Category Archives: Liberal

Conservative Facebook pages marked for takeover by online liberal group

File this under, “I couldn’t make this up” –

It’s recently come to light that a group of liberals on Facebook have put together a list of about eighty conservative Facebook pages and have marked them for infiltration and takeover. The list was accidentally posted to the Citizens’ Post Facebook page. When they realized what they had done, the list was immediately taken down and a group page where they had been congregating was deleted.

Some very popular conservative pages like The pro-Sarah Palin “Barracuda Brigade” and the pro-Phil Robertson “I Stand with Phil” pages were among those listed as targets. Several pro-gun pages were also listed along with a justice for Benghazi page.

The online message concluded with the phrase “Moar Gotes,” an apparent reference to a technique used by Facebook liberals as “goating,” where pages are infiltrated and taken over by users posting multiple pictures and memes involving goats. (I told you I couldn’t make this up)

How does this happen? A liberal “troll” will con his or her way into the good graces of a page owner by posing as a conservative. This could take months. Once the person has been granted the proper privileges, he or she then takes over, removing all other administrators and flooding the page with various goat memes, thus shutting down the page.’s David Thornton explained:
“Jason Doolin, owner of the conservative Citizens’ Post page on Facebook, said that Patrick Blair, posed as a representative of The Freedom Alliance and contacted him several months ago about helping him to expand his page. Blair gained his trust over a period of months.
There is a real Freedom Alliance as well, a Virginia based charity organized as 501(c)(3) organization that educates young Americans in civic responsibility and provides scholarships to the children of American soldiers.

Thornton added that Patrick Blair, “apparently operated several fake conservative Facebook pages and websites as a cover.”

According to Thornton, Blair conned other conservatives into helping him, only to delete their work later on, replacing it with goats. He also reportedly admitted “duping conservatives and ‘goating’ their pages.”

Thornton said he was uncertain why goats are used.

Owners of conservative pages should be extremely careful about those with whom they operate. Moreover, they should carefully examine and thoroughly vet those listed as administrators.

Above all, page owners should never, ever, grant manager access to anyone they do not know extremely well.

So what did we learn from this goat rope? (pun intended) The tolerant progressives believe in freedom of expression as long as it agrees with their ideology.

Here’s a .doc with a list of targeted sites:

sites listed for infiltration by liberal group


Leave a comment

Filed under Conservative, Current Events, Liberal, Media, Politics

Daniel Bongino debates dopey self professed socialist while on air

While filling in for Sean Hannity’s Radio Show, Daniel Bongino debates a college student, who is educated beyond his intelligence, and a self professed Socialist. Guess who wins the war of words?

Leave a comment

Filed under Conservative, Liberal, Media, Politics

Me and My House Will Serve the Lord and Not Watch A&E

Steven Ruffatto

Steven Ruffatto Asst. Professor
Criminal Justice at Harrisburg Area Community College 

Dear A&E,

Thank you for bringing us a show that was family friendly and fun to watch. I greatly appreciated the fact that my Christian family could watch a Christian family on TV as opposed to much of the garbage that is reality TV. Unfortunately, you have done a disservice to Phil Robertson as well as the Christian AND non-Christian fans of Duck Dynasty.

Freedom of speech means that we are all free to speak what we believe. The Supreme Court does restrict some speech. In fact they specifically address such speech that may cause panic or physical injury. The example they give is that someone cannot scream “fire” in a crowded movie theater when there is no fire.

Me and My House Will Serve the Lord and Not Watch A&E

Phil Roberson in his “I Am Second” video. (Source: I Am Second screen shot)

Why, because it would cause a panic and people would get hurt. Did Phil Robertson’s speech meet this criteria set forth by the Supreme Court? No, it did not. The only people who panicked were the A&E executives that decided to pull Phil from the show.

Phil Robertson spoke what he knew to be true according to the Bible. Does that ruffle some peoples feathers because it goes against what they want to do? Yes it does.

The members of GLAAD are free to speak out against Christianity and those that believe in the Bible. How is that speech any different than Phil’s?

Under the U.S. Constitution they both have a right to express their thoughts and opinions. So why is Phil being punished for expressing his opinions? Why are you punishing Phil Robertson for being a Christian? This was not an incident of homophobia or hate speech.

Me and My House Will Serve the Lord and Not Watch A&E

This 2012 photo released by A&E shows, from left, Phil Robertson, Jase Robertson, Si Robertson and Willie Robertson from the A&E series, “Duck Dynasty.” The A&E channel says “Duck Dynasty” patriarch Phil Robertson is off the show indefinitely after condemning gays as sinners in a magazine interview. In a statement Wednesday, Dec. 18, 2013, A&E said it was extremely disappointed to read Robertson’s comments in GQ magazine. (AP Photo/A&E, Zach Dilgard)

Homosexuality is clearly defined as a sin in the Bible just as other sins are listed. Stating it as a sin does not make someone anti-gay. Phil even stated, “we should love God and each other.”

If GLAAD and the LGBT community expect everyone to be tolerant of their views, opinions, and lifestyle choices, they too must be tolerant of Bible believing Christians, their views, opinions, and lifestyle choices. For A&E to succumb to the pressures of “political correctness” speaks volumes about your true concerns.

However, I would remind you that tolerance is a two-way street.

At this point what is needed is a clarification about your programming and your ant-Christian stance. If you are truly an anti-Christian station, which the move to pull Phil from the show based on his Christian beliefs reveals you to be, please be up front about it. You will most likely lose viewers based on this incident.

However, do not for a minute believe that you are losing viewers because of Phil’s comments. You will lose viewers due to your reaction to his comments.

Therefore, without clarification from A&E that you support Christians and Christian beliefs as much as you support GLAAD and the LGBT community, then  “As for Me and My House We Will No Longer Support or Watch A&E.”


Steven D. Ruffatto

Our culture has accepted two huge lies. The first is that if you disagree with someone’s lifestyle, you must fear or hate them. The second is that to love someone means you agree with everything they believe or do. Both are nonsense. You don’t have to compromise convictions to be compassionate.

I’d really like to hear your thoughts. To me, this goes way beyond a TV show or family. It’s about political correctness trumping freedom of speech. What do you think? Please leave your comments below.

Leave a comment

Filed under Conservative, Current Events, Human Interest, Liberal, Media, Religion, Water Cooler

Fighting back on voting rights – Because voter ID’s are racist?

E.J. Dionne of The Washington Post and MSNBC commentator.

E.J. Dionne of The Washington Post and MSNBC commentator.

This morning I came across an article written by E.J. Dionne, a long time op-ed contributor for The Washington Post and a NPR, PBS and MSNBC commentator, about fighting back on voting rights. I knew it was going to be skewed to the left, I just didn’t realize how much so.

By E.J. Dionne Jr., Guest Columnist
Attorney General Eric Holder has opened what will be an epic battle over whether our country will remain committed to equal rights at the ballot box. In a display of egregious judicial activism in late June, the conservative majority on the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act. Holder made clear last week he intends to fight back.

The struggle will begin in Texas, but it won’t end there. “We cannot allow the slow unraveling of the progress that so many, throughout history, have sacrificed so much to achieve,” Holder told the National Urban League’s annual conference.
He wasn’t exaggerating the stakes. From the moment the Supreme Court threw out Section 4 of the act, which subjected the voting laws in states and jurisdictions with a history of discrimination to Justice Department scrutiny, conservative legislators in those places gleefully signaled their intention to pass laws to make it harder to vote. In addition, Texas re-imposed a redistricting map that a federal court had already ruled was discriminatory.

These hasty moves were unseemly but entirely predictable, proving that Chief Justice John Robert’s opinion in the case will become a Magna Carta for voter suppression. Without having to worry about “preclearance” from the Justice Department, legislators can go about their business of making it more difficult for voters who would throw them out of office to reach the polls — and of drawing racially gerrymandered districts that prolong their tenure. Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg understood a logic here that escaped Roberts. “A governing political coalition,” she wrote in her dissent, “has an incentive to prevent changes in the existing balance of voting power.”
This in turn means that when a political party fares badly with minority voters, it will try to turn them away from the polling booths. That’s what segregationist Southern Democrats did in the past. Many Republican-controlled legislatures are doing it now.

Holder announced he was using Section 3, a different part of the Voting Rights Act that was left standing, to ask a federal court to re-subject Texas to preclearance. It is a less efficient way to achieve what the pre-gutted act allowed automatically, but it is the best that can be done for now. It would be better still if Congress reinstated a revised version of Section 4. In the meantime, the hope is to limit the damage of the high court’s folly — and perhaps also give other states pause before they rush into new discriminatory schemes.
“This is the department’s first action to protect voting rights following the [Supreme Court] decision, but it will not be our last,” Holder declared. His department is likely to move this week against the Texas voter-identification law, and to go to court eventually against other states that pass comparable statutes.

To get a sense of how bad these laws are, consider the bill Republicans rushed through both houses of North Carolina’s Legislature that should be called the Omnibus Voter Suppression Act of 2013. It reads like a parody written for Stephen Colbert’s show with its cornucopia of provisions that would make it as hard as possible for African-Americans, Latinos and young people to vote.

As the Charlotte Observer reported, it shortens the early-voting period, eliminates the opportunity to register and vote on the same day during that time, and ends pre-registration for teenagers 16 to 17. The bill also prevents counties from extending voting hours when lines are long — which they will be with the cutback on early voting days. It not only requires photo identification, but also narrows the list of what’s acceptable, eliminating college IDs, for example.

Oh, yes, and remember the old civic tradition of using all avenues to encourage people to register to vote, a favorite cause of that famously revolutionary group, the League of Women Voters? This bill would ban paid voter registration drives.

… Read More
E.J. Dionne’s email address is

Expecting more from a man who penned the book, “They Only Look Dead: Why Progressives Will Dominate the Next Political Era” , was kind of naive, but thinking that being a print journalist he would have been more scrupulous – even just a bit impartial. Lesson learned.

Of course I have an opinion on his op-ed piece, but I wanted to make sure he was aware of it. I emailed him this morning –

I noticed in your article, Fighting Back On Voting Rights, a few omissions. I’m sure this was unintended.
For example, you wrote, “This in turn means that when a political party fares badly with minority voters, it will try to turn them away from the polling booths.” You mean like the New Black Panther Party voter intimidation in Philly that was later dismissed by Holder? I’m sure you mean just like that.

New Black Panthers intimidating voters at the polls in Philadelphia

New Black Panthers intimidating voters at the polls in Philadelphia

Then there was that little rant on banning paid voter drives. You must have been distracted during the last election. Unless you were living under a rock, you would know that paid voter drives breed voter registration fraud. If you need examples, I’d be more than happy to supply them. Perhaps it was just an oversight on your part. It’s inconceivable that some people think voter fraud is a myth, they must be part of the low information voters. Ask me how I could have voted twice when I was handed the ballot of another voter because of the same last name and similar address. I suppose if someone had asked to see my ID the situation could have been avoided. Not everyone is as honest as I am.

That got me thinking about photo identification – either a driver’s license or a state ID for non-drivers. I noticed some pertinent data was missing from your article. There are so many instances besides voting where showing/having an ID is necessary.
For instance, one would need an ID to apply for/receive Medicare and Medicaid, purchase cigarettes and alcohol, buy Sudafed, rent a car, get a hotel room, check out a library book, any bank transactions, register yourself or a child in school, board an airplane, get certain medications at the pharmacy, apply for store credit, set up a utilities account (water, lights, etc), buy a car, register a car, vote in a union, donate blood, use a credit card, Social Security services, buy train tickets, volunteer at non-profit organizations, buy a house, rent an apartment, and even at print shops.

I don’t think you were seriously suggesting that asking for an ID to vote is somehow racist or “right wing”, that would be ludicrous. I’m sure the groups you mentioned: blacks, latinos and young people, (I’ll even throw one in of my own – senior citizens) have used at least one or more of these services. To think otherwise would be absurd…. or intellectually dishonest. Wouldn’t you say?

I do hope Mr. Dionne gets sarcasm –

What are your thoughts…opinions on voter’s rights and voter ID?

Leave a comment

Filed under Civil Rights, Conservative, Current Events, Elections, Liberal, Politics

Eric Holder – The Moses of Our Time?

That was actually said by a left wing pundit and MSNBC contributor Michael Eric Dyson.
“He’s the chief law giver of the United States of America , so to speak. He’s the Moses of our time, and at least for this administration.”
Seriously? I couldn’t make this up if I tried….

Holder is the chief law giver? I thought Congress gave us laws, and the DOJ was supposed to make sure they are universally and judiciously enforced. He’s “the Moses of our time”? The only thing Eric Holder parted like the Red Sea was Congress. I wonder whether Holder consulted the Ten Commandments before potentially perjuring himself in his May 15 testimony when he claimed that he not been involved with any “potential prosecution of the press” for disclosing classified material?

Leave a comment and tell me what you think. I know I can’t be the only one that thinks someone has lost their mind.

Leave a comment

Filed under Conservative, Current Events, Government, Liberal

Video: Dem lawmakers exposed when reporters pose as homeless

James O’Keefe’s latest Project Veritas  — the hypocrisy of liberal lawmakers

At issue is California’s “Homeless Person’s Bill of Rights and Fairness Act,” a bill backed by Democratic Assemblymen Roger Dickinson and Tom Ammiano, which would grant any homeless person the right “to move freely, rest, eat, share, accept, or give food or water, and solicit donations in public spaces,” according to The Daily Caller.

“The effect of this proposed legislation,” James O’Keefe during the video narration, “is that homeless people would be entitled to sleep or solicit donations on any public sidewalk.”

In an interview withThe Daily Caller, O’Keefe explained, “Essentially, the bill gives homeless people a ‘right’ to sleep out in front of your house. We wanted to see how the assemblyman would react if he had homeless people sleeping out in front of his house.


Leave a comment

Filed under Conservative, Government, Liberal

The Dumbest People In America

Obama supporters in California petition to repeal the First Amendment when asked by Mark Dice,(author and political activist).
I haven’t decided whether to be ashamed for, or laugh at, what have to be the dumbest people in America.

Is it ignorance or apathy – what’s your opinion?

Leave a comment

April 26, 2013 · 8:09 am