) has released a new rule implementing the end of life or death panel counseling. The new rule will require end of life counseling every year instead of the five in the original bill.

The new rule was released on Christmas Day and was reported by The New York Times.

While America was busy celebrating the birth of Christ Dr. Death released rules that would compel health care providers to coerce the weakest among us into submitting to death. This, as Palin once noted, amounts to death panels.

The Democrats are happy this took place because they wanted it from the beginning but were taken aback by the uproar. So, as with many things Democrats do, they sneaked it in in a covert fashion. As the Times article points out:

Congressional supporters of the new policy, though pleased, have kept quiet. They fear provoking another furor like the one in 2009 when Republicans seized on the idea of end-of-life counseling to argue that the Democrats’ bill would allow the government to cut off care for the critically ill. The American Spectator

What they are saying here, and as the Spectator points out (the Times link requires registration), Sarah Palin was absolutely correct. They smeared her for making such claims and then removed the portion of the legislation to which she referred and then they put it back in.

Palin is often slammed as not being very bright and of a lesser class than those elites who supposedly lead us but Sarah Palin is an astute observer who was absolutely correct. She pointed out what the Obama Regime was doing and forced them to remove the death panel provision. Now that they have secreted it back, and with more stringent requirements, (coupled with the desire to keep things quiet) Sarah Palin has been vindicated.

The Obama regime specifically, and the Democrats in general, have no concern for human life. The so called party of the people cherish abortions and now look to compel the weakest among us to take decisions that are not in their best interest.

I think that the regime will see a lot of John Q types if people are forced to take decisions contrary to their best interests.

I imagine doctors might feel pressure to force people into end of life decisions especially since they will be paid to do so (and required to have the discussion). I wonder how many doctors will happily comply if their safety is placed in jeopardy by people not too happy with the whole death panel scheme?

I don’t think anyone argues that patients and their physicians should not engage in these discussions when warranted. But compelling physicians to have them and paying them to do so in an effort to force people to skip medical care is evil and will cause an upheaval that will not be pretty.

All in the name of saving a dollar. Keep in mind, those making the rules will get all the care they want no matter what.

Obamacare and the people running it are pure evil.

And we see this daily as items in Obamacare begin to infect our health care system.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: berwick, Christmas, death panels, lies, obamacare, sarah palin

Rewriting History, Good Thing Palin Is Around

Sep 2, 2010 Political

Barack Obama and his handlers are having a few issues because the surge he and Joe Biden opposed is responsible for the victory we achieved (and a victory Obama has not acknowledged). The so called smartest guys in the country got it wrong and if they had gotten their way we would be discussing a defeat (and Obama would be blaming it on Bush).

Here is an interesting point of view on the surge given to us by Robert Gibbs:

”What is certainly not up for question is that President Obama, then-candidate Obama, said that adding those 20,000 troops into Iraq would, indeed, improve the security situation, and it did.”

This is interesting indeed. First of all, when anyone in this regime says that something is not up for question it means that it is and that they are likely lying. This is a variation of Obama saying “let me be clear” or “I have always said” which are preludes to a lie that follows. It is Obama trying to play Jedi mind tricks on people. It works on the Kool Aid drinkers who lap it up and ask for more. The rest of us can see the lie a mile away.

Or as I like to put it, Stevie Wonder could see it.

While Gibbs thinks it is certainly not up for question the record is different:

“I am not persuaded that 20,000 additional troops in Iraq are going to solve the sectarian violence there. In fact, I think it will do the reverse.”

Obama was clearly not in favor of the surge and he clearly indicated that he was not persuaded that the additional troops would make things better (like improve security) and he clearly stated that he believes it will do the opposite, and create more sectarian violance (and therefore, less security).

Gibbs is playing the game because he has to tell the lies for the Socialist in the White House but the rest of us, those not under the influence of the Force, can see it.

Thanks to Sarah Palin we can all see it in writing. She jumped all over it because she knows Obama is a liar and that he will say or do anything to advance his agenda and to keep from admitting that he backed the wrong horse.

Maybe a trip to Iowa is in order.

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: history, lies, Obama, robert gibbs, sarah palin, surge, troops

How Many People At The Rally And Were They Racists?

Aug 29, 2010 Political

Moron Liberal’s Sign

The usual post rally numbers game is underway and people are saying that as few as 87,000 and as many as 1 million people attended the Restoring Honor event in DC. The liberal left needs to minimize the numbers because the bigger the numbers are the weaker its position becomes.

I was at the rally and I believe there were closer to a million people than to 87,000. The New Carrollton Metro station had 8000 to 10,000 people in line when I arrived. It took nearly 2 hours to get to the train and when I did get on the train the line down below was longer than when I arrived. The entire Mall was surrounded by people and the crowd extended to the Washington Monument. The open area to the left (when looking at the Lincoln Memorial) was completely full of people and the right had densely packed groups way into the wood line (they cannot be seen from the overhead shots but they were there and they were packed in there).

The crowd was mostly white (as is the population of this country) but there were quite a few people of color in attendance. I saw many, many people who were not white and they appeared to be enjoying themselves. In fact, two women of color were walking next to me on the way to the Mall and one looked to the other and said; “Can you believe he asked me where the Al Sharpton event was? I told him over there where those 10 people are. I am going down here where everyone else is.” She was amused that the person would assume that since she was not white she would be on her way to see Sharpton rather than Beck. She got a huge laugh out of it as did everyone with whom she shared the story.

I understand that the left is upset by all the attention non liberal groups get and it needs to fight it any way it can. This is why everything is labeled racist. But minimizing the crowd at this event and repeating the same tired lines about it being very white is getting old. Whites are a majority of the population and when one considers that 95% of blacks are held captive on the Democrat plantation then it is easy to see why throngs of blacks are not at these types of events. However, rejecting the validity of an event because it has too many people of one color and not enough of another makes no sense and is very dangerous. Those who think that any rally that consists of mostly white people is not valid would have to invalidate the Al Sharpton rally that consisted mostly of black people.

Additionally, this picture of the Martin Luther King “I have a dream” speech shows the crowd to be almost all black. No whites are found in the picture of the crowd. I am sure some were there but since whites made up 60%-70% of the population (probably more like 80% back then) at that time then this crowd is disproportionately black. I find that perfectly acceptable but if we are going to use the diversity of color at an event to give it credibility or validity then MLK’s speech was not credible and not valid. I would also point out that Obama’s inauguration had huge numbers of blacks in the crowd, numbers that were hugely disproportionate to their representation in the country. Does this mean that event lacked validity?

There are plenty of pictures of the crowd and they tell a story that makes it clear more than 87,000 people were there. MLK had 200,000 to 250,000 at his speech and the Restoring Honor pictures show more people than attended King’s speech so it is logical to assume that there were more than 200,000 people there. I think that the number is 600,000 to 1 million but have no way of knowing and no agency does any official counting.

It would be interesting to know how many Metro tickets were sold. That would give a good indication of how many people were there.

Suffice it to say that the event is not well received by liberals who cannot grasp the concept of honor and who cannot see anything but racism in such events. It will drive them nuts for some time to come.

I also add that there were many people opposed to Beck having this rally in the same place where MLK had his speech and on the same date that the speech occurred. Al Sharpton was very upset about this claiming that Beck was against what MLK stood for (which Sharpton erroneously believes to be the removal of state’s rights) and challenged Beck to debate the Ground Zero Mosque issue, which Sharpton supports. This challenge came as Sharpton appeared on Geraldo Rivera’s show. So does anyone else find it ironic that Sharpton complains about the location of Beck’s rally but dismisses this concern (location) from people opposed to the mosque? Thanks to Rick for this insight.

Anyone want to wager that the people offended at Glen Beck’s choice of location for his Restoring Honor rally in DC (where Martin Luther King held his I Have A Dream speech) are the same people defending the location of the mosque at Ground Zero?

Anyone?

We will hear more in the days ahead…

Here are some great pictures and interesting takes on the rally:
Affirmative Action Counting for DC Events
Leftists Could Find No Racism at Restoring Honor Rally
Wrap Up and Whitewash (Plus, who is cleaner and where is the racism)
An enormous and impassioned crowd (and from the New York Times no less)
Washington Compost (the added “mostly black” to the Sharpton crowd report later, probably in response to a comment asking why it was not reported the same way as the RH Rally)
CNN article Note how many comments refer to the WHITE crowd
Why is there this assumption that MLK and his speech were a black only thing?

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

Tags: al sharpton march, civil rights, DC, glenn beck, liberalism, mlk, racism, restoring honor rally, sarah palin