My mother grew up in the Great Depresson. Her hero ws Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Her main villain was Herbert Hoover, although now Obama competes with Hoover on her villain list, with George W. Bush not that far behind. What is the main complaint my mother remembers against Hoover? It is that he, as President in the Great Depression, was constantly overseas promising money and help to people THERE, while my mother was starving. Forget whether that is fair to Hoover, clueless and out of his dept as he may have been. It is what my mother perceived,--remembering vividly all of these years later--and perceives now with Obama (and Bush before him).
What am I talking about? This is where Andrea Mitchell comes in. Andrea Mitchell is a whore. This blog likes to remind people of that from time to time. yes, I am merely using Mitchell as an example of ALL of the people of NBC and MSNBC--not to mention the whole mainstream media--but she is so useful an examplle, because she is so earnestly DISHONEST (a great whore). Of course I am using the word "whore" figuratively, meaning a "journalistic" whore rather than a literal prostitute. An honest prostitute might be regarded as much better than Andrea Mitchell, since she could be regarded as proving a "service" with real value (although I am not a big fan of glorifying the sad "world's oldest profession").
On Thusday, I actually saw Andrea Mitchelll, on MSNBC, talking about how the killing of Gadhafi had exposed the Republican Presidential candidates as out of touch with reality!!!!!!! Do you want any more PROFF that Andrea Mitchell is a whore? What does the death of Gadhafi have to do with whether our Libyan policy is right or wrong? Oh, it is a good thing he is dead, as it is a good thing that Saddam Hussein is dead (something which the HYPOCRITES of the left were never ewilling to admit, in their unreasoning hatred of President Bush), but Gadhafi's reging in Libya was alredy over. His death does not "validate" the Obama Libyan policy, or vindicate it. It has been a matter of time for a considerable time. But Andrea Mitchell is not merely an incompetent fool. She is a WHORE. That means that shes was not merely criticizing the Republicans for not supporting Obama more on Libya. Rather, Mitchell (I could never make this stuff up) said that Gadhafi's death shows who war wrong the Repuboicans were, in the last debate, to suggest that we should CUT foreign aid (because so many people are hurting her at home, and because we don't have the money). Most of the Repubicans made clear that they were not talking aobut money being spent for our national secrutiy, but rather the kind of Herbert Hoover clueless apparent preference for foreing aid ove dealing with the CRISIS of deficits and debt we have at home. But whore Mitchell never let the facts stand in the way of prostituting herself to Obama and the Democrats. She reidculed the idea of lookng at the funding of the United Nations, even as the United Nations (supported mainly by us) turns into a vehicle being mainly used by our enemies. Wait, Andrea Mitchell was not through.
Even Andrea Mitchell has to realize that there was no obvioius connection between the death of Gadhafi and givnig BILLIONIS of dollars to fight disease in Africa (one of my mother's favorite Hoover complaints against both Beorge W. Bush and Obama)? Obviously, there is no connection. You can argue whether we should be giving billoins of TAXPAYER dollars to fight AIDS, and other diseases, in Africa, but you cannot aruge that the death of Gadhafi has anything at all to do with that issue. It is an insane argument, but not if you are a whore--as Andrea Mitchell is. To try to make it seem less insane, Mitchell said that Hillary Clinton is promising AID to Libya right now, and that the Gadhaif death makes it obvious how vital such aid is. Mitchell went so far as to say that, without AMERICAN TAXPAYER AID, the new "Transitional Government" in Libya cannot survive.
Say what? You should have whipleash. There is no logic to any of this. Andrea Mitchell is a whore, and this proves it again. What does Gadhafi's death have to do with the AMERICAN TAXPAYER propping up a new regime in Libya? Nothing at all, Andrea. You are a whore. That was what you on the left used to derisively call "nation building", whne you accused George W. Bush of doing it. But we have already established that media whores like Mitchell are trhe worst hypocrites to ever walk the Earth, on two legs or four. (incuding real whores creating the beast with two backs). Further, I thought that the Obama Administration was DENYING that taxpayer money would be used to prop up a new government in Libya (with a pretty good likelihood that the money will just end up in the hands of our enemies). I thought that Libya had all of those BILLIONS in funds that have been frozen overseas, which can be used by the new government. I have not heard Repubicans say that a legitimate government in Libya should not be able to use those funds. That money is NOT "foreign aid", or taxpayer money. Now there is a little bit of an issue as to whether Libya should REIMBURSE us for our expenses in helping take out Gadhafi, and if NATO wanted to be reimbursed from frozen funds, that would be a legitimate issue. We are gong to have trouble, however, being the ONLY country who wants reimbrusement. So that is a side issue. What does the death of Gadhafi have to do with ANY of this? NOTHING-unlesss you are a dishonest whore like Andrea Mitchell.
Do the American people want THEIR MONEY being used to prop up a new Libyan government? Not a chance. Mitchell is doing President Obama no favors by suggesting that is what the Obama Administration intends to do, and that we have some sort of "obligation" to make sure of the "survival' of the new Libyan government. And what aobut the OIL? Libya has resources. The idea that American taxpayers should be foreced to spend money we don't have on "nationi building' in Libya is worthy of the whore that Andrea Mitchell is. So what does the death of Gadhafi have to do with Republicans being against foreign aid? Andrea Mitchell, whore, never explains, because she cannot explain. She just wanted to take a shot at the Repubicans, and this totally illogical 'argument" sounded good to her (and to the other people on MSNBC).
Are we going to use taxpayer money to prop up a new government in Libya, which may end up being composed mainly of our enemies? If so, and you can't rely on Andrea Mitchell and MSNBC to be accurate, then my mother is right: this, alonge, is reason enough to vote against Barack Obama. Yes, it is getting to the time that IRAQ (which also has oil) should be paying for its own "rebuilding". Sure, we need to advance ou own national security interests, and that may mean certain kinds of assistance (especailly advisors and miltarry help against terrorists). But this idea that we can AFFORD to "bail out" THE WORLD not only has nothing to do with Gadhafi's death: It is INSANE.
What Andrea Mitchell has really done is show that the repubican candidates are rIGHT. We simply have to stop this insane idea that we are "responsible' for the peace and prosperity of all of the people of the world. We never had enough resources to do that. And we certainly don't have the resources now. Ask my 89 year old mother about Herbert Hoover. Maybe whore Andrea should do that. It is, of course, worse that this. What the LEFT wants to do is have us prop up the people and "causes" in the world approved by the LEFT--illogical as the "standards" of those hypocrites seem to be.
Nope. Andea Mitchell is a whore. She mrely tried to USE the death of Gadhafi not only to support Obama, but to take a swipe at Repubicans on unrealated matters. For example, is the Un.N. a useful organizatin or ot--a helpful organization overall, or just mainly a vehicle for our enemies? You can dbate that question, but you cannot debate that the death of Gadhafi has nothing to do with that debate. No. The Un.N. did NOT even get rid of 'Gadhafi. The U.N. merely RELUCTANTLY let NATO do it. You may remember that GADHAFI'S Libya was a member of some U.N. HUMAN RIGHTS ORGANIZATIOIN. But you well never hear about that when a whore discusses the U.N.
P.S. No proofreading or spell checking (bad eyesight).
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment