Jimmy Z: Getting in President Obama's way has been the top priority for Republicans in Congress since day one. But now they've gone too far.
They've been caught red-handed making up so-called 'scandals' out of thin air to stir up false rumors of vast 'cover-ups' happening in the White House.
Did they find a single shred of evidence to back up their outrageous claims? No.
But rather than let the truth stand in their way, Republicans actually doctored emails between administration officials about Benghazi. Then, they released them to the press, trying to pass them off as real in order to create their scandal. Fortunately, they got caught in the act when the White House released all of the actual emails.
While Republican leaders were focused on stirring up controversy, Michele Bachmann was talking about impeaching President Obama for absolutely no reason, and Republicans in the House voted to repeal Obamacare -- for the 37th time.
That's how they think they should be spending their time and your money.
Make sure the President knows that you stand behind him and his agenda right now -- and that you won't let Republican games distract you from advocating for real change that will benefit all Americans.
Stand with President Obama today -- and send the message to Republicans that it's time to stop playing political games and get back to work for the American people:
Its time for them to do their damn jobs.
Thanks,
Brad
Brad Woodhouse
Communications Director
Democratic National Committee
Friday, May 24, 2013
Tuesday, May 14, 2013
• Mayor Rybak of Minneapolis Hails Homosexual Sin
Love won in Minnesota yesterday.
I will never forget what it was like to stand in the Minnesota state house and watch as so many men and women who have fought so long and hard for equality saw their home state take a giant step forward.
It's something that should be happening in every state -- not just my own.
Chip in $5 or more today and help elect Democrats who will stand up for marriage equality across the country, just like the ones in Minnesota did yesterday.
Equality shouldn't be a political issue, but unfortunately, the Republican Party has made it one. They keep affirming their opposition to marriage equality, even as an increasingly large majority of Americans are moving forward on this issue.
I'm proud to be a Democrat because our party and our President support the right of same-sex couples to get married. Make no mistake: Marriage equality will be the law here in Minnesota because of the hard work of activists and because it was passed by our Democratic legislature and will be signed by our Democratic governor.
Stand with the Democrats fighting to make sure that everyone has the right to get married, no matter who they are or who they love. Chip in today:
12 down, 38 to go,
R.T.
Mayor R.T. Rybak
Minneapolis
I will never forget what it was like to stand in the Minnesota state house and watch as so many men and women who have fought so long and hard for equality saw their home state take a giant step forward.
It's something that should be happening in every state -- not just my own.
Chip in $5 or more today and help elect Democrats who will stand up for marriage equality across the country, just like the ones in Minnesota did yesterday.
Equality shouldn't be a political issue, but unfortunately, the Republican Party has made it one. They keep affirming their opposition to marriage equality, even as an increasingly large majority of Americans are moving forward on this issue.
I'm proud to be a Democrat because our party and our President support the right of same-sex couples to get married. Make no mistake: Marriage equality will be the law here in Minnesota because of the hard work of activists and because it was passed by our Democratic legislature and will be signed by our Democratic governor.
Stand with the Democrats fighting to make sure that everyone has the right to get married, no matter who they are or who they love. Chip in today:
12 down, 38 to go,
R.T.
Mayor R.T. Rybak
Minneapolis
Saturday, May 4, 2013
• The JIMMY Z & DEBRA Show (Debut)
Abortion-not.org :: Irene Van Der Wende Netherlands
Immigrant driver's licenses in D.C. panned; advocates say different look is akin to 'scarlet letter' - Washington Times
FDA: Plan B will be over the counter for women 15 and over
MSNBC's Martin Bashir alters the Lord's Prayer to mock the NRA - Washington Times
Cameron Lyle: Athlete who retired so he can donate his bone marrow has two liters removed | Mail Online
Obama losing power - The Hill - covering Congress, Politics, Political Campaigns and Capitol Hill | TheHill.com
Sunday, April 28, 2013
• One of Conservatism's Biggest Problems
RIGHT WING DISINFORMATION: THE SPREADING OF MANURE
One thing online that is proliferating at a shocking rate is the poison that is disinformation in the name of conservatism. Liberals and Democrats (redundant, I know) have been engaging in disinformation and falsehood for decades. Now, it seems that some conservatives have decided that we should use the same tactic on our side for both increased traffic online and to try and "hurt" liberals. The practice is actually dis-informing conservatives who believe this junk.
The example here is a quote by Dianne Feinstein posted in this graphic by someone on Facebook who goes by the name 'Save The 2nd Amendment.' But the fact is, Dianne Feinstein never said any such thing. It was a "quote" attributed to her in a satire piece at the Palookaville Post.
The following is a dialogue I had with the owner/operator of the 'Save The 2nd Amendment' Facebook page. Needless to say, I was disappointed. Defending this kind of disinformation online is inexcusable:
One thing online that is proliferating at a shocking rate is the poison that is disinformation in the name of conservatism. Liberals and Democrats (redundant, I know) have been engaging in disinformation and falsehood for decades. Now, it seems that some conservatives have decided that we should use the same tactic on our side for both increased traffic online and to try and "hurt" liberals. The practice is actually dis-informing conservatives who believe this junk.
The example here is a quote by Dianne Feinstein posted in this graphic by someone on Facebook who goes by the name 'Save The 2nd Amendment.' But the fact is, Dianne Feinstein never said any such thing. It was a "quote" attributed to her in a satire piece at the Palookaville Post.
The following is a dialogue I had with the owner/operator of the 'Save The 2nd Amendment' Facebook page. Needless to say, I was disappointed. Defending this kind of disinformation online is inexcusable:
Jimmy Z: The Feinstein quote is fake. She never said this. It's a quote from a comedy website. Satire. NOT REAL.So, that's that. Another failed attempt to convince a fellow 'conservative' to shape up and fly right. -Jz
Save The 2nd Amendment: It is not in quotations and it is a meme, dude you didn't believe it did you. It's a meme! Not an article from the Washington Post. The reason it is a satire is it sounds like something the moron would say.
Jz: Most of the folks who click it and view it and share it believe it! You are purposely deceiving people without a specific note about it's origin and the source (Palookaville Post). If you KNOW this not a real quote, that's even worse.
ST2A: GOOD GOD BRO GET OVER YOURSELF, AND GO KICK YOUR DOG, OR SOMETHING! I AM NOT YOUR ENEMY, GO PICK A FIGHT WITH SOMEONE WHO GIVES A CRAP, AND SPARE ME YOUR MORAL CODE. -Howa
PLUS ARE YOU SAYING THAT MOST GUN OWNERS ARE NOT SMART ENOUGH TO TELL HUMOR FROM REALITY, TRUTH FROM LIES, ARE YOU SAYING WE ARE STUPID?
Jz: I'm going by the people who are reacting and commenting to the graphic you posted. Yes, there are a lot of gullible people online. You did NOT make clear that this was satire. I don't know if most gun owners are able to tell - the reason it is good satire is because it really is difficult to tell if its real or not. But the comments show us that many people believe it to be true! But, I have done MY part to correct the situation (I then posted a link to the graphic above).
ST2A: Jimmy this is ~WRATH~ GET A LIFE FOR ONE, TWO ADVERTISE YOUR OWN PAGE SOMEWHERE ELSE PEACE BRAH!!!!
Jz: I'm not advertising anything, silly. This was a private message. You should clarify your dishonest graphic. I talked with a friend of mine about all of this, over breakfast this morning. He was thinking the same thing I was saying - the tactic of spreading disinformation is used against us. Once liberals prove that conservatives are spreading quotes that are NOT true, they use it against us effectively. You are facilitating this. Feinstein has said many things, in reality, that are much more damaging to her about gun confiscation - we should be focused on what she did say, not spreading false quotes that people take as being true. That's my position and it is the TRUE conservative position. Truth over fiction, and when writing satire it needs to be made clear it is satire. Thanks for your time.
Thursday, April 25, 2013
• Rhode Island Legislature votes for 'gay marriage'
Rhode Island Legislature votes for "gay marriage" after two "pro-family" Senators cave during Judiciary Committee vote.
(Mass Resistance)
This was so close to being stopped . . . then:
On Tuesday, after weeks of pressure, two key "pro-family" Rhode Island State Senators caved in to the homosexual lobby and switched their votes, causing the Senate Judiciary Committee to pass the "gay marriage" bill by a 7-4 vote, and send it to the full Senate.
Wednesday it passed the Senate by 26 to 12. The Governor has said he will sign it. Opposition to the bill came exclusively from Democrats. All five Senate Republicans supported the "gay marriage" bill.
Senate Judiciary Committee was seen as the barrier to passage
Back in January the "gay marriage" bill had easily passed the in the House with great fanfare. But it was widely known that the Senate Judiciary Committee had a fairly solid one-vote margin in favor of traditional marriage, and it would likely be killed there. In addition, the Judiciary Committee Chairman and the Senate President both publicly supported traditional marriage. Thus, if those two Senators had held firm, the Committee vote would have been 6-5 and the "gay marriage" bill would have died.
Two turncoat "pro-family" Senators
The two Senators, Sen. William Conley (D-East Providence) and Sen. Leonidas Reptakis (D-Coventry), are both known for their pro-family religious beliefs. Conley is a strong Catholic. Reptakis is a member of a solid Greek Orthodox Church. In both local churches, the priest is a vocal supporter of traditional marriage. Their support seemed to be solid.
But they were successfully targeted over the last several weeks with unrelenting pressure from the statewide homosexual lobby, teamed up with homosexual activists in their districts. In both cases, they caved despite last-minute pleas from their churches and priests. According to one major pro-family activist, just days ago their priests had said that Conley and Reptakis were solidly on our side.
It was shocking to pro-family activists. Back in January, Reptakis had told a local newspaper: "I believe in a traditional marriage between a man and a woman. That's my personal opinion." Conley was also considered a man of principle. But last month Reptakis told the press that he'd been getting 30 to 40 phone calls every day on the issue. It was the beginning of the end.
Decision by pro-family Senate leadership not to interfere
The Committee Chairman, Sen. Michael McCaffrey, had plenty of incentive to do what he could to stop "gay marriage" from seeing the light of day in his committee. Last year, homosexual activists ran a candidate against him. He still won, but according to reports, he had to raise $60,000 to do it.
Senate President Paiva Weed supports traditional marriage, but agreed that no attempt would be made to subvert the will of the others on holding a vote, even though she could also have easily bottled up the bill. This a change from two years ago. Weed did help stop the previous "gay marriage" bill in 2011, but as a consolation supported the bill for homosexual civil unions that passed in Rhode Island later that year (though that bil was opposed by pro-family groups including MassResistance).
Bungled legislative strategy
For some inexplicable reason, neither McCaffrey nor the Senate President decided to force a Committee vote immediately or soon after the March 21 public hearing, but instead let it linger for weeks until the homosexual movement was able to successfully pressure the two Senators. Had the vote been taken right away, it would most likely have gone our way. One insider told us that it was just a tactical error, given everything else going on.
The night before Tuesday's Judiciary Committee vote, homosexual activists were already celebrating. They knew the vote was going their way, and gathered in a local Episcopal church, according to reports. But just to be sure, the activists packed the Committee room during the formal vote for an extra dose of intimidation should any of the politicians have second thoughts.
Constitutional amendment rejected by Committee
At the same meeting on Tuesday, the Judiciary Committee also rejected the alternative "gay marriage" bill, a State Constitutional Amendment writing "gay marriage" into the Constitution (which would have also required a statewide vote in order to pass). This bill was not popular with the homosexual lobby but had been endorsed as a so-called "compromise" by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and several Senators. (We don't know why they would support that bill, unless it was to buy more time.)
Strong message from Archdiocese unheeded
The day before the Committee vote, Roman Catholic Bishop Thomas J. Tobin of the Diocese of Providence sent out the following statement to the (largely Catholic) legislature:
(Mass Resistance)
This was so close to being stopped . . . then:
On Tuesday, after weeks of pressure, two key "pro-family" Rhode Island State Senators caved in to the homosexual lobby and switched their votes, causing the Senate Judiciary Committee to pass the "gay marriage" bill by a 7-4 vote, and send it to the full Senate.
Wednesday it passed the Senate by 26 to 12. The Governor has said he will sign it. Opposition to the bill came exclusively from Democrats. All five Senate Republicans supported the "gay marriage" bill.
Senate Judiciary Committee was seen as the barrier to passage
Back in January the "gay marriage" bill had easily passed the in the House with great fanfare. But it was widely known that the Senate Judiciary Committee had a fairly solid one-vote margin in favor of traditional marriage, and it would likely be killed there. In addition, the Judiciary Committee Chairman and the Senate President both publicly supported traditional marriage. Thus, if those two Senators had held firm, the Committee vote would have been 6-5 and the "gay marriage" bill would have died.
Two turncoat "pro-family" Senators
The two Senators, Sen. William Conley (D-East Providence) and Sen. Leonidas Reptakis (D-Coventry), are both known for their pro-family religious beliefs. Conley is a strong Catholic. Reptakis is a member of a solid Greek Orthodox Church. In both local churches, the priest is a vocal supporter of traditional marriage. Their support seemed to be solid.
| Men of infamy: Rhode Island State Senators William Conley (left) and Leonidas Reptakis. Their capitulation caused "gay marriage" to be imposed on the state. |  |
 |
But they were successfully targeted over the last several weeks with unrelenting pressure from the statewide homosexual lobby, teamed up with homosexual activists in their districts. In both cases, they caved despite last-minute pleas from their churches and priests. According to one major pro-family activist, just days ago their priests had said that Conley and Reptakis were solidly on our side.
It was shocking to pro-family activists. Back in January, Reptakis had told a local newspaper: "I believe in a traditional marriage between a man and a woman. That's my personal opinion." Conley was also considered a man of principle. But last month Reptakis told the press that he'd been getting 30 to 40 phone calls every day on the issue. It was the beginning of the end.
Decision by pro-family Senate leadership not to interfere
The Committee Chairman, Sen. Michael McCaffrey, had plenty of incentive to do what he could to stop "gay marriage" from seeing the light of day in his committee. Last year, homosexual activists ran a candidate against him. He still won, but according to reports, he had to raise $60,000 to do it.
Senate President Paiva Weed supports traditional marriage, but agreed that no attempt would be made to subvert the will of the others on holding a vote, even though she could also have easily bottled up the bill. This a change from two years ago. Weed did help stop the previous "gay marriage" bill in 2011, but as a consolation supported the bill for homosexual civil unions that passed in Rhode Island later that year (though that bil was opposed by pro-family groups including MassResistance).
Bungled legislative strategy
For some inexplicable reason, neither McCaffrey nor the Senate President decided to force a Committee vote immediately or soon after the March 21 public hearing, but instead let it linger for weeks until the homosexual movement was able to successfully pressure the two Senators. Had the vote been taken right away, it would most likely have gone our way. One insider told us that it was just a tactical error, given everything else going on.
The night before Tuesday's Judiciary Committee vote, homosexual activists were already celebrating. They knew the vote was going their way, and gathered in a local Episcopal church, according to reports. But just to be sure, the activists packed the Committee room during the formal vote for an extra dose of intimidation should any of the politicians have second thoughts.
 |
Homosexual activists filled the hearing room for the Judiciary Committee vote on Wednesday. [Photo: Providence Journal] |
Constitutional amendment rejected by Committee
At the same meeting on Tuesday, the Judiciary Committee also rejected the alternative "gay marriage" bill, a State Constitutional Amendment writing "gay marriage" into the Constitution (which would have also required a statewide vote in order to pass). This bill was not popular with the homosexual lobby but had been endorsed as a so-called "compromise" by the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and several Senators. (We don't know why they would support that bill, unless it was to buy more time.)
Strong message from Archdiocese unheeded
The day before the Committee vote, Roman Catholic Bishop Thomas J. Tobin of the Diocese of Providence sent out the following statement to the (largely Catholic) legislature:
"As the Rhode Island Senate prepares to take action on legislation that would seek to legitimize 'same-sex marriage,' I once again urge members of the Senate to stand strong in resisting this immoral and unnecessary proposition and to defend marriage and family as traditionally defined. We should be very clear about this: it is only with grave risk to our spiritual well-being and the common good of our society that we dare to redefine what God himself has created. My prayer is that the senators will have all the wisdom and courage they need to do the right thing in this moment of decision."
Sunday, April 21, 2013
• Kevin Jackson & Friday's Supposed 'Police State'
KEVIN JACKSON DEMEANS THE STELLAR, HEROIC WORK OF LAW ENFORCEMENT IN MASSACHUSETTS
I really hate to do this - Kevin Jackson is a smart guy, a conservative black American, but honestly? I think he's getting a little full of himself. Some might argue that you can't fault success, but hell, Alex Jones is very successful and he's doing genuine damage to the conservative cause in America. So let me out line what's happening.
Recently, Kevin wrote the following about the killing and capture of both terrorist suspects last Friday:
I'm sorry, but Kevin Jackson is playing to the conspiracy kook "police state" crowd. These are the people who have been purposely mischaracterizing the work of law enforcement on Friday in Massachusetts as a "police state", "martial law" and a "test run to take over the whole country." This is really poisonous stuff, no question about it, and the FBI, The Boston Police Department and various police and sheriff's departments involved do not deserve it.
As much as I like Mr. Jackson, he's been buying into a lot of the conspiracy theory twaddle over the last year or so (probably because it does sell). This is sad. Hate to say it but this time he's off his nut. No, we do NOT wait for citizens to hunt down and shoot criminals. That's anarchy at best. It's dangerous as hell too - you end up getting innocent people shot, people who were mis-identified by inexperienced citizens running around with guns trying to catch bad guys.
It's so preposterous that I hate even having to explain it, and this is just ONE reason why it makes zero sense. We hire law enforcement for a reason, and it is the crazed, paranoid losers who listen to and believe people like Alex Jones who are sewing distrust in our police and the FBI. No one in Massachusetts lost any freedom; In fact, freedom was protected on Friday. The people who live in the Watertown, MA area lined up along the streets and cheered the heroes who caught the bad guys. It is truly exemplary work that was done, and both terrorists were caught and killed within three and a half days after the bombing.
God bless the FBI, the Boston PD and all other police departments and sheriffs' offices who played a part in killing and capturing the two bomb-wielding Islamic terrorists responsible. They are all heroes. This was not martial law, this was not a police state - this was clearly, to anyone watching, a case of a clear and present danger.
Have a listen to Brian Suits, in Los Angeles on Saturday night. It's just 60 seconds but its the most important thing I've heard on the radio since the whole thing began last Monday:
"It's called 'clear and present danger,' folks. Did you all not make '24' the number one show for eight years?" -Brian Suits
One more thing Mr. Jackson wrote:
I realize that Kevin's audience is bigger than mine, and Mr. Jackson can go after me more effectively than I can go after him. But this is activism that hurts the conservative brand and makes conservatives look like the kind of people who really are dangerous to others.
Kevin said he was asked by the GOP to come in and talk, and he refused. He said that he told them "I will NOT FOLLOW YOU." Now if you ask me this is an opportunity true conservatives should take advantage off. Unfortunately though, I believe Kevin Jackson is more interested in catering to the conspiracy crowd and growing an audience comprised of them, and that's not conservative at all.
Recently, Kevin wrote the following about the killing and capture of both terrorist suspects last Friday:
"Have you considered how much more of OUR money was spent chasing TWO, repeat TWO cockroaches?! Millions of dollars, an entire city of 4.7M people on lockdown to find TWO punks. Governor Rick Perry had to be laughing at this idea, given that Texans are ARMED, and some citizens would have dispatched these two Muslim terrorists with a quickness.
"Instead, Bostonians were told to "stay in your homes." Let the government spend MILLIONS of dollars to do what somebody could do with $3.48 in bullets. Stay in your homes and be scared, because Big Brother has your back. The same Big Brother who carried FULLY automatic REAL assault rifles in chasing the perps."
I'm sorry, but Kevin Jackson is playing to the conspiracy kook "police state" crowd. These are the people who have been purposely mischaracterizing the work of law enforcement on Friday in Massachusetts as a "police state", "martial law" and a "test run to take over the whole country." This is really poisonous stuff, no question about it, and the FBI, The Boston Police Department and various police and sheriff's departments involved do not deserve it.
As much as I like Mr. Jackson, he's been buying into a lot of the conspiracy theory twaddle over the last year or so (probably because it does sell). This is sad. Hate to say it but this time he's off his nut. No, we do NOT wait for citizens to hunt down and shoot criminals. That's anarchy at best. It's dangerous as hell too - you end up getting innocent people shot, people who were mis-identified by inexperienced citizens running around with guns trying to catch bad guys.
It's so preposterous that I hate even having to explain it, and this is just ONE reason why it makes zero sense. We hire law enforcement for a reason, and it is the crazed, paranoid losers who listen to and believe people like Alex Jones who are sewing distrust in our police and the FBI. No one in Massachusetts lost any freedom; In fact, freedom was protected on Friday. The people who live in the Watertown, MA area lined up along the streets and cheered the heroes who caught the bad guys. It is truly exemplary work that was done, and both terrorists were caught and killed within three and a half days after the bombing.
God bless the FBI, the Boston PD and all other police departments and sheriffs' offices who played a part in killing and capturing the two bomb-wielding Islamic terrorists responsible. They are all heroes. This was not martial law, this was not a police state - this was clearly, to anyone watching, a case of a clear and present danger.
Have a listen to Brian Suits, in Los Angeles on Saturday night. It's just 60 seconds but its the most important thing I've heard on the radio since the whole thing began last Monday:
"It's called 'clear and present danger,' folks. Did you all not make '24' the number one show for eight years?" -Brian Suits
One more thing Mr. Jackson wrote:
"If you are tired of upside-down government, then you know what my team does... We want to get the PEOPLE to uprise against this gangster government, and we won't follow anybody."Just what the hell does "we want to get the PEOPLE to uprise [sic] against this gangster government" mean? How does this manifest itself? Pretty incendiary. Is he talking coup d'état or what? And who is the leader? Every group is lead by someone. If you're not going to follow anyone, all you have are individuals. This kind of rhetoric is troubling at best - destructive and damaging to conservatism at worst.
I realize that Kevin's audience is bigger than mine, and Mr. Jackson can go after me more effectively than I can go after him. But this is activism that hurts the conservative brand and makes conservatives look like the kind of people who really are dangerous to others.
Kevin said he was asked by the GOP to come in and talk, and he refused. He said that he told them "I will NOT FOLLOW YOU." Now if you ask me this is an opportunity true conservatives should take advantage off. Unfortunately though, I believe Kevin Jackson is more interested in catering to the conspiracy crowd and growing an audience comprised of them, and that's not conservative at all.
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
• Gay 'Friends'?
K: Similar to pro-choicers who oppose Partial Birth Abortion (and whose movement leaders do not) but remain silent against extremism in their own leadership, it hurts their cause. I'm quite certain that if I polled my gay friends, they'd think this woman's statement was ridiculous. Yet, I cannot find any gay rights organization that has condemned it.
Jimmy Z: What's that? "Gay friends?" I don't recognize that term. What part has light with darkness?
K: I have lots of gay friends, and a "spare" daughter who is gay. We just agree to disagree on a number of things, most particularly, marriage. Other than that, I just judge everybody on the content of their character.
Jimmy Z: K, I'm not sure how that works. To live in abject sin... see, I look at this from the Bible point of view, so if someone I know is sleeping with another man's wife or another woman's husband, committing adultery, and telling me its just fine and we have to agree to disagree, that this is the way he or she is made, and they love this married person they're sleeping with, I don't buy it. It's wrong and it is egregious enough that I cannot have friendship with that person.
From a Facebook thread...
Jimmy Z: What's that? "Gay friends?" I don't recognize that term. What part has light with darkness?
K: I have lots of gay friends, and a "spare" daughter who is gay. We just agree to disagree on a number of things, most particularly, marriage. Other than that, I just judge everybody on the content of their character.
Jimmy Z: K, I'm not sure how that works. To live in abject sin... see, I look at this from the Bible point of view, so if someone I know is sleeping with another man's wife or another woman's husband, committing adultery, and telling me its just fine and we have to agree to disagree, that this is the way he or she is made, and they love this married person they're sleeping with, I don't buy it. It's wrong and it is egregious enough that I cannot have friendship with that person.
From a Facebook thread...
Monday, April 15, 2013
• Criticism, Love Letters & Advice
JIMMY Z HAMMERED FOR NEWTOWN PARENTS CRITIQUE
I'm told today that my former radio consulting analyst, John Benko, has criticized my statement here. In part, Mr. Benko wrote, "any decent human being would be shocked and stunned by a statement of such mind-boggling hate."
The fact is there is nothing hateful about this at all. The parents who are in Washington DC (not all of the parents), lobbying against my 2nd Amendment rights have burned through all of the empathy they were due.
"To stoop to accusing these poor suffering parents of exploiting their own dead children, to categorize these people, who have experienced such an unspeakable sorrow, as unworthy of sympathy. To say "screw 'em" and suggest that they be "smacked around" is beyond the lowest of anything that could be considered respectable discourse..."
The very idea that they would use their family tragedy to WORK WITH OBAMA and the democrats, and allow their tragedy to be exploited by Obama and the anti-gun rights democrats, is truly shocking. These parents who have been through unspeakable horror (and they have been), are IN FACT allowing anti-gun democrats and Obama to use their children's death against us, the law abiding citizens who ONLY seek to exercise our 2nd Amendment rights. I'm glad Benko saw it; I'm not surprised that he didn't get it.
If it was my child shot in school, I'd tell Obama and Feinstein to their faces that if the NRA had it's way - if the school had an armed guard, my kid might still be alive.
I should also add that Mr. Benko leveled great criticism toward my friend and colleague Debra JM Smith. In fact, his venom for her and her view of Catholicism was much more vitriolic than his criticism of my statement about the parents from Newtown lobbying for Obama is Washington DC.
For the record, Debra and I do not see eye to eye on Catholicism in some ways. But I would be dishonest if I didn't say that my view of Catholicism has been changing, NOT because of anything Debra has said to me, but because of the behavior and rhetoric and language used by Mr. Benko over a long period of time.
I will not dive into the piles of emails I have that Mr. Benko sent to myself and Debra. What I will tell you is that I've been told that it is Mr. Benko's view as a Catholic that I am a hell-bound Protestant heretic. The fact is that there are many Catholics who think that way, and it was an eye-opening moment. And I must also admit, Debra told me so.
The fact is there is nothing hateful about this at all. The parents who are in Washington DC (not all of the parents), lobbying against my 2nd Amendment rights have burned through all of the empathy they were due.
"To stoop to accusing these poor suffering parents of exploiting their own dead children, to categorize these people, who have experienced such an unspeakable sorrow, as unworthy of sympathy. To say "screw 'em" and suggest that they be "smacked around" is beyond the lowest of anything that could be considered respectable discourse..."
The very idea that they would use their family tragedy to WORK WITH OBAMA and the democrats, and allow their tragedy to be exploited by Obama and the anti-gun rights democrats, is truly shocking. These parents who have been through unspeakable horror (and they have been), are IN FACT allowing anti-gun democrats and Obama to use their children's death against us, the law abiding citizens who ONLY seek to exercise our 2nd Amendment rights. I'm glad Benko saw it; I'm not surprised that he didn't get it.
If it was my child shot in school, I'd tell Obama and Feinstein to their faces that if the NRA had it's way - if the school had an armed guard, my kid might still be alive.
I should also add that Mr. Benko leveled great criticism toward my friend and colleague Debra JM Smith. In fact, his venom for her and her view of Catholicism was much more vitriolic than his criticism of my statement about the parents from Newtown lobbying for Obama is Washington DC.
For the record, Debra and I do not see eye to eye on Catholicism in some ways. But I would be dishonest if I didn't say that my view of Catholicism has been changing, NOT because of anything Debra has said to me, but because of the behavior and rhetoric and language used by Mr. Benko over a long period of time.
I will not dive into the piles of emails I have that Mr. Benko sent to myself and Debra. What I will tell you is that I've been told that it is Mr. Benko's view as a Catholic that I am a hell-bound Protestant heretic. The fact is that there are many Catholics who think that way, and it was an eye-opening moment. And I must also admit, Debra told me so.
Friday, April 12, 2013
• Massive Friday Show
I'm just going to give you the topics - a show with more issues discussed than just about any other show, online, terrestrial or otherwise; and today the show is COMMERCIAL FREE!
SIDE TWO Family Research Council: Are you an enemy of the state? • Jay Z lashes out with new Hippity Hop track over Cuba trip criticism • Washington state Atty General sues florist over same sex wedding flowers • Obama cancels all Blue Angels performances; cuts Pearl Harbor tours • Pousé founded radical anti-white student paper in college • Reviewing Pousé audio and Alphonzo Rachel's scathing response • Cookie Monster and Elmo get aggressive with little kids in New York City • American Thinker: Are gays really much ado about nothing?
Go to The Jimmy Z Show on Facebook for now, then later at TheJimmyZShow.com
OR, Just click the players right here!
SIDE ONE
SIDE TWO
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
