I used to fear the Nuclear Plume. Fear of it coming nonstop from MSNBC and Troofers. Even Drudge links to one of the troofers. But there is nothing to fear really. Drudge linked unfortunately to Al Jazeera during the Egyptian mess. Don’t know what is wrong with him but don’t be afraid.
Alex Jones is a conspiracy nut and just how he is dead wrong about 9-11 he is wrong on this. It is strange I kind of took him seriously until I stepped back and questioned why I was taking this nut seriously. He is wrong on his crazy conspiracies. He is wrong on this too. It is another one of his crazy conspiracies. So unless you think it was the government not the jihadis that did 9-11 don’t worry. He was dead wrong on the Gulf Oil spill too.
MSNBC is also not credible at all if you consider they are pro communism and anti Israel. If they are so wrong to think the federal government should gain more power and to support the sick jihadis over Jews why believe them on this. Communism fails every time it is tried. And they support the terrorist “Palis” to a point you can call it Jew hatred. They have anti nuclear whack jobs as supposed nuclear scientists. The whole thing is being used by lefties to destroy our power supply and country.
Everyone on the right is saying there is nothing to fear. I believe them. Remember what the other sources said about the gulf oil spill. It turns out the right was right. I am not willing to go as far a Coulter on O’Reilly
But I think there is nothing to fear. Don’t worry. Don’t be mislead by pro commie jihadis or insane troofers.
On a side note I am posting alot less. Figured to post the best stuff every day or two is better then making around 20 posts a day on the things I find interesting. What do you think?
Via the Right Scoop and Mark Tapscott of the Examiner. There’s a wrinkle here that you don’t usually find with most clips of Democrats embarrassing themselves in public — namely, a voiceover. I think Tapscott’s transcript of what Moran says is accurate (skip ahead to 3:00 for the key part) but I honestly can’t tell for sure. I’ll leave it to you guys to crank up the volume on your PCs and crowdsource it for accuracy in the comments:
“It [the Republican successes in the 2010 elections] happened for the same reason the Civil War happened in the United States. It happened because the Southern states, the slaveholding states, didn’t want to see a president who was opposed to slavery.
“In this case, I believe, a lot of people in the United States don’t want to be governed by an African-American, particularly one who is liberal, who wants to spend money and who wants to reach out to include everyone in our society….”
At the Standard, John McCormack politely notes that it’s difficult to square this reasoning with The One’s landslide win just two years before. True enough, but I’m less focused on that than on the media outlet he’s speaking to. Am I the only one who remembers Alhurra? It was founded in 2004 by — ta da — the U.S. government as a pro-American alternative to Al Jazeera in the Middle East. (The network acknowledges its U.S. financial backing on its “About” page.) It’s an Arab version of “Voice of America,” in other words, and needless to say, it hasn’t caught on. The pathetic punchline here is that, even on a network devoted to spreading American propaganda, this guy can’t resist tearing his fellow citizens down. Send the tape to Al Jazeera, Jim; maybe they’ll hire you as a full-time contributor after you retire.
The sole example that everyone’s favorite hard-Left Mother offers for this wild claim is an attack on a black man, but “journalist” Jen Phillips cancels out that example by noting that the idiot yahoos who confronted him took him to be a Muslim, which is why they were confronting him. So in other words, this wasn’t a “racist” incident at all, or an example of “Islamophobia” leading to an increase in hate crimes against other groups.
Why make this claim at all? Perhaps because actual incidents like the one described, of jerks acting like jerks toward Muslims, are so rare. Hate crimes against Muslims are so rare (see here, here and here) that Hamas-linked CAIR has to trump them up to maintain the media myth of Muslims as victims.
A more pragmatic definition paints a Hudna as not only a temporary truce but also a method of deception used by radical Muslims to install a false sense of security among opponents. All terms and conditions of a Hudna are optional for the radicals, with their duration in effect “only as long as the Muslims need them to be.”
When Democrats began promoting ‘civility’ after their libelous accusations linking a deranged Leftist mass-murderer (who despised George W. Bush) with the Tea Party, I immediately recognized a Hudna.
After a historic shellacking in the midterm elections, Democrats want to promote ‘civility’ in the form of a truce that will allow them to regroup.
