moonbattery logo

Oct 19 2012

B. Hussein’s Binder

Libs’ attack on Romney for collecting information on prospective female personnel in binders is too nonsensical to comprehend. All that can be said with certainty is that like everything else coming out of Democrats, it is hypocritical — given that Obama used a similar method when looking for Muslims to plant in the government:

In a bid to get more Muslim Americans working in the Obama administration, a book with resumes of 45 of the nation’s most qualified — Ivy League grads, Fortune 500 executives and public servants, all carefully vetted — has been submitted to the White House.

Sounds to me like a binder full of Muslims.


On a tip from Uneducated Moonbat. Hat tip: Weasel Zippers.

23 Responses to “B. Hussein’s Binder”

  1. Jimbo says:

    A blatant, hateful, and rabid lie from Bathhouse Barry is typical. If the worthless SOB ever tells the truth – now THAT would be news.

  2. Words chosen with identifying precision,
    “….given that Obama used a similar method when looking for MUSLIMS to PLANT in the government”

  3. Joe says:

    He’s starting to stall, and the next thing that happens is entering the death spiral. Hey barry, hang on for that sudden stop at the bottom. Loser.

  4. Nathaniel M says:

    The whole Mitt binder thing freakin took off the last few days on the intermawebz. Just bizarre. I will admit some of the sh*t has been funny.

  5. Jason says:

    I don’t get it guys, I really don’t. You seem so desperate for an enemy, an “other” to fight against. I get that for many decades communism was that enemy, and America won that fight. Why does there still have to be an enemy? Listen to yourselves. You revel in dehumanizing those who disagree with you. It’s astounding.

    No group of people are a single, monolithic bloc. Not all Muslims are radical terrorists. Not all Republicans are oil men from Texas. Not all Irishmen are drunkards. But yet you cling to the notion that the opposite is in fact true. And you then complain when your opponents paint you as intolerant bigots. Why must there be so much aggression?

    The United States of America happened because the people of the 13 colonies – different people with different ideas and different priorities – worked together. Out of many, America became one. Now it seems it is more divided than ever, with a certain number of individuals seeking nothing more than the failure of the Obama presidency, whatever the consequences for America as a whole. No president, whether Democrat or Republican, should have to hear Americans saying they hope he fails. The President works for America, and all 44 of them so far have.

    I simply don’t understand the anti-Muslim sentiment here. Like I said, while there are extremist elements in nearly every group of people (from an entire religion to even just the fandom of a particular TV show or band, you’ll always get obsessives and crazies), it’s no reason to tar that entire group with one brush. Many Americans have British ancestry. Britain was once America’s greatest enemy. Many Americans have Germany ancestry. Germany nearly conquered Europe as a fascist regime. Many Americans have Irish ancestry. Extremist elements in Ireland were content to murder innocent British and Irish civilians in bombing campaigns. Does this mean that Americans with any of these ancestries, any of these connections, should be castigated? Of course not. Some radical, obsessive, hate-filled people committed terrible atrocities in the name of Islam. They did not speak for the vast majority of Muslim people, and especially not for Muslim Americans.

    If America is to restore itself to the glory it has enjoyed since WWII, it has to work together. The divisions and pettiness have got to stop.

  6. bob says:

    I don’t really see this “binder” thing getting any real traction.

    Smacks of “big bird” to me.

  7. KHarn says:

    “Jason says:October 19, 2012 at 12:51 pm”

    Golly, JASON, I don’t know. Why don’t you ask the OCCUPYERS who vandalised, raped, assaulted and disrupted businesses and people who just wanted to live a decent life? Or ask the MUSLIMS who have been fighting against the WORLD for centurys? Or ask the LIBERALS who hate America and want to impose COMMUNISM which has FAILED everywhere and every time it’s been tried?

    But tell us this: why do you find it objectionable when we object to verbal and PHYSICAL attacks on our persons and country?

  8. Ghost of FA Hayek says:

    The President works for America, and all 44 of them so far have.
    So Jason demands we roll up our sleeves to perfect the Lightworkers America. You know, the America where we are all treated equal, right ?
    Nobody has worked harder to SUBDIVIDE Americans for political gain than BO
    It’s so bad, even a local CBS affiliate noticed
    We notice when people who speak up against Islam’s atrocities are targeted for death.
    We notice when black conservatives are ridiculed, called uncle Tom’s outright and in public, and ostracized
    We notice when the Tea Party is labeled as a terrorist organization, yet the rape and dope camps of OWS were ignored.
    Those colonists did have something in common. They fought a war to gain independence.
    But why couldn’t they learn to play nice, right Jason ?
    Today we fight to regain ours from King Barack and an oppressive Federal government who are using the very same class division tactics so famous of past Marxists.
    So don’t tell me Communism is dead.
    Legions of OWS cockroaches belonging to very real worldwide Communist organizations smashing windows, burning, looting.
    Our way is solely at the ballot box.
    Yet Jason accuses us of using aggression

  9. Moonbattery, I notice you use B. Hussein Obama in your title. Perhaps that is a subtle reference to Barack letting his wish be known last night that he wishes he could go by his middle name. (Was that a slam on America’s shallowness and intolerance, pray tell?)

    Mr. President, Hussein you want, Hussein you shall have!

  10. octa bright says:

    Islam is the “other” because it is an all inclusive social, political, and religious system that claims priority over all other systems and assumes that it has the right to enforce its dictates on all others. While Christianity has done this in the past there are at leas theoritical limits. Rape is not approved, even if it does happen.
    Finally, Islam considers us the eternal foe so who are we to argue?

  11. Jason says:

    @octa bright
    I’ll respond to you first because you were the least confrontational. And thank you for that. You are correct in saying that Christianity has had such extreme tendencies in the past, and indeed such tendencies do continue among small minorities, but the majority of Christians are good, decent people. Likewise Islamic extremism is espoused by a number far smaller than the total number of Muslims, but a number which is far more vocal and which is aggressive. They do not speak for the majority of moderate Muslim people, who just like the majority of Christians are good, decent people.

    My initial question was why there *has* to be an “other”. America earned its place as the greatest superpower in the world, and even if you disagree with what I’m saying, know that I think America is a wonderful place and I want it to keep being the greatest superpower in the world.

    As for your final question, the extremists consider you their foe. The rest of the civilized world considers extremists to be their foe. We will fight them as we need to but we don’t need to succumb to the type of hysterical divisive rhetoric they thrive on. Extreme elements build up support among moderate people by stirring up hatred for the people as a whole amongst their foes. We should not fall in to that trap.

    You misinterpret me. I don’t object to your objections to attacks on you and your beliefs. I love that America is a country which proudly allows each of its citizens to express themselves.

    You go on to cite different groups of people, but you’re still tarring whole groups with one brush, as an “other”, as the enemy. Regarding the occupyers, I actually don’t agree with the damage and violence that was caused. With regards to Muslims, please see my reply to octa bright, and I will also point out that Islam has not been fighting the world for centuries. Islam and Christian Europe were antagonistic for centuries, as each wanted the Holy Land. That’s the full extent of the struggle until at least WWII.

    As for liberals, again you’re demonizing a whole group of people as an enemy. I said that it is good that America allows its citizens to express themselves freely. As part of that, its citizens are allowed to disagree with each other. Democrats and Republicans, liberals and conservatives, will have different ideas about what is best for America, and they will disagree about each others’ ideas of course, but when did disagreeing with someone mean we have to hate them too? President Reagan famously had an antagonistic working relationship with the Democratic Speaker Tip O’Neill, but he said that “after 5 o’clock, we’re all friends”. What happened to that? I realize this kind of hatred can be found on the liberal/Democratic side as well, and it’s just as wrong there. But this entire site seems to have been built out of demonizing and dehumanizing a whole group of Americans because you and they disagree. Liberals aren’t trying to bring communism to America. Can you name me one instance of a communist policy being enacted by the present administration? Obviously I lean liberal, but I despise communism and what it stands for. The Soviet Union’s record is proof enough of why communism will never work. But for all your fears about communism coming to America, look at the election. You still have a choice, just as you always did. Communist states never gave their citizens a choice.

    @Ghost of FA Hayek
    Much of what I’ve already said responds to your post, but the specific examples you cite (e.g. the Tea Party being labelled a terrorist group, black conservatives being ridiculed) are each awful and each instigated again only by the extreme elements on the opposing side. Like I said, extremists on the liberal/Democrat side are just as bad as those on the conservative/Republican side. They don’t speak for the majority of their people, they’re just more examples of a loud disruptive minority ruining it for everyone.

    You said: “Those colonists did have something in common. They fought a war to gain independence. But why couldn’t they learn to play nice, right Jason ?” But if you read what I said the first time you’d know I was praising the colonists. America became the great country it is as a result of their actions. My one and only complaint here is that the rampant and bitter division America is seeing now is disuniting the American people and putting America itself, a great country, into chaos. As you say, the ballot box is how you will express your politics and I salute you for it. I am not accusing you of “using” aggression, I am merely saying that the aggression you each seem to be expressing, and forgive me if I’m wrong but it appears to be your tone, will no America no good in the long term.

    Thank you for your time, I apologize for the long reply.

  12. KHarn says:

    Grow up and take a hard look at the REAL WORLD or go to hell.

  13. KHarn says:

    Pardon me, I ment “JASON”.

  14. Jason says:

    I’m sorry you feel you need to insult me and dismiss me like that. I wish you well.

  15. Ghost of FA Hayek says:

    Liberals aren’t trying to bring communism to America
    You are actually correct here
    Communism has been completely engrained into the American fabric for as long as there have been liberals.
    An example of Communist policy is taxation out of some notion of “fairness” rather than for revenue
    This philosophy may still be rejected by a majority (mainly because they know it’s effects would be the end of their dreams to finish on top) but it persists like acne on a teenager.

    Liberals today would describe this as the freedom to succeed, as long as that success remains within imposed limits.
    Some freedom, huh ?
    Another is the notion of profit as evil.
    But Communism need not run you over with a truck, or nationalized healthcare.
    See, there is always more than one way to skin a capitalist
    Government can subsidize him to do it’s bidding.
    It can wipe out competitors through excessive, expensive regulation.
    Want green energy to succeed ?
    No problem. Subsidize and mandate it.
    Or better yet, bankrupt coal.

    My one and only complaint here is that the rampant and bitter division America is seeing now is disuniting the American people and putting America itself, a great country, into chaos
    Massive out of control deficit spending is doing this just fine.
    In the novel Atlas Shrugged, the government despised the producers, yet absolutely required them to keep it’s citizenry content.

    I would say any “chaos” resulting from a producers unwillingness to be enslaved is the responsibility of those who wish to enslave
    This administration seems quite content on fomenting chaos for it’s own benefit, such as fingering our first amendment rights for the actions of terrorists
    Also, what becomes of your leftist friends who proclaim their intent to riot if the election does not go their way ?
    Are you suggesting we are responsible for this “chaos” ?

  16. Jason says:

    FA Hayek
    Communism was invented as a political theory in 1848. Conservatism and liberalism have existed in various forms since long before then. The very terms “left-wing” and “right-wing” originate from the French Revolution, which happened over 50 years before Marx began talking about his new idea. What exactly conservatism and liberalism each are have changed over time. A Democrat from 100 years ago would be considered conservative today. Conversely, while progressives argue that conservatives do not want to improve anything, one of the most progressive actions in American history – the abolition of slavery – was done by a Republican President.

    From your reply I can gather you are a hardline supporter of capitalism, in that you see the slightest abberation from “pure” capitalism as encroaching communism. I disagree with you about this, and let me clarify that while I disagree, I don’t think you’re a bad person or that your beliefs are wrong or invalid. I read that link you posted, I wasn’t surprised at what that Communist Party guy was saying, but only because it’s the hallmark of communist parties around the western world now to try to say anything to make themselves seem relevant. He thinks Obama will be a transitional president? To his ideology? Ridiculous. It’s the same as when extremists on the liberal side decried the George W. Bush presidency as a descent into a right-wing dictatorship. They were being hysterical and incorrect, and so too are those who either cheer or fear Democratic victories as slides towards a communist dictatorship.

    I’ll address your specific concerns in a second, but first I want to talk about what a communist dictatorship actually is. The Soviet Union banned all political parties except the communist party. That will never happen in America and even if anyone attempted to make it so, the American people would (rightly) rise up and resist such an action. American elections will always give their citizens a clear choice between two (or more e.g. Perot in 92 & 96) sides, with competing ideas and policies. The American people will always choose what kind of government they have. When dictator of the Soviet Union, Stalin initiated mass purges of his political opponents and critics. If the current administration was going to do anything like this, wouldn’t even exist. Stalin’s purges were a reign of absolute terror, something the United States will never see. Stalin also created a cult around himself, with pictures of his face everywhere and schoolchildren taught to revere him, just as the same has been done by the Kims in North Korea. This can also never happen in America, the American people and American culture make that type of brainwashing impossible.

    You may point out to be that many liberals seem to revere President Obama, but I could counter that many conservatives seem to revere President Reagan. In both cases, it’s admiration. I admire both men because I think they each did/are doing their best for America. They may each have had their differences with each other, but differences are the essence of a democratic system. And sure, a certain small number on each side may go overboard with the admiration – those people tweeting about assassinating Romney for example, which is absolutely disgusting – but they again are just the extreme element which doesn’t speak for the majority of the people they claim to represent. It’s unfortunate that nearly every President has some small group of extreme people wishing to threaten them.

    The other main aspect of communism, and the one considered by communists to be their actual aim, is the one which most relates to your further points. Complete state ownership of the means of production. I, as a liberal, firmly believe that America will not and must not let that happen. I also firmly believe that there is no chance of it ever being attempted. As I say, you appear to be an avid believer in pure capitalism, which I respect, but it’s not entirely correct to label even the slightest departure from pure capitalism as communism. Communism is something much more extreme and radical than that. Communists say that socialism achieves pure communism, but even with all of the extreme and terrible actions undertaken by successive Soviet regimes, the USSR never came close to achieving pure communism, and instead it went, as President Reagan predicted it would, to the ash-heap of history.

    This is why I believe that even when a government initiates a policy that centres around welfare or some form of regulation that might be seen by some as being “socialistic”, such actions will never take America anywhere near being a socialist state. Capitalism is the backbone of America, and most liberals wouldn’t dream of transforming America that radically. Sure, there are communists on the liberal side, there are people who want to change everything, but they are the extreme minority. As every election in American history from the reddest state to the bluest state will tell you, actual communists are just not taken seriously by the American people.

    The “chaos” I referred to is the political and social chaos that comes from people being so divided and disagreeing so vehemently with each other. For example, I disagree with many of the things you have said, and while I disagree, I respect your views, I respect you as a person (likewise for everyone else here). I don’t hate anyone just because I don’t agree with what they say. I find I learn more by talking to people I disagree with and trying to understand their positions instead of just talking to people who agree with me on everything. People who do that, whether liberal or conservative, become absolutely convinced of their own righteousness, and start to think that their ideas are the only ones that are right and anyone who disagrees is, well, whatever insult they feel like.

    Different ideas and the discussion and arguing for the merits of different ideas are the backbone of democracy. We may disagree, but at the very end, both conservatives and liberals (except the extreme elements) want the same thing: for America to continue as a great nation and for its people to be successful. Sure, the two sides disagree on how this is to be done. But that’s the beauty of it. We don’t have one group of people telling us how things *will* be done, like the Soviets did. The American people will always be able to choose the ideas they like the most.

    That’s why I’m not suggesting that you or anyone else here is responsible for the kind of chaos I’m talking about. You have your ideas, and you rightly defend them. The chaos is caused by hardline elements across the nation. There are some, on both sides, consumed so much by hatred of the other side that their own world view is undemocratic at heart. All I’m saying is that we should all try to make sure we don’t fall into that trap.

    Again, thank you for your time, and for taking the time out to reply.

  17. Just sayin' says:

    I got three words for Jason: Ma-lar-ky.

  18. Cameraman says:

    Liberal=Insane=Marxist=Traitor=Bullshit.Nice Try Jason, centre..Canadian Much?

  19. Ghost of FA Hayek says:

    That you seem to understand the origins of classical (small “l”) liberalism, yet still are all too happy to hijack it for your own means speaks volumes.
    The reason I use it is because using the the alternative word “progressive” (forward thinking) to describe a movement in which it’s adherents subvert Capitalism to expand government (cronyism) at the very least, or attempt to destroy it at worst and replace it with tired centuries old policies of collectivism just does not fit.

    The American people will always be able to choose the ideas they like the most.

    But what happens when those ideas are intellectually bankrupt ?
    In a Democracy of the purest sense, the majority is able to (for instance) vote to remove the property rights of a minority.
    What does “eat the rich” mean to you ?
    The only way to battle a tyranny of the majority is to fight those who stand at the rear of the “mob” driving them with cattle prods.
    In a republic, even the rich have a right to their labor
    The point is some policies are radical, and must be called out as such.

    Which leads us to BO
    He believes in freedom all right.
    So much so that he has unilaterally decided that a free abortion trumps religious liberty.
    It’s just not enough that it is legal, it is declared a “right”
    Just like health insurance.
    How can anything be a “right” if it must impose on someone else’s rights ?
    Capitalism does require some rules of the road to be successful.
    But the current thought is that more is better.
    Do we still enjoy the fruits of Capitalism when it has been pushed by the powers that be beyond the sidelines, out the main gate, and across the street ?

    We want the same thing: for America to continue as a great nation and for its people to be successful.

    And therein lies the rub
    Are we still a great nation when ranked 18th on the economic freedom index ?
    Will we still be great when our debt takes us the way of Greece ?
    How about when our GDP is surpassed by France, or our currency is devalued beyond Zimbabwe’s ?
    See Jason, as a small businessman and job creator, unless I find that magic route into the back pocket of big government, I stand to loose by it.
    It offers me nothing but a higher tax bill, more regs, plus for an added flavor one party chooses to demonize me in general for political gain
    I should “pay my fair share”
    I should hire more (whether I need the help or not)
    I am a polluter(nevermind the fact my industry is cleaner than anytime in history, or than in any other developing country)
    My competitors are subsidized (in many cases too the hilt), their products mandated
    My exports are the first ones targeted for retaliation whenever government gets the itch to impose tariffs to protect some unionized steel plant, or tire Mfgr.
    Ect, ect.
    Their is even one Democrat who has made it his stated career goal to destroy my industry.
    He said I am a greater threat than Bin Ladin
    These “ideas” I defend are NOT in the abstract for me as they appear to be for you.
    Government affects me personally, and now in many ways the same as some mugger demanding my wallet

  20. dan says:

    binder full of women…you have Bill Clinton’s attention and mine

  21. Brendan Rizzo says:

    KHarn says: October 19, 2012 at 1:57 pm

    “Golly, JASON, I don’t know. Why don’t you ask the OCCUPYERS who vandalised, raped, assaulted and disrupted businesses and people who just wanted to live a decent life? Or ask the MUSLIMS who have been fighting against the WORLD for centurys? Or ask the LIBERALS who hate America and want to impose COMMUNISM which has FAILED everywhere and every time it’s been tried?

    But tell us this: why do you find it objectionable when we object to verbal and PHYSICAL attacks on our persons and country?”

    So, basically, you reject what Jason says out of hand?

  22. TomH says:

    Wow, Jason just owned you all

Alibi3col theme by Themocracy