Tag Archives: Gabrielle Giffords

Obama’s ‘Saving Even One Child’ Policy Falls Short

obama1Originally posted at American Thinker

Something happened between the time the president talked about Christina Taylor Green, the 9-year-old girl shot dead in the Tucson Gabrielle Giffords shooting, jumping through rain puddles in heaven, and the country finding out that Sara Murnaghan, a 10-year-old Pennsylvania child with cystic fibrosis, is being denied a life-saving lung because of government regulations dictating age restrictions on organ transplants.

Sara Murnaghan does qualify for pediatric lungs.  However, there are currently none available.  Without transplanting adult lungs into Murnaghan’s body, the little girl has about five weeks to live and will qualify for a transplant one year and eleven months too late.

Lately, America has been subjected to radically pro-choice Barack attempting to advance an anti-gun agenda by pretending to care about saving the lives of children he’d have otherwise been fine with aborting had they still been in utero.

Undermining Second-Amendment rights is why the president shows up at memorials, fake-cries on camera, hugs grieving parents, signs legislation surrounded by high-fiving youngsters, and repeatedly vows that saving the life of one child is worth the effort.

Piling it on, Michelle Obama even flew to Chicago to attend the funeral of 15-year-old gun violence victim Hadiya Pendleton and then invited the dead girl’s parents, Cleo and Nathaniel, to grace the State of the Union skybox, just to add a good dose of parental bereavement to the anti-gun atmosphere.

Now, after hearing Kathleen Sebelius make the cold comment that “someone lives and someone dies” in response to questions about why she refuses to intervene in the Sara Murnaghan emergency lung transplant case, it’s clear that anti-gun political pragmatism is at the root of concern over the saving of some lives and not others.

It’s clear that in the Obama administration, if gun violence kills a child, it matters.  However, if cystic fibrosis is the killer, oh well — as Kathleen Sebelius says, “someone lives and someone dies.”

In response to the Sandy Hook shooting where 20 children and six adults lost their lives in Newtown, Connecticut, the president stressed that “if there is a step we can take that will save even one child from what happened in Newtown, we should take that step.”

Yet, during a recent House hearing, when Lou Barletta (R-Pa) implored HHS Secretary Sebelius to “take that step” so that a little girl can have a shot at life, and to “please, suspend the [lung transplant] rules until we look at this policy,” Sebelius, who does have the authority to waive the rule on Sara’s behalf, refused.

At the Tucson Memorial, Scripture-quoting Barack Obama said, “If this tragedy prompts reflection and debate, as it should, let’s make sure it’s worthy of those we have lost. Let’s make sure it’s not on the usual plane of politics and point scoring and pettiness that drifts away with the next news cycle.”

At the Newtown Vigil, Obama reaffirmed those sentiments when he said that “[t]his job of keeping our children safe…is something we can only do together … we bear a responsibility for every child because we’re counting on everybody else to help look after ours; that we’re all parents; that they’re all our children.”

Then, while signing executive orders aimed at curbing gun violence, flanked by four anti-gun youngsters, Obama said, “This is our first task as a society. Keeping our children safe. This is how we will be judged. And their voices should compel us to change.”

So if saving children’s lives are “not on the usual plane of politics” when an opportunity to fulfill “our first task — caring for our children,” arises for one little girl, why does Kathleen Sebelius respond by coldly reminding Congressman Barletta that although it’s an “incredibly agonizing situation where someone lives and someone dies … 40 [other] people in Pennsylvania are on the ‘highest acuity list’ for lung transplants”?

And while caution is in order because the government changing the rules for the benefit of the one sets a dangerous precedent — in the future, the government could be inclined to change the rules to detriment of the many — there is a huge amount of liberal hypocrisy afoot here.

Why?  Because in the end, little Sara Murnaghan will likely die, and not as the result of a gunshot wound, so Barack Obama won’t care.  Moreover, Michelle Obama will not attend Sara’s funeral, and neither will Sara’s mom and dad, Janet and Fran, be sitting beside the first lady next year in the State of the Union skybox as representatives of the need to change organ transplant laws.

Rest assured, in the short time that Sara has left, Barack Obama will not be reminding America that “we bear a responsibility” for Sara.  Nor will he sign a middle-of-the-night executive order overriding Kathleen Sebelius’s stubborn refusal to waive the adult lung transplant rule in time to save the child’s life.

It’s also unlikely that health care reformer Barack “Doesn’t Care” Obama will be on hand to shed one fake tear or quote a single out-of-context Scripture passage at Sara’s funeral.

Instead, as a result of refusing to “take that step … [to] save even one child,” Barack Obama and his self-serving administration have exposed the true nature of an agenda that has nothing to do with shielding the lives of helpless children from harm and everything to do with advancing a progressive anti-gun agenda.

Barack Obama’s Silence Speaks Louder than His Words

Originally posted at American Thinker blog

When President Obama disagrees with something, it doesn’t take long for him to impulsively express his disapproval in a public forum, especially when he believes doing so will further his policy goals or bolster his waning popularity.  But while what he does say sends a strong message, what he chooses not to say can send an even stronger one.

On the issue of gay marriage, the President has verbally identified himself as being in the process of “evolving” from anti- to pro- same-sex matrimony. When Gabrielle Giffords was shot in the head and innocent people were killed in Tucson, the President very publicly insinuated that conservative incivility contributed to a violent climate, and then goaded the nation toward mutual respect.

Barack Obama has even been brazen enough to verbally try to “intimidate” the Supreme Court “by wrongly suggesting that a ruling against the health care overhaul would be ‘judicial activism,'” as well as promote policies that restrict the Catholic Church’s right to adhere to its core religious convictions.

Above all, the President has never been reluctant to articulate his support for abortion on demand, and free contraceptives for everyone, nor has he hesitated to speak out against bullying gay teenagers, rebuke radio talk show hosts calling female college students derogatory names, or respond to criticism over his family taking extravagant vacations.

Yet with such strong opinions on these and many other issues, when those on the left do to conservatives exactly what the President has expressed indignation over when criticism is directed toward him, his policies, or liberals in general, Barack Obama’s deafening silence signals that his outrage is quite selective. With President Obama, his silence oftentimes speaks louder than his words.

A prime example of that tendency was exhibited by his speaking out in the Sandra Fluke/Rush Limbaugh incident and failing thus far to do likewise in the Dan Savage/Christian kid-bashing incident.

After Georgetown Law student Sandra Fluke took to the national stage to advocate for Catholic institutions to provide insurance that covers free birth control and abortion, Rush Limbaugh called her a “slut” and a “prostitute,” two comments for which he later apologized.

In defense of Sandra Fluke, Barack Obama jumped into the fray when he called the third-year law student to express his support for her brave stance.  At the first press conference of 2012, Obama, who Jay Carney had already explained felt Limbaugh’s comments were “inappropriate,” revealed his motives for picking up the phone and dialing up Ms. Fluke.

The President said he did so because “he was thinking about his own two daughters,” saying:

One of the things I want them to do as they get older is to engage in issues they care about…I want them to be able to speak their mind in a civil and thoughtful way, and I don’t want them attacked or called horrible names because they’re being good citizens.

I wanted Sandra to know that I thought her parents should be proud of her, and that we want to send a message to all our young people that being part of a democracy involves arguments and disagreements and debate.

Those sentiments, although noble to some, are proving to be exclusive and only expressed when Barack Obama defends the left.

Recently an incident took place where “inappropriate” remarks were directed by a gay activist toward children who were also “engaging in issues they care about.”  Yet thus far there has been no comment from the President who, on behalf of a left-wing feminist, had tripped over himself rushing to her defense.

Dan Savage, ‘It Gets Better’ founder/”Savage Love” sex advice columnist/gay activist/White House reception guest of Barack Obama, was supposed to be sharing an anti-bullying message at the National High School Journalism Conference sponsored by the Journalism Education Association (JEA ) and the National Scholastic Press Association. Instead, Savage used the opportunity to exercise his civic duty and bully the kids who came to the conference from Christian schools in the area.

At one point, Savage described for the teenagers how “good his male partner looked in a Speedo” and told them, “I hope you’re all using birth control.” After Savage, “Evolve Already ” promoter of marriage equality for gays attempted to savage the book of Leviticus, the Apostle Paul, and his letter to the Romans, 100 offended high school students quietly stood up and filed out of the auditorium.

Feeling bullied by the students refusing to listen to his vulgar tirade, the anti-bullying speaker then “began cursing, attacked the Bible and reportedly called those who refused to listen to his rant ‘pansy assed.'”

Continuing on with a level of mistreatment that far surpassed Limbaugh’s two-word insult, Savage told a room full of high school students that “there are people using the Bible as an excuse for gay bullying, because it …being gay is wrong,” and encouraged them all to “ignore all the (expletive deleted) in the Bible.”

Based on how quickly Barack Obama raced out to the microphones to address what he felt were demeaning comments directed toward the frail Ms. Fluke, is Obama planning on doing likewise and officially distancing himself from Dan Savage by publicly addressing his “inappropriate,” anti-Christian remarks?

When he’s finished straightening out Mr. Savage, will the President then be phoning the children who were called ‘pansy asses’ by his abusive White House guest, as he did Sandra Fluke ?  Will he tell the kiddies their parents should be proud of them for the dignified way they respectfully dismissed themselves from the awkward confrontation?

Afterwards, at his next press conference, will Obama share that he thought about how terribly his Christian daughters Sasha and Malia would have felt being singled out and insulted in such a public way, just for going to a high school journalism conference?

Will Barack Obama condemn verbal and religious abuse of any kind and remind America “The remarks that were made don’t have any place in the public discourse.” Or will Mr. Obama send a strong but silent message of agreement to the anti-bullying bully Dan Savage by choosing to say absolutely nothing at all?

Election Year Civility: Obama’s Tucson Memorial vs. Trayvon Martin Reactions

Originally posted at Breitbart’s BIG Government

There was a time when liberals fancied themselves the keepers of civility.  Who can forget when, after the Gabrielle Giffords tragedy, the President spoke at a memorial in Tucson where he exhorted the nation to more courteous conversation by insinuating that right-wing hate speech had fueled the brutal attack on the Arizona congresswoman?

After the shooting, in one of his typical lectures to America, Barack “Together we Thrive” Obama maintained that “at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized – at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do – it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.”

More recently, after the controversial shooting death of black Florida teen Trayvon Martin one can’t help but wonder if Barack Obama truly meant those words.

Based on his reaction to the racially-tinged incident in Sanford, Florida, it seems the President’s exhortation applies exclusively to political adversaries, because lately we’ve come to find out that if dissension should crop up anywhere besides Arizona, ‘pausing for a moment’ is apparently not something Barack Obama advocates.

The truth is, when comparing the hoodie-wearing congressmen, bounty-placing New Black Panthers, terror-tweeting Hollywood directors, and a President who has lots to say about conservatives’ conduct but remains mum when out-of-control liberals behave badly, indignant hypocrites on the left have succeeded in making Rush Limbaugh’s recent improper innuendos seem relatively benign.

After the shooting in Tucson that killed six people and injured 12, the President implored a stunned nation to embrace civility, saying, “For the truth is that none of us can know exactly what triggered this vicious attack. None of us can know with any certainty what might have stopped those shots from being fired, or what thoughts lurked in the inner recesses of a violent man’s mind.”

Yet, after uttering such cogent words, Obama has chosen to remain relatively silent as George Zimmerman, the man who claims that he shot a black teen in self-defense, is pursued by an outraged lynch mob chanting “No justice, no peace.”

Even more disturbing is the fact that those shunning the assistance of law enforcement are some of Obama’s closest friends.  The group attempting to avenge a death deemed by some to be the result of racial profiling that turned into a cold-blooded execution includes the New Black Panthers, Democrat ultra-liberals like Maxine Waters (D-CA) and Al Sharpton, and Hollywood progressives like Roseanne Barr.

Famous African-American “40 Acres and a Mule Filmworks” director Spike Lee even chose not to “do the right thing.” Jumping into the fray and hoping to direct an angry mob to George Zimmerman’s doorstep to accomplish God knows what, Lee tweeted out a home address he thought belonged to the perpetrator. Spike might as well have strung a noose on a tree outside the man’s house.

The house number Lee tweeted was incorrect, but his communiqué resulted in Elaine and David McClain being driven from their home fearing for their lives. Spike Lee, a $1.6 million fundraiser for Obama’s bid for reelection, finally apologized and reached a financial settlement with the elderly couple. But thus far, the Tucson Healer has yet to utter one word about the shameful incident.

After mentally disturbed Jared Lee Loughner shot Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords in the head, Barack Obama made a concerted effort to temper the violence by promising justice, and did so while encouraging everyone to exercise measured restraint. Now, in response to Trayvon’s death, a posse with the Twitter handle @Kill Zimmerman is advertising that, without an investigation or trial, an American citizen should “be shot dead in the street the same way Trayvon was.”

Yet, the President who once challenged the nation with the words “We should be willing to challenge old assumptions in order to lessen the prospects of violence in the future” has been eerily silent about the growing unrest surrounding the teen’s shooting.  Obama has spoken once, only to mention that if he had a son, he’d look like Trayvon.

Whatever happened to President Obama advising Americans to use a violent situation such as this “to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy, and to remind ourselves of all the ways our hopes and dreams are bound together?”

If we were listening to each other, exercising empathy and reminding ourselves we are bound together, then Attorney General Eric Holder and his Justice Department would have reacted appropriately to the New Black Panthers trying to take the law into their own hands by placing a bounty on a Zimmerman’s head and circulating “Wanted Dead or Alive” posters.

Moreover, why is President Obama, who in Tucson warned that we should never use “tragedy as one more occasion to turn on one another,” stoking aggression by purposely ignoring the growing animosity toward a man who is supposed to be “innocent until proven guilty?”

At the Tucson Memorial, Barack Obama quoted Scripture and discouraged the nation from “pointing fingers and assigning blame.” Now, with an election just months away, the Keeper of Civility, desperate to renew his base, has found a racial issue to exploit and has aligned his 2012 reelection campaign with a hooded uniform that symbolizes a slain teen whose culpability in his own death has yet to be determined.

And so, not only has the President proven that his recent righteous indignation toward so-called right-wing “hate speech” is a reaction directed exclusively toward political foes, and while contributing to growing tension in a nation he’s supposed to be leading, Obama has once again managed to expose his own duplicity.

The Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman case has left a young man dead, an accused shooter hiding from an angry mob of bloodthirsty vigilantes, and has caused the nation to be sharply divided again by racial tension.  But above all, what the Trayvon Martin tragedy has done is reveal to America that every word uttered by Barack Obama at that Tucson Memorial was nothing more than politically-motivated empty rhetoric.

The Eloquence of Obama’s Inaction

Originally posted at American Thinker

Purposeful inaction is a form of passive-aggressive behavior.  Doing or saying nothing is still doing something.  William Shakespeare once said:  “Action is eloquence.”  Barack Obama is considered by some to be an eloquent speaker, but the President’s rhetoric is meaningless when his hollow words, regardless of how well-executed, are followed up with inaction.

In the past, Obama has been quick to remark on issues and events of which he disapproves.  Unable to contain himself, oftentimes uncontrolled frustration and disdain inappropriately spill out in public forums.  If the President senses rejection, he responds contemptuously by expressing unsolicited opinions.

Case in point: Everybody knows how Obama feels about the Tea Party movement, whose members he referred to with the vulgar sexual slur “tea baggers.” It is also no secret as to the President’s dismissive, mocking attitude toward the Fox News network.

Priding himself as the champion of equality, Barack Obama is quick to step forward in defense of those victimized by what he perceives to be racial insult.  If an incident involves race, without forethought the President has been known to assign blame before gathering facts.

Yet when a barrage of racial slurs victimized Herman Cain, Obama said it all when he failed to step forward to condemn the hostility directed toward the first conservative black presidential candidate.

Early on, the Obama administration warned America to be on the lookout for certain individuals the government felt posed a threat to the nation’s safety. A Homeland Security document was issued that described potential terrorists as: ex-military, those who respect and defend the unborn, Americans in favor of secure borders, evangelical Christians, and Second Amendment-rights advocates.  In other words, Tea Party members.

By choosing to ignore ‘Occupy’ Washington DC activists shoving an elderly woman down a flight of stairs while chanting “Hey, hey, ho, ho, corporate greed has got to go,” the President sends a louder message to America than any government attempt to identify and define conservative views as the root of potential terrorism.

Despite all his rhetoric, Obama has never spoken louder than what he hasn’t said about what’s going on all over America with the ‘Occupy’ movement.  As the growing brand of miscreant activism devolves into a conglomeration of squalor, crime, sickness, death, and disrespect for all that is good, America’s usually chatty and opinionated President is suddenly at a loss for words.

Occupy Boston activists take over the Israeli consulate, protesters throw fits demanding free food from private business owners and the Campaigner-in-Chief is busy pushing an unpopular, politically motivated jobs bill and focusing on the 2012 election.

What happened to the man who dropped everything to rush to Tucson, Arizona to address a single act of random violence against Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords that took the lives of six innocent people? There at the podium, the President cited Scripture, talked about children splashing in rain puddles, called for national civility, and predictably used the incident as a platform to unjustly accuse his political enemies.

Wasn’t it Barack Obama who once said, “We will never forget the selfless courage demonstrated by the firefighters, police officers and first responders who risked their lives to save others?”  Yet at ‘Occupy Wall Street,’ when an EMT fractured his leg after being callously shoved into a ladder by an irrational protester, rescue workers were prevented from transporting the disturbed aggressor to the hospital by a hostile human chain. Obama, proud signer of the First Responders bill, had nothing to say.

In addition to a tuberculosis outbreak in Occupy Atlanta, a respiratory virus they’re calling “Zuccotti Lung,” a norovirus also known as the winter vomiting virus, has infiltrated the camp on Wall Street. According to a New York news organization, “The damp clothing and cardboard signs wet with rain are also breeding grounds for mold. Some protesters are urinating in bottles and leaving food trash discarded throughout the campground, providing further opportunities for nastiness.”  What’s next, cholera?

Does Obama care? People’s lives and public safety hang in the balance and the man supposedly focused on a healthier America remains silent. In Vermont and California, body bags are being occupied while a seemingly oblivious President chooses to do and say nothing.

Instead, Barack Obama fritters away precious time on frivolous campaign junkets, tours classrooms in Pennsylvania, attends fundraising dinners, and delivers remarks at events like the National Women’s Law Center’s Annual Awards dinner.  As American cities devolve into open-air sewers, giant Petri dishes where ‘give us more’ squatters multiply in a broth of hostility, hate, and envy, the President is all about the vital work of deciding whether or not to tax Christmas trees.

In fact, right about the time Obama flew off on a nine-day $9 million Asian tour, a suicide took place in ‘Occupy’ Burlington and gunshots fired into a crowd killed a protester in Oakland.

By comparison, based on Barack Obama’s tolerance of widespread incivility it appears the Tucson call for mutual respect may have merely been a plea for civility towards Barack Obama. Otherwise why would he fail to condemn a movement that has become a melting pot of shootings, deaths, tuberculosis outbreaks, alleged rapes, anti-Semitic aggression, lewd conduct and more?

The master of liberal didactic artistry may not realize it, but in a way he has returned to teaching. This time the lectern is positioned squarely in the middle of America and the lecturer is speaking loudly without uttering a word.

Hopefully, the nation is conscious and aware, because whether America rises or falls as a nation clearly hinges on our citizens recognizing the message conveyed by Obama’s non-verbal lessons and deliberate inaction.

If Shakespeare was right and “Action is eloquence,” Barack Obama’s silence and purposeful inaction are in fact a distinct action – and the President of the United States has never been more eloquent.

‘Gun Against the Head’ Civil Discourse

Originally posted at BIG Government

In 2008, long before a shooting in Tucson where six people died and 19 were injured, candidate Barack Obama did not shy away from violent imagery when explaining how he would counter Republican attacks during the 2008 presidential campaign. Chicago-style Obama warned: “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.”

After Tucson, when it came time to assign blame for what amounted to an attempted political assassination, liberals did not squander the opportunity to blame the Sarah Palin PAC website’s depiction of cross-hairs for inciting the type of uncivil discourse that led to the  murders, and Obama didn’t stop them. In fact, the media all but laid the responsibility for Jared Lee Loughner shooting Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ)  in the head at Palin’s feet.

Liberal commentator Keith Olbermann even went so far as to say: “If Sarah Palin … does not repudiate her own part, however tangential, in amplifying violence and violent imagery in American politics, she must be dismissed from politics, she must be repudiated by the members of her party.”

Four short days after the shooting, Barack Obama used the opportunity to sell T-shirts, rebuke the gun lobby, and use the tragedy to partner with the media and call for “civility in public discourse.”  In other words, the memorial in Tucson became a platform for Obama to reprimand his critics and harness the First Amendment by condemning “point scoring and pettiness.”

Barack recited Scripture, offered condolences, and eulogized all the victims before segueing into rhetoric that heaped guilt upon anyone on the right who might employ hyperbole in political discussion. Citing the gallant actions of those who saved lives in a Safeway parking lot, the President said heroism posed a “challenge to each of us,” and raised the question “going forward” of what “beyond the prayers and expressions of concern,” was  required of all Americans, including himself, to “honor the fallen” and “be true to their memory?”

Politicizing an act that had nothing to do with politics and everything to do with insanity, the President brought up “national conversation” as an “essential ingredient in our exercise of self-government.” Obama also used the occasion to mention the debate over the “motivations behind these killings…the merits of gun safety laws,” and “the adequacy of our mental health systems.”

President “Bring a Knife and We’ll Bring a Gun” Obama chided the nation by saying, “at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized – at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do – it’s important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds.”

It was touching sentiments such as those that inspired the New York Times to praise Barack Obama for ushering in a New Era of Civility.  Six months later, amidst talk of economic “Armageddon,” as the debate over raising the debt ceiling continues to heat up, Barack Obama is the one who  dropped the ‘civility’ ball.

If it is true that mentally ill individuals can be goaded toward violence by cartoon depictions of cross-hairs, then Obama, who exhorted the nation by saying “rather than pointing fingers or assigning blame, let us use this occasion to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy, and remind ourselves of all the ways our hopes and dreams are bound together,” may have unintentionally provided the impetus for a future tragedy.

At  a Twitter town hall in Washington DC, the man who, when in Tucson, demanded from political adversaries “more civility in our public discourse,” tweeted out to millions that Republicans are using the debt ceiling debate as a “gun against the heads” of the American people.  He even made reference to how Republicans disagree with what they call “job-killing tax increases.” If President Obama wants to set the courtesy bar, maybe he should stick to his own stringent, legalistic language standard and when speaking censor the word “killing.”

Barack Obama’s own words at the Tucson Memorial denounced ‘gun against the head’ imagery, which everyone knows is simply hyperbolic analogy.  However, unless this is another in a long list of examples of Barack Obama exempting himself from the edicts he places upon everyone else, the President either owes an apology to the nation for exhibiting the lack of “decency and goodness” he called for in Tucson, or he should quit looking for any excuse to control speech and politicize misfortune.

Gabby proves there’s still hope for America

Gabrielle Giffords from Arizona’s 8th congressional district is “a book lover…motorcycle rider; pro-choice and pro-gun…former registered Republican-turned-Blue Dog Democrat.” Tragically, on January 8, 2011 Ms. Giffords was viciously cut down by a bullet that pierced the left side of her head.  The congresswoman was shot by a madman named Jared Loughner at a meet-and-greet in what turned out to be a not-so-safe Safeway parking lot in Tucson, Arizona. Gabrielle was one of 19 people shot that day; she was one of 13 who miraculously survived.

Although Gabrielle is a moderate Democrat, her 100% NARAL rating has been a huge disappointment to many on the right who otherwise admire her politics. Yet, Gabby being pro-choice has not prevented even her most ardent political adversaries from wishing her well and praying God grant her a full recovery.

Until the photos of Gabby were released, it was impossible to really know the full extent and toll those devastating wounds took on the slender smiling woman with the welcoming way. The photos tell only part of the story.

Gabby’s long blonde hair is no longer there; what remains is a short, dark, uneven pixie cut and although the media, trying to be kind, are saying there are “…but few other telling signs of the gunshot wound to the head,” their assessment isn’t entirely truthful.

Gabby’s spirit certainly shines through.  However, her warm smile and direct gaze into the camera don’t distract from the lifesaving tracheotomy scar clearly visible in the center of her throat.  Also impossible to ignore is the side of Gabby’s head which, without a word, tells the tragic tale of grave and unnecessary harm.

It’s been just a month since “doctors repaired Giffords’ skull, finally freeing her from a cumbersome protective helmet that her staff members say she hated.”  Congresswoman Giffords went from wearing a stunning houndstooth jacket on Capitol Hill to wearing a protective helmet while receiving rehabilitation at TIRR Memorial Hermann hospital in Houston.

Although Gabby Giffords appears to be healing and her recovery has supposedly “impressed doctors,” the hard truth is that an insane stalker’s bullet cruelly cut down an innocent person in the prime of her life and it remains to be seen whether the future will see her vitality and potential restored.

Sadly, the once articulate Giffords now has “difficulty stringing together sentences.” In order to communicate and express herself, Gabby is forced to rely “heavily on gestures and facial expressions.”

Giffords’ doctors do say that “With Gabby, what we’ve been able to infer and what we believe is that her comprehension is very good…close to normal, if not normal.” Regardless of the hopeful prognosis, so far thanks to Jared Loughner the gentlewoman from Arizona will not be beckoned to the House floor anytime soon to read the First Amendment.

All the same, what the two Giffords photos purport to show is “how far [Gabrielle] has come since she was wounded in the left side of her forehead.”  Her spokeswoman, Pia Carusone, warned that regardless of how she appears in the pictures, “Ms. Giffords still has a long way to go,” and shared the shockingly sad reality that lovely Gabrielle “remains [but] a shadow of her former self.”

The pictures of Gabby Giffords are bittersweet, arousing both optimism and a sense of melancholy in light of the unjust nature and almost guaranteed permanency of her situation. Looking at her face, images of yet another tragedy are unexpectedly stirred and rise to the surface.

America too, like the Arizona congresswoman, has been critically wounded.  Not by a bullet meted out by a lunatic, but by a President and a political party that have inflicted chaos and ruin upon an entire nation. Thanks to an inexperienced, socialist-leaning, liberal politician who was convinced he knew a better way, in what seems like mere seconds a nation that believed his empty rhetoric has subsequently been reduced to a mere “shadow of [our] former self.”

For Giffords, hope prevails. Gabby’s “release from the hospital [will] mark an important step in her recovery.” For America, the year 2012 holds the potential to deliver national healing. After the next presidential election, America too will require months or even years of post-Obama economic, social and political rehabilitation to recover from a close call with death and destruction.

Nevertheless, despite the shameful politicization of her shooting, witnessing the extraordinary occur in Gabby Giffords’ life should impart renewed hope to a land and a people struggling to surmount a near-lethal political experience.

The injured congresswoman offers America an opportunity to seize upon the spirit of a survivor and to remember that although our nation is critically wounded, we will likewise be restored to the freedom and prosperity enjoyed prior to the ill-fated election of Barack Obama.

Rev. Obama’s Revival Meeting

Originally posted at American Thinker

Although a committed Christian I’ve never appreciated whipped up revival meetings complete with dancing, falling backwards or crippled people being yanked out of wheelchairs. After three decades of voyeuristic research, I possess a heightened ability to spot a snake oil salesman a mile away.  Oftentimes, under bouffant hairstyles, oversized pinky rings and weepy confessions one finds self-absorbed individuals who exploit the Gospel for gain while living contrary to the message they preach.

Yet, year-after-year gullible sheeples continue to support ministries, submit to fleecing, and attend events where flesh and blood is exalted and the credulous place unquestioning faith in fraud.

It was that kind of finely honed discernment that spotted a similar dynamic at work at the memorial service where Barack Obama spoke in honor of Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, 13 severely wounded bystanders, and six individuals, including a 9-year-old girl, all mortally wounded by a madman on a mission.

To the untrained eye, the University of Arizona ceremony appeared to be a well-meaning memorial service visited by a somber President attempting to heal the nation.  However, to an educated onlooker the event closely resembled a tent revival run by a hypster whose pious pontificating was more about furthering a political agenda than consoling the aggrieved.

Was I the only one who recognized that when Obama entered the packed stadium all that was missing was a donkey and palm branches?

The tenor in the room was one of an energized rock concert. In the bleachers were those who came to the memorial to hear the message and catch a glimpse of a superstar. “The university … opened up the football stadium for the overflow crowd. People started lining up at about 6:30 am to get into the event. Many people …brought children.”

On one side of the stanchions, the tiered rows were abuzz with emotion, anticipation and adoration. On the floor, closer to the stage, were dignitaries, the press and wide-eyed family members huddled closely together.

Although the event was intended to be a solemn tribute to the dead and wounded, within seconds it morphed into a quasi worship service where the headliner became the focus of the occasion. In fact, untraditional components were utilized to rev up the audience like tee shirts draped over the seats with campaign-style logos that reminded congregants, in a state Obama is in the process of suing, that: “Together we Thrive.”   Can anyone say Benny Hinn Prosperity Prayer Shawls?

The “memorial service” had all the accoutrements of an energized crusade. A Pascua Yaqui, eight minute blessing was pronounced over the assembly by Native American/Mexican associate professor of medicine Carlos Gonzalez who was recruited to open the diversity-sensitive proceedings.  Gonzalez’ tribal incantation was accompanied by eagle feathers that were a cross between a dusting implement and a quill pen.  Carlos showered the flock with spiritual entreaties that referenced everything from “winged” things to “Father Sky [and] things ‘slither’.”

In lieu of a church organist, entertainment was provided by the Arizona Choir and the University of Arizona Symphony Orchestra, who performed Aaron Copland’s Appalachian Spring ballet suite rendition of  the Shaker hymn “Simple Gifts.”

Then, in the tradition of adulterous televangelist Jim Bakker, Scripture was read by three individuals, Department of Homeland Secretary Janet Napolitano, Attorney General Eric Holder and President Barack Obama all of whom, when not selectively reading Bible verses before thousands of people, heartily endorse anti-Biblical policies like destroying unborn babies.

Attempting to channel a tempered Billy Sunday, Obama is more like charlatan-man-of-the-cloth, Ted Haggard.  Haggard lived a life-style diametrically opposed to the one he espoused at the pulpit, as does the President who eloquently encouraged the cheering crowd to do a laundry list of what he has yet to do, such as: Refraining from passing blame, choosing not to turn on enemies, acting humble, curtailing finger pointing and carefully listening to others.  Obama said:

What we can’t do is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on one another.  As we discuss these issues, let each of us do so with a good dose of humility.  Rather than pointing fingers or assigning blame, let us use this occasion to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy, and remind ourselves of all the ways our hopes and dreams are bound together.

The camera didn’t scan the crowd, but I bet if it did, in honor of a former Reverend Jeremiah Wright Sunday service, quite a few attendees would have been seen waving affirmative handkerchiefs, hollering “Amen,” and swooning backwards into their seats.

As in every fraudulent tent meeting, the run up to passing the collection plate is always peppered with words and images that tug at heartstrings, incite tears and prime pockets for emptying. In hopes of filling the basket with renewed momentum, revived poll numbers and positive public approval, Reverend Obama did not disappoint. As the audience wept, the President chided the nation with flowery language that implied Americans fail to live up to the expectations of a murdered child’s vision of democracy.

While there were no political hallelujahs and exhortations to “Turn to your neighbor and say ‘hope and change,’” there were inferences that Americans don’t give enough, care enough or do enough, which is the type of exploitative rhetoric that successfully fills coffers at sports arenas hosting miracle crusades.

Then, like a shameless pastor fallen from grace, after robbing future generations blind by placing the nation in insurmountable debt, in memory of little Christina Taylor Green, Obama beseeched the financially hamstrung to do: “Everything we can to make sure this country lives up to our children’s expectations.”

After all the hype and false religiosity, sanctimonious fakery, manipulative exploitation and acceptance of accolades from an arena supposedly gathered in somber tribute to the dead and wounded probably the most shameful exhibit came when Barack Obama intimated his presence was a catalyst to healing.

“In an electrifying moment, the president revealed that Giffords, who…was shot point-blank in the head, opened her eyes for the first time shortly after his hospital visit,” Obama’s comment was obliquely suggestive of Jesus saying “Talitha koum!” (Which means, “Little girl, I say to you, get up!”).

Like a faith healer working the crowd with stirring images, Obama painted a picture of his presence in a room stimulating a response from a woman in a coma.  The crowd and the nation was so taken by the whole affair that in one sentence Obama went up in the polls, sent tingles up the leg of pundits both on the right and the left, probably settled the Arizona lawsuit and quelled any further opposition to health care reform.

Nevertheless, as a person who prides herself on recognizing the genuine from the counterfeit, it appeared as if Vicar of Veracity Barack Obama, in Christina’s stead, was attempting to “jump in rain puddles” by quoting from Job. Unknowingly, Obama revealed the underlying spirit of the service with words from Job 30:26 that, when spoken in context, say: “Yet when I hoped for good, evil came; when I looked for light, then came darkness.”

Pick-pocketing the Dead

In Tucson, Arizona, Democrat Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was gravely injured in a horrific shooting that seriously injured 12 and killed six, including a nine year-old child. “Shocked and saddened lawmakers” are now grappling with the idea that “new laws and regulations are needed to curb incendiary speech.”

Although despondent and disgusted over the bloodbath, Americans should not be fooled. Compassionate concern from the left has little to do with protection for politicians and everything to do with reining in freedom of speech.  If inflammatory words – not politics – were the real issue, “Allahu Akbar” would be relegated along with “targeted…crosshairs…kill the bill…the ‘N’ word and Hawaiian Punch” to the no-no column of the vocabulary list. The last time I checked, the terrorist battle cry “Allahu Akbar” was not on that list.

It’s safe to say that it’s not beneath liberal logic to tie together fire/arson/shouting/panic and Rush Limbaugh if the result accomplishes the curtailing of First Amendment rights. Democrats would love to apply to unrelated circumstances the 1919 US Supreme Court case of Schenck v. United States where Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote: “The most stringent protection of free speech would not protect a man in falsely shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic.” Using legislative duct tape, the left can seal the mouths of anyone who disagrees with liberalism and promote it as prevention of political violence ignited by the use of combustible words.

In 2007, a tow truck driver was convicted of stealing from a victim “in a double-fatal car crash.”  As the crumpled casualties lay in the road, Ronald Forget of Pawtucket, Massachusetts “took the wallet of one of the victims and used credit cards from the wallet to pay his cell phone bill and to buy gasoline.”

The truck driver’s actions, cold as they seem, are eerily similar to the response of liberal politicians and left-wing media types to the carnage brought about by the psychotic madman in Tucson, Arizona.   The left smells blood from miles away and will pull up alongside any convenient casualty.  In this case, liberals all but politically picked the pockets of the deceased in hopes of furthering a freedom-stifling agenda.

Granted, caution should be used when accusing anyone of heartlessly exploiting tragedy.  However, following the horrendous shooting, and based on the left’s ghoulish behavior, the only conclusion that seems reasonable is that the crisis provided a prime opening for liberal government bureaucrats to look for another excuse to further restrict the Constitutional rights and freedoms of US citizens, and to do it on the backs of those who suffered and died.

Based on public disapproval of healthcare reform and reeling from stinging defeat, Democrats came across a pileup in Arizona that has provided a liberal Thought Police scenario with the potential to justify a “warning against a return to [what they call] the divisive rhetoric of last year’s healthcare debate.”

Misfortune provided post-election Democrats the perfect storm.  The situation culminated in an impeccably timed critical mass, where politics, guns, conservatism, the healthcare reform debate, and the Tea Party could be directly tied to a massacre.  Rather than focus on truth, the left chose to manipulate terror to quash telltale condemnation of an out-of-control left-wing ideologue President, an ousted Congress, and a Democrat-controlled Senate hell-bent on placing a yoke of socialism on the back of a resistant nation.

After the fact, in a pseudo-display of false solidarity, the shooting is now being described as a “rare moment of unity on Capitol Hill.”  That is pure political spin. What transpired was the Democrat ambuscade hit pay dirt.  The left patiently laid in wait for an excuse to blame unrelated violence on “inflammatory rhetoric,” Fox News, conservative talk radio, and popular politicians, and in the process are using a self-righteous demeanor to chide anyone who dares disparage liberal/Democrat policies or politicians.

Rhetoric-reaction to the shooting has been so bizarre that Maine Congresswoman Chellie Pingree proposed expunging the word “killing” from the name of the “Repeal the Job-Killing Healthcare Law Act.”

Phantom Democrats are parsing words and pointing fingers at the innocent, making ridiculous statements such as Pingree saying “I’m not suggesting that the name of that one piece of legislation somehow led to the horror of this weekend — but is it really necessary to put the word ‘killing’ in the title of a major piece of legislation?”

Hey Chellie, do we really need the word “punch” in punch line? How about bullet proof, gun shy, slaphappy, choke hold, and shoot off your mouth?  The words kilt and kiln sound too much like “kill,” which poses a potential problem in a heated political environment. How about cutting the rug, loaded for bear or pipe down?

So far, despite the highly charged atmosphere surrounding the shootings, the left has yet to acknowledge the multitudinous examples of provocative language used by Democrats. For example, for twenty years, Barack Obama was mentored by a racist, anti-Semite, anti-American deranged preacher whose revolting rhetoric far exceeded use of the word “target,” or the metaphoric placement of benign symbols on a map.

There is still not one scintilla of evidence that the Arizona shooter was motivated by political rhetoric.  Nevertheless, even before the police and ambulance arrive the left continues to cruise the Arizona crash site by censuring crosshairs, touting the merits of the Fairness Doctrine, and blaming Sarah Palin and Sharron Angle for influencing a person who was unbalanced long before either woman showed up on the national scene.

So as Gabrielle Giffords heals and six innocent murder victims, including nine year-old Christina-Taylor Green, are laid to rest, it appears the left will continue to pick-pocket the dead by taking advantage of heartbreak, feigning righteous indignation over nothing more than hyperbole, and looking for obscure excuses to muzzle political opposition in the name of moderating incendiary rhetoric.

Hillary Tumbles 4 Ya

Hillary Clinton “tripped” boarding a plane in Yemen.  After waving from the top of the stairs the former First Lady lost her footing and went down, executing a “classic tumble.” Uninjured, and with the help of concerned aides, Hillary was helped to her feet as the plane lights were dimmed to prevent videographers, who had already photographed the event, from filming the event.

Hillary is proving that she is just about as fleet-of-foot as she is adept at perspicacity.  Prior to going down with a thud, Ms. Hillary shared her insightful opinion on the subject of the shooting in Arizona.  Remember, Hillary is a woman who can sniff out a “conspiracy” wherever it resides.

Hillary has proven that she can distinguish potential issues and problems nearly as accurately as the bumps in the carpet when boarding a plane.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DFSvVN_ndUc[/youtube]

For instance, when Bill was canoodling with interns and adding to a growing personal collection of Camacho cigar rings, Hillary credited “a vast right wing conspiracy” for Willy’s issues with truth, oaths, and his inability to keep chubby girl trysts secret.

In response to a more recent controversy, Hillary stepped forward, albeit cautiously, to share her views on another mentally disturbed individual: Jared Loughner, the shooter in the Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords massacre.

Similar to how Hillary assigned blame to a right wing conspiracy for Bill’s lying, perversion, and adultery, the Secretary of State once again is of the opinion that when a mentally deranged individual acts out, don’t blame the doer, blame politics.  Moreover, if possible, insinuate, however slyly, that the right wing is at the root of the perpetrator’s motivation.

When asked about the tragedy, without a modicum of evidence Hillary replied: “Jared Loughner is an extremist because he carried out the Arizona shootings while acting on his ‘political views.’” Hillary’s discriminating observations should make all Americans feel confident that our nation’s pantsuit representative is traveling the globe speaking to world leaders and assessing solutions for potential international crises.

Hillary cast aside lunacy, disregarded verification, and blathered on about political motivation, “animus,” and crossing the “line from expressing opinions that are of conflicting difference in our political environment into taking action that’s violent action,” which according to Hillary is a “hallmark of extremism,” not mental illness.

Hillary said, “So, yes, I think that when you’re a criminal who is in some way pursuing criminal activity connected to – however bizarre and poorly thought through – your political views, that’s a form of extremism.”

If that’s true, Hillary typifies extremism, because anytime the Secretary of State gets a chance she does what extremists do. The sure-footed ambassador of good will advocates for the political philosophy of the left and does so by “resorting to measures beyond the norm.”

Shaky-on-her-feet Hillary continued by issuing a global clarion call: “It’s time for people across the world to stand against extremism and violence. We cannot allow a small, vocal, violent minority to intimidate the vast majority of people who have moderate views … who do not want to be put in a position where they are forced to keep silent or to follow a certain religious or political ideology. But people have to be willing to stand up against that.”

“Stand up against” is what America is attempting to do as Clinton issues opinions whose goal is to gag opposition and to push the type of liberal dogma she continues to promote by sharing peculiar observations that eventually come to be viewed as bumbling, deluded missteps

Electoral Demosaurus Extinction

According to recent scientific studies, “a third of all mammal species declared extinct in the past few centuries have turned up alive and well.”  In fact, “Some of the more reclusive creatures managed to hide from sight for 80 years only to reappear within four years of being officially named extinct in the wild.”

The idea of wiped out flora and fauna reappearing may enthuse worried conservationists. However, if species in the animal kingdom are able to resurface long after apparent extinction, then a similar threat looms when attempting to oust politicians from perches, lairs and feathered nests.

Long believed-to-be-departed mammals suddenly appearing in the wild, if theoretically applied to politics, generates apprehension for those hopeful that the Democrat majority will be permanently expunged from the Congress, Senate and White House. Yet despite the possible threat, it is comforting to know that at least the late great Robert “White Hood” Byrd (D-WV) and Teddy “Cape Lion of the Senate” Kennedy won’t be gracing the hallowed halls of power ever again.

Nevertheless, there are still quite a few never-say-die liberals haunting the political scene, leaving left-footed Demosaurus prints all over a right-of-center country, not to mention the criminal and the ethically challenged still eagerly planning to make political comebacks, i.e. former Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich.

Presently, there are numerous examples of politicians who ought to have been gone long ago being sighted around Washington DC.  Take for example, Jimmy “Red-cockaded woodpecker” Carter intermittently surfacing to hammer away at race issues and dead Kennedys.  And let’s not forget the indomitable Bill “Ozark Hellbender” Clinton.  Clinton turns up in diverse locations leaving a unique scent on everything from humanitarian causes to campaign stops for vulnerable incumbents.  Recently, Clinton the preservationist stumped for at-risk Congressman Barney Frank and zealously attempted to save America’s “Queen Conch” from impending doom.

Even elusive political relic Michael S. Dukakis, former Massachusetts Governor and failed 1988 presidential nominee, visited the White House offering strategy advice for the midterm elections. Dukakis, like the shy okapi, “vanished on the wildlife radar for decades.” Dukakis was nowhere to be found, and then suddenly reappeared like a cloven-hoofed okapi, leaving left-leaning imprints on the surface of the 2010 mid-term election.

In fact, the newly compiled list of mammals “back from the dead” reads like a who’s who of fossilized Democrats yet to be added to a certified roster of vanquished politicians.

Topping the list is the “Cuban Solenodon,” a species similar in nature to Progressive incumbent Alan Grayson (D-FL). The perpetually “rat-like” Grayson crawled out from a campaign hole to accuse Tea Party activists of being “people who… [25 years ago]… were wearing sheets over their heads.”

Grayson, complete with “scaly tail and toxic saliva,” is poised to be unseated in Florida’s Eighth Congressional District by Daniel Webster, who Grayson recently called Taliban Dan.  Florida voters should take heed; extermination at the polls is necessary to guard against a future Cuban Solenodon-style Alan Grayson comeback.

Revitalized rats aside, hope prevails, because “Many scientists believe the world is going through a new ‘mass extinction’ fueled by mankind – and that more species are disappearing now than at any time since the dinosaurs vanished 65 million years ago.” In theory, scientific predictions bode well if applied to the next two elections where mankind-caused ‘mass extinction’ is a needed remedy to depose ancient Demosaurus’ presently in power.

Even more important than mass-, permanent is necessary because according to scientific studies, “More than a third of mammal species that have been classified as extinct or possibly extinct, or flagged as missing, have been rediscovered.”

Another mammal rebirth is the Christmas Island shrew. Presently America is looking forward to removing the gavel from the liberal grip of Nancy Pelosi, who is one helluva prehistoric shrew herself. For the last four years, the Capitol building has been subjected to “high-pitched” Speaker squeaks throughout the rotunda. Thus, a majority of voters appear to be of the opinion that it’s time for Nancy to tunnel under a rock and stay put.

If polls are correct, habitat-dependent Pelosi is one step from demotion to an aisle seat. If all goes according to predictions, for the next State of the Union address, the Shrew will officially be de-perched and seated in the spectator section amongst the rabble.

Dr. Diana Fisher, of the University of Queensland, Australia, claims that in the animal kingdom, “Mammals that suffered from loss of habitat were the most likely to have been declared extinct and then rediscovered,” a precedent Ms. Pelosi will likely attempt to emulate.

In addition to the rats and shrews, back from obsolescence are flying foxes.  For wildlife lovers, a bat revival is a wonderful development, but spells disaster in the political realm. Roosting in the Senate is a colony of Democrat grey-head flying foxes. To name a few: Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Blanche Lincoln (D-AK), Patty Murray (D-WA), and Barbara Mikulski (D-MD). In the House, endangered flying foxes include the vulnerable Betsy Markey (D-CO), Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH), and youngling Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ).

Each and every Democrat woman in the House and Senate is inarguably more batty than foxy, larger than life, and personally responsible for causing America to cry out for permanent flying fox extinction.

One male casualty of primary banishment is a scaly chameleon named Arlen Specter (D-PA).  Other vulnerable endangered species include Senator Harry “Devil’s Hole Pupfish” Reid of Nevada, Russ “Warbler” Feingold of Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania’s “Eastern Mud Salamander” Joe “Refused to be Bribed” Sestak.

Scientists contend that “Species spread out over larger areas [are] also more likely to be wrongly classified as extinct.” Across the nation, from New Hampshire to California liberal Democrats are experiencing varied levels of political endangerment. Categories range from “critically endangered” to “conservation dependent” to a Pat Leahy (D-VT) “near threatened” leaving ultra-blue Chuckie Shumer (D-NY) and Daniel Inouye (D-HI) secure and “least concerned.”

“According to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, 22 percent of the world’s mammals are at risk of extinction.” Democrats are acutely aware that political extinction looms.  If Republicans pick up the predicted 10 seats in the Senate, 17% of Democrat Senators stand to be driven out.  If at-risk Democrats lose a possible 50 seats in the House, 20% will be consigned to exile, after which “Devil’s Hole” Harry and Speaker Shrew will officially be categorized as critically endangered/soon to be extinct politicians.

However, in nature, “the complete data-set, 67 species that were once missing have been rediscovered,” which in politics is a phenomenon that must be prevented at all costs. A species cannot survive without an intact habitat. Dr. Fisher maintains that it’s unlikely endangered species “would have survived had [habitats] been cleared,” which is precisely why it’s time to clear havens occupied by mammals bearing Democrat markings. Ejecting the left from safe and protected native areas is the first step to ensuring extinction.

Flourishing Conservative philosophy has the muscle to choke off liberalism, ensuring the left is powerless to “gradually regenerate.” In turn, officially dismissed politicians will be discouraged from returning to Washington DC to reproduce and rekindle a predatory political genus that would benefit the nation much more by remaining extinct.

%d bloggers like this: