About Me

Name: The New THOMA$...
Biography
Loading...

Create Your Own Blog Find Other Townhall Blogs

Comments

Archives

Search

Definite Double Standard

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Tuesday, January 06, 2009 2:41:41 PM
This is a textbook example of how the liberal media ignores what they don’t want to report: Hamas has been lobbing THOUSANDS of rocket bombs into Israel for months, even years, and not a peep out of ANYBODY. Israel decides “enough is enough” and attacks Hamas installations (not indiscriminately, as Hamas does) in an attempt to stop their incessant bombing and “the world” screams to high heavens, Palestinians call it “war crimes,” and emphasizes the number of “innocent civilians” they kill. Never mind Israel is only defending themselves against Hamas murderers. Of course Hamas, like most other Islamic extremists, hide thjeir military installations right in the middle of private homes, thereby  GUARANTEEING civilian deaths when Israel (or any other enemy) retaliates, “innocent people” will be killed.; This is how their scam works, and our liberal press willingly falls for it. Hezbolla, who lost a war to Israel recently, is staying out of it for now, not wanting their noses bloodied again. “Censorship?” We don’t need government censorship in this country. The liberal press censors itself and we have to go to “alternative” sources to hear ALL the news. (Yahoo News/AP)

Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Gay Activists Don't Make That Distinction

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Tuesday, January 06, 2009 2:34:13 PM
Rev. Rick Warren is NOT “anti-gay.” Neither am I. But gay activists don’t make that distinction. If you’re against ANYTHING they want, you’re a “homophobe” and hate all gays. I’m not against gays and what they do behind closed doors (mostly); but I resent the gay activists and their efforts to FORCE me and mine to RECOGNIZE their “right” to usurp the word “marriage.” I think they should have all the rights of married people, but I resent their efforts to change the meaning of the WORD “marriage.” They’re getting much too much power these days. (One News Now)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Are They Sending a Message?

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Sunday, January 04, 2009 2:05:13 PM
This is about Atlanta police officer Raymond s. Bunn. "Officer Raymond S. Bunn has served his community and country with a clean record for years. He now needs your support. Bunn is married with five children and cannot risk being sent to prison for crimes that he did not commit. In 2002, Bunn fired two shots at a Chevy Tahoe SUV that was trying to run him down in a parking lot. Corey Ward, the driver, was hit once and died instantly. Bunn is being charged with murder, felony murder, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and violation of oath. Bunn was only trying to defend himself and his fellow officer.” Are the liberals trying to “send a message” that deadly force will not be allowed, even for police officers trying to do their jobs? I’d like to know what law officer Bunn violated in trying to save his own life, and that of his partner. Police procedure says this: “The regulation in effect for use of force in July 2002 for the Atlanta P.D. provided that "an employee shall only use necessary force against another person to effect an arrest, prevent an escape...or defend himself or another from physical assault." That’s what he was doing, as Border Patrol Agents Ramos and Compean were doing when they shot a smuggler in the rear end as he was escaping, and pointing something at them. Subsequently, this smuggler TESTIFIED against them at THEIR trial before being arrested later for the SAME crime. They’re now in prison for ten or more years for doing their jobs. Will this police officer be another example of how their employers will not only NOT support them, but will act AGAINST them for doing their jobs? If you want to help, go here: (Law Enforcement Legal Defense Fund)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Al Franken's Joke

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Sunday, January 04, 2009 2:00:38 PM
His joke is to do exactly what the liberals ACCUSED George Bush of doing in 2000. Using the state Supreme Courts to steal the election. His people have completely turned this election around with spurious demands. One such vote they challenged (shown in the Minneapolis Star-Tribune) is clearly a vote for Norm Coleman, yet they are demanding it be rejected. Will it be? Given the makeup of the Minnesota Supreme Court, it probably will, along with many other obvious Coleman votes. The liberals are saying the RNLA (Republican National Lawyers Association) is lying about Franken. Read the information in the link and tell me where they are lying. They SAY they’re lying, but they can’t tell us where, and about what. They hope just saying so will convince people. (RNLA)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

How Quickly they Forget

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Sunday, January 04, 2009 1:57:28 PM
"If you wonder why the U.S. hasn't had a serious terrorist attack since 9/11, two words should suffice: President Bush." (IBD Editorials) Liberals keep talking about George Bush having a low “approval rating,” forgetting their own rating, which is a lot lower. They also forget one important thing about Bush, that he and his policies have kept us safe from Islamic terror ever since 9/11. Of course, liberals won’t agree with that, but there’s a good reason Islamic terrorists loved it when Obama won the election. They know it won’t be long before they have a successful terrorist strike in the United States, since he will be busy moving us toward socialism and just won’t have the time or manpower to keep track of what they’re doing. Like most liberals, he doesn't even believe what they're doing is important. (IBD Editorials)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

"Gun Control" Doesn't Work

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Thursday, January 01, 2009 1:12:58 PM
It didn’t work in Mumbai (formerly Bombay), India where TEN people killed HUNDREDS in a country with tight gun laws. It doesn’t work in Australia, which suffered a 300% INCREASE in gun violence after effectively BANNING guns. In America, we have periodical massacres, sometimes in schools, other times in churches and colleges. Some have been done with ILLEGAL guns; others with LICENSED guns. Nothing the anti-gun freaks have tried has worked. If someone wants to go on a shooting spree, he/she always seems able to get guns, legal or not. Whatever makes politicians think that the way to self-defense is to DISARM ourselves; or that criminals, who don’t obey laws, will obey one that says they can’t be armed, I don’t know. Stupidity, maybe? If the Columbine school principal (during their massacre) had had a gun and the will to use it when he peeked around a corner and watched one of the shooters firing into a room and could have “put a couple in him,” maybe the death toll wouldn’t have been so high. In Colorado Springs at a church, it was different. There was a female parishioner there who had been asked to bring her gun to services and act as a “part-time security agent.” She shot the shooter after only two deaths. So he killed himself, knowing it was “all over.” The point is, no amount of “gun control” has EVER been able to “control” guns. So why not allow innocent people to carry guns for self-defense? Maybe violent criminals will find something else to do if they can’t be sure their intended victims aren’t armed and ready to shoot THEM. What good are “gun laws” if they can’t get rid of guns? Only violent criminals meeting guns in the hands of their intended victims will lower gun violence. That’s an absolute. (Just common sense)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Good for Israel!

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Thursday, January 01, 2009 1:07:46 PM
They killed a top terrorist leader in one of their attacks on Hamas after refusing to fall for the “cease-fire” trap that allows Hamas to regroup, rearm, and re-man their installations so they can continue to pound Israel apace. Frankly, I think they should quit targeting peripherals and target Hamas headquarters. Get rid of the top Hamas terrorists in the Palestine government. Then target the “government house” in Iran, which is promoting this war for their own purposes. The media calls it an “assassination,” but it’s not. It’s simply killing one of the top men waging war against them. (Yahoo News/AP)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

Choosing Extremists

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Thursday, January 01, 2009 1:04:23 PM
President-elect Obama has chosen his environmental czars: Two of the most extreme environmentalist activists out there. "President-elect Obama chooses as his science adviser and head of our weather research agency two global warming activists who believe your SUV is driving us over a climate cliff. He nominated Harvard physicist John Holden to be his science adviser as director of the White House Office of Science and Technology, and marine biologist Jane Lubchenco  to head the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Both are global warming true believers. 'Global warming is a misnomer,' Holden said a year ago in a speech at Harvard. 'It implies something gradual, something uniform, something quite possibly benign, and what we're experiencing is none of those. There is already widespread harm . . . occurring from climate change [Sic -RT]. This is not just a problem for our children and grandchildren.' " If these are the kinds of people Obama is appointing, look for America to do everything Gore and his accomplices want us to do, and then some. Is this the kind of “change” he’s promising us? We’ll, I don’t want it. (IBD Editorials)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive

What's Wrong With Heritage Foundation?

Posted by The New THOMA$ REPORT on Thursday, January 01, 2009 1:00:47 PM
Some people are “naturally” suspicious of facts put out by “right-wing foundations” such as the Heritage Foundation because they are “right-wing.” I have similar reservations about “LEFT-wing foundations,” but those who are suspicious of “right-wing foundations” accept what THEY (left-wing foundations) say without reservation. Why is this? Because they’ve been CONDITIONED to believe what left-wing foundations say, and to be suspicious of anything said by liberal-described RIGHT-wing foundation. Therein lies idiocy. ALL foundations are like news sources. Their output is “colored” by their philosophy of life. They tend to ignore information inimical to their life philosophy. But I have found so-called right-wing foundations to be more circumspect in that respect than those on the left because they aren’t really “right-wing.” They’re “truth seekers” and anyone who searches for real truth is “right-wing” to the liberals. What you need to do is simply do your own checking on the “facts” reported by both sides. Foundations on both sides offer documentation for their findings, and, while neither gives you ALL of them sometimes, with the Internet, you can search out documentation they don’t offer. (Just common sense)
Email ItEmail It | Print ItPrint It | CommentsComments (0) | TrackbacksTrackbacks (0) | Flag as offensiveFlag as Offensive
« Previous1234Next »