I Know You Are, But What Am I?
Monday, February 27th, 2012
Sticks and stones and all that. Oh civilized lefties. I’m copying it all for posterity:
Murdering, Lying, Thieving, Rat-F*** Republican Pieces of Sub-Amphibian Sh**…
…mendacious, death-loving, frothing, lamprey-mouthed, inhuman, abominable, atrocious, verminous, rapacious, sadistic, bullying, invasive, grasping, psychopathic, twisted, warped, animalistic, belly-crawling, mouth-breathing, illiterate, innumerate, know-nothing, imbecilic, sheep-raping, horror movie extras masturbating into wads of money while fantasizing about war collateral damage…(inhale)…puppy-torturing, vacuous, mindless, nihilistic, evil, diseased, soulless, morally bankrupt, greedy, insecure, envious, kleptomaniac charnel-house mascots stewing in universal hatred for all life…(inhale)…toxic, ugly, bestial, humorless, loveless, compassionless, demonic human-shaped ruins forever slouching toward Bethlehem in search of some fresh nightmare to wreak on the defenseless via other people’s money and heroism…(inhale)…Satanic monkey-shit-throwing, cowardly, chickenhawkish, parasitic, baby’s-candy-stealing, wife-beating, minority-purging, syphilitic Confederate poltergeists with erectile dysfunction…
…perverse, prurient, crocodile-eyed, necrophiliac mass-producers of human misery and gleeful destroyers of truth, justice, and the American way…sepulchre-hearted human deserts walking the Earth only to look for more victims…silly, stupid, ignorant bastards proud of every good thing they’ve never done, every person they’ve never been considerate toward, every fact they’ve never learned and will never acknowledge, and every virtue they will never possess or even attempt to comprehend…preternaturally drunken, bleary-eyed, zombie-like, empty vessels who wander aimlessly until given instruction by their masters…unthinking, unquestioning, unfeeling diabolus ex machina mockeries of the human condition, perpetually acting out a burlesque of the basest and least interesting psychological dysfunctions…
…face-chewing, self-devouring, medieval barbarian museum dioramas and depraved Nazi homunculi preserved in formaldehyde to frighten children…sick, ominous, loathsome, Nosferatu-impersonating Gollum-acolytes feasting on the flesh of our society while complaining about its taste…tax-evading, sommelier-abusing, election-buying, yacht-aficionado hemmorhoids flying flags of convenience and berating their six-year-old Chinese employees for requesting bathroom breaks…
Republicans, you vile, repulsive, scum. You’re not leading this country. You’re not contributing to this country. You’re not even part of this country. You are the maggot-ridden rot that arises in this country’s damaged flesh; you are the vultures constantly picking at us to see if we’re weak enough yet to become your next meal; you create problems where none would otherwise exist, just to further weaken America and quicken your own insatiable appetites; you are garbage, and you are traitors. And you are not welcome in this country anymore.
What I like is the nuance.
Leftist Underage Labor: Forcing Children To Do Their Dirty Work
Tuesday, December 6th, 2011
Once again, a leftist uses her child as a prop to harass a conservative. Needing to prove a political point, the lesbian mom get that she’s harming a child in the process.
Here’s a gay mom using her son to pester Michele Bachmann, something the child clearly doesn’t want to do. And even if he wanted to, doesn’t have the notion of consequences, i.e., could look back when he’s an adult and have formed a different opinion. Kathy Shaidle has an opinion on this “bullying.”
The Left has a real problem using children for their own coercive purposes.
D.C. mom uses children as human shields [video] at Occupy Wall Street protests. This one in D.C.
Hollywood activists get kids to sing creepy pro-Barack song.
An artist made kids cry for anti-Bush art. (This is really despicable.)
Here’s a union “goon” using his son as a human shield in Portland, Oregon.
Oh, don’t forget this sweet girl used by her dad to block traffic. This is particularly upsetting, too.
And really, these are just the examples I can think of off of the top of my head. There are probably more and you’re welcome to share them in the comments.
The point is that leftists have no problem using children to achieve political ends. They force them against their will and without consent to engage in behavior that is dangerous.
Totalitarians of all stripes are the same, though.
Here’s some Palestinians using their children as human shields.
It’s disgusting whenever it’s used.
Marco Rubio: American. Exiled Cuban.
Friday, October 21st, 2011
Marco Rubio punched back against the defamatory Washington Post piece. Liberals are loving it because Marco Rubio — an ardently pro-American Senator of Cuban descent can not only lead, but he can give a speech, too — scares them to death. More here.
Articulate minority? Why, he should be a Democrat. How dare he be uppity?
Since he isn’t, it’s a mission to destroy him as a person.
A friend of mine, Bettina Inclan, also of Cuban descent was incensed at the hit and said this privately and I asked if I could share her thoughts. Here’s what she said:
I am beyond disappointed by the Washington Post and their attack piece on Marco Rubio and his family’s history fleeing Cuba’s political turmoil. I keep wondering why they deiced to run this piece now? Is it for the financial gain of article’s author Manuel Roig-Franzia who has an upcoming unauthorized biography on Rubio?
I’m not sure what to be more upset about, Washington Post’s sloppy reporting, their total lack of understanding of the Cuban exile experience, how they conveniently ignore Cuban history or their veiled attempt to try to bruise Marco Rubio, a rising Hispanic Republican star ….
My grandfather suffered for 13 plus years in a Cuban prison because he refused to become a Communist. His experience as a political prisoner and my family’s flight for freedom in America has shaped my political beliefs. My story is similar to thousands of Cuban-Americans whose family history might be slightly different, yet their pain is very much the same.
Marco Rubio embodies what we feel, what we’ve experienced and the hopes and dreams of our parents and grandparents. He has succeeded not only because he been able to effectively communicate the Cuban American experience but also because he represent thousands of exiles and immigrants who might have come to America for different reasons, but all are searching for their American dream…
For the Washington Post to say that he is not a “real” exile is beyond insulting. The facts stand, his family left Cuba because of a dictatorship. They tried to go back, but because of Fidel Castro, they couldn’t return to their beloved homeland. Like many Cuban exiles, the Rubio family felt like all was lost. In 50 years dates and exact details get blurry and bruised. Yet, even with half of century past, the exile experience is still raw and in many ways sacred…
The Washington Post is opening a huge can of worms. They attack Rubio for not being a real Cuban exile. This hit piece on Rubio is tied to birther attacks that Rubio is not American-enough to be considered for President of the United States of America. It’s an unfortunate game… I hope that if anything comes of this, more people learn about the harsh realities many Cuban families have faced and the sacrifices they had to make in search of freedom in this great country.
Like Bettina, I think the Washington Post and the DC media, hell-bent on helping Democrats, is making a big mistake here. The country is becoming more diverse, not only racially, but ideologically. Independents make up a huge portion of the voting demographic. This kind of thing doesn’t sit well. You’re hurting the Democrats, WaPo. I know that’s not your intention.
Here is Marco Rubio’s own statement in full:
Dear Friend,
The Washington Post on Friday accused me of seeking political advantage by embellishing the story of how my parents arrived in the United States.
That is an outrageous allegation that is not only incorrect, but an insult to the sacrifices my parents made to provide a better life for their children. They claim I did this because “being connected to the post-revolution exile community gives a politician cachet that could never be achieved by someone identified with the pre-Castro exodus, a group sometimes viewed with suspicion.”
If The Washington Post wants to criticize me for getting a few dates wrong, I accept that. But to call into question the central and defining event of my parents’ young lives – the fact that a brutal communist dictator took control of their homeland and they were never able to return – is something I will not tolerate.
My understanding of my parents’ journey has always been based on what they told me about events that took place more than 50 years ago – more than a decade before I was born. What they described was not a timeline, or specific dates.
They talked about their desire to find a better life, and the pain of being separated from the nation of their birth. What they described was the struggle they faced growing up, and their obsession with giving their children the chance to do the things they never could.
But the Post story misses the point completely. The real essence of my family’s story is not about the date my parents first entered the United States. Or whether they travelled back and forth between the two nations. Or even the date they left Fidel Castro’s Cuba forever and permanently settled here.
The essence of my family story is why they came to America in the first place; and why they had to stay.
I now know that they entered the U.S. legally on an immigration visa in May of 1956. Not, as some have said before, as part of some special privilege reserved only for Cubans. They came because they wanted to achieve things they could not achieve in their native land.
And they stayed because, after January 1959, the Cuba they knew disappeared. They wanted to go back – and in fact they did. Like many Cubans, they initially held out hope that Castro’s revolution would bring about positive change. So after 1959, they traveled back several times – to assess the prospect of returning home.
In February 1961, my mother took my older siblings to Cuba with the intention of moving back. My father was wrapping up family matters in Miami and was set to join them.
But after just a few weeks, it became clear that the change happening in Cuba was not for the better. It was communism. So in late March 1961, just weeks before the Bay of Pigs invasion, my mother and siblings left Cuba and my family settled permanently in the United States.
Soon after, Castro officially declared Cuba a Marxist state. My family has never been able to return.
I am the son of immigrants and exiles, raised by people who know all too well that you can lose your country. By people who know firsthand that America is a very special place.
My father spent the last 50 years of his life separated from the nation of his birth. Separated from his two brothers, who died in Cuba in the 1980s. Unable to show us where he played baseball as a boy. Where he met my mother. Unable to visit his parents’ grave.
My mother has spent the last 50 years separated from her native land as well. Unable to take us to her family’s farm, to her schools or to the notary office where she married my father.
A few years ago, using Google Earth, I attempted to take my parents back to Cuba. We found the rooftop of the house where my father was born. What I wouldn’t give to visit these places where my story really began, before I was born.
One day, when Cuba is free, I will. But I wish I could have done it with my parents.
The Post story misses the entire point about my family and why their story is relevant. People didn’t vote for me because they thought my parents came in 1961, or 1956, or any other year. Among others things, they voted for me because, as the son of immigrants, I know how special America really is. As the son of exiles, I know how much it hurts to lose your country.
Ultimately what The Post writes is not that important to me. I am the son of exiles. I inherited two generations of unfulfilled dreams. This is a story that needs no embellishing.
Marco Rubio
No, I Don’t Want To Be Like Europe, Paul Krugman
Tuesday, January 12th, 2010No, I don’t want to learn from Europe. And this is why:
5. Although Netherlands, Sweden and Denmark are among Europe’s wealthiest countries, as U.S. states they would be between 14.5% and 18% below the U.S. average.
Go read the whole thing. Also this.
These are just financial, quality of life reasons I don’t want to learn from Europe. There are also cultural reasons I don’t want to learn from Europe.
When I visited Washington, D.C. and saw the mind of Thomas Jefferson writ large in the Library of Congress, I knew that I would never be embarrassed about American culture ever again. The Library, along with the D.C. architecture holds knowledge and learning and ideas that vestiges of European monarchies can only dream about.
Go to any major American city and take in the opera or the orchestra. Hell, go to any church in America. You’ll hear the sounds that make up the music of a free life.
Visit New York City and see what upward mobility means. Travel through the rolling, vast plains of the midwest and see the neat farmers fields that feed the world.
I’m not knocking Europe. Paris is the most romantic city in the world, bar none. Britain has history going back thousands of years. I get it.
Still, America’s elites need to stop foisting this b.s. about what America can learn from Europe. The only thing America should be learning is what happens when socialism comes knocking at the door. Europe should be a warning about what NOT to do when you have wealth and prosperity.
Are you sick of being lectured by these guys yet?
Kurt Westergaard, Mohammed Cartoons, And Liberals Ignoring The Obvious
Tuesday, January 5th, 2010
Liberal bloggers are so very, very brave. They can quote out of context and everything! They can also question the bravery of others while not being brave themselves. They can accuse other of hypocrisy and can’t see their own. It’s awesome. Ummmm:
I’m more than a little troubled/confused by the story of Kurt Westergaard, the Danish cartoonist who survived an attack this Friday from an axe-wielding critic by hiding in a semi-fortified panic room. (Westergaard drew one of the controversial Muhammad cartoons in 2005). I mean, there are any number of complexities about the story, but here’s the one that I’m most perplexed by.
At the time, Westergaard was looking after his five-year-old granddaughter, Stephanie. He was confronted with a terrible choice: risk being killed in front of his granddaughter, or trust that the PET, Denmark’s security and intelligence service, knew what they were talking about when they had told him terrorists usually don’t harm family members but stick to their target.
Westergaard chose to escape into his bathroom, which had been specially fortified as a “panic room”, while Stephanie was left sitting in the living room. From the bathroom he alerted the police as his assailant reportedly battered the reinforced door with the axe, shouting, “We will get our revenge!”
Both survived unscathed, although God knows how a 5-year-old processes something like that, and you’ve got to imagine her folks aren’t going to be letting Grandpa babysit again anytime soon. Still, how does one even make that choice? Was it really a rational process, as implied above? I could not even begin to say. Or judge.
Well, actually, I think that this author is judging…as am I. If there was a way to get the kid to the safe room, I’m guessing he would have, right? If he callously left her…what the hell? But of course, there’s more to the story.
From the Guardian article:
“Those minutes were horrible,” Westergaard recalled yesterday. “But I think I have got through this fairly well – and so, it seems, did my grandchild. That, of course, is the main thing. I would not have been able to live with myself if something had happened to her.”
From the outside, Westergaard’s house in Aarhus, Denmark’s second-biggest city, looks like your average suburban home. But according to the cartoonist, it is a “fortress without a moat”, equipped with security cameras and armoured windows. Living under the constant threat of revenge, he has always had to take precautions when leaving his home – visits to the gym, for example, could not be at predictable hours, so he would change his schedule every week. He carries a personal alarm and tracking device everywhere, and every day a police car would escort him to and from his work at Denmark’s biggest-selling daily newspaper.
Makes me think the above blogger wants to note the cartoonist’s hypocrisy…he’s not all that brave. While she also omits that this guy is being hounded by radical Muslims every day because of a cartoon.
Can we focus on the closed-mindedness here? Imagine, say, that the cartoon was about Jesus and years later the cartoonist had to have a police escort and a tracking device and a safe room.
It’s called perspective liberals. While you kvetch about his cowardice leaving his grand-daughter in the living room–something, I too, question–you also ignore the constant, relentless threat he lives under for being an artist who dared poke fun of the Religion of Peace. The real story is that a couple years later, psychotic Muslims aren’t enlightened enough to endure criticism of their religion and then reinforce all stereotypes of a barbaric religion by being barbaric. (Ya gotta admit, an axe is pretty barbaric, no?)
It’s also getting more difficult to ignore the Religion of Peace when their extremist adherents are trying to blow up planes on Christmas. Oh yes, they respect other religions as much as they endure insults to their own.
So, until Islam goes through a reformation, focus your ire where it belongs: On the psychotic people unwilling to embrace enlightened values like tolerance and love and peace. You know, all those things John Lennon liked to imagine. It’s not the Christians conducting a jihad, here. They’re making difficult choices like whether they have time to pull their five year old granddaughter into the safe room without getting them both killed by an ax-wielding Muslim or trying to not get blown up on their plane home on Christmas.
Thomas Freidman Admits There’s An Anti-American Narrative, He Just Let’s Himself Off The Hook
Sunday, November 29th, 2009Wow. After you get past the shock that a liberal admits there is an anti-American narrative, chew on the fact that the liberal Thomas Friedman still can’t admit how his own ideology feeds and nourishes the anti-American narrative:
Have no doubt: we punched a fist into the Arab/Muslim world after 9/11, partly to send a message of deterrence, but primarily to destroy two tyrannical regimes — the Taliban and the Baathists — and to work with Afghans and Iraqis to build a different kind of politics. In the process, we did some stupid and bad things. But for every Abu Ghraib, our soldiers and diplomats perpetrated a million acts of kindness aimed at giving Arabs and Muslims a better chance to succeed with modernity and to elect their own leaders.
The Narrative was concocted by jihadists to obscure that.
It’s working. As a Jordanian-born counterterrorism expert, who asked to remain anonymous, said to me: “This narrative is now omnipresent in Arab and Muslim communities in the region and in migrant communities around the world. These communities are bombarded with this narrative in huge doses and on a daily basis. [It says] the West, and right now mostly the U.S. and Israel, is single-handedly and completely responsible for all the grievances of the Arab and the Muslim worlds. Ironically, the vast majority of the media outlets targeting these communities are Arab-government owned — mostly from the Gulf.”
This narrative suits Arab governments. It allows them to deflect onto America all of their people’s grievances over why their countries are falling behind. And it suits Al Qaeda, which doesn’t need much organization anymore — just push out The Narrative over the Web and satellite TV, let it heat up humiliated, frustrated or socially alienated Muslim males, and one or two will open fire on their own. See: Major Hasan.
Let’s see, Bush is evil. The elevation of Abu Grahib. Newsweek publishing the flushed Koran accounts and Friedman is putting the blame on the Arab press?
You have got to be kidding me.
I’m not as inclined to let Friedman off the hook as Don Surber. This back pedaling looks a lot like a subtle defense of President Obama the day before he pushes the surge in Afghanistan. Asking for more troops on the backdrop of losing more troops, seems a lot like justification to me.
And it’s charity Friedman and the liberal elites would never have extended to George Bush. And, by the way, it doesn’t take a freaking genius to know that Hasan is a terrorist. It’s rather self-evident.
Andrew In The Sky Of Diamonds
Thursday, November 19th, 2009Conservative authors have said that Liberalism Is A Mental Disorder and Andrew Sullivan has made me a believer. He is Exhibit A: hallucinating his way through a serious case of Sarah Palin hate. But Andrew Sullivan is only the most shriekingly obvious deranged lib. The mainstream media [Newsweek, NBC, WaPo] makes itself look even more addled and irrelevant with the way they treat Sarah Palin.
Doc Zero over at HotAir’s Greenroom (who is this incredible writer?!) says this:
The media has treated Palin’s book like the mirrored scroll from “Kung Fu Panda”: every reviewer sees themselves reflected in its pages. Imagine a mainstream news magazine trying to portray any liberal woman as a lightweight, by using a photo of her in running shorts to tease its review of her major new book. Running a book review by someone who admits to skipping the last third of the book is not an insult to Sarah Palin, who was not writing for an audience of lazy media hacks. It’s an insult to the audience… including liberal readers of the Washington Post with the intellectual clarity to desire an understanding of those who eagerly devoured every single page. Palin is a phenomenon, and honest liberals would be well-advised to read her work and understand her appeal, just as conservatives should read “Dreams From My Father” to understand the mind of Bill Ayers.
The careless, sloppy disdain of the Left’s reaction to “Going Rogue” is almost as strong an argument for Palin’s politics as anything contained within its pages. The absolute lack of care and competence from the government that ran up a $12 trillion national debt is astonishing. Months of dithering over Afghanistan strategy, with American troops under fire, ends with a painfully unqualified Commander-in-Chief wailing that he wants a new set of options. The politicization of national defense ends in the absurd spectacle of a civilian trial for illegal enemy combatants… subcontracting national security to trial lawyers, and a randomly-selected pool of 12 people who never heard of 9/11.
He continues. You must read the whole thing.
The liberal establishment can barely contain their contempt for the average American life. Common sense is scorned in favor of high-minded theories. The bitterness coming from the left will only increase as President Obama, Congress and the SEIU enforcers put into place their liberal utopia and it fails utterly (as it is doomed to do because liberal policy is all theoretical and ignores little truths like self-interest and human nature).
Liberals will look, act and sound like tripping LSD Dead Head groupies as President Obama and the Democrats in Congress fail. Liberals will see things that aren’t there. Reality will cease to have meaning for them. It’s already happening. Andrew Sullivan is only the first of many to completely lose rational thought in the face of abject ideological failure.
The fresh conservative breeze Sarah Palin represents blows all those theories away. Sarah Palin stands on reality. God, family, country. Baseball, hotdogs, apple pie and …. well, Honda, I guess. She’s a “bitter clinger”. She’s prays. She births. She runs. She works. She’s the average American that libs don’t want to believe exist. And yet, there she is in all her glory. And in the face of normal, the left has come completely unhinged–ranting, skin crawling, tripping their way to a complete psychotic break.
Andrew Sullivan is only the first and most obvious. This will get worse.
The Tough Liberal: NY Is A-OK With Being A Terrorist Target–Updated
Monday, November 16th, 2009Glenn Greenwald and his sock puppet said this on Twitter today, articulating, the self-congratulatory meme within the leftosphere:
RT @AnonLib “Strange that being ‘tough on terror’ = publicly soiling yourself at thought of being in same state as an imprisoned terrorist”
Newsflash lefties: You can’t have it both ways. Either these guys are scary dudes wanting to kill everyone and have buddies wanting to do the same or they’re hapless criminals who aren’t terrorists at all–they’re just misunderstood criminals. If it’s the latter, there’s no reason to be concerned which really means only a lame-o would be afraid. Therefore, you can’t claim extraordinary courage and bravery out of one side of your mouth, while diminishing the threat of these hardly-dangerous petty criminals out of the other side.
At least people who see terrorists for what they are–homocidal maniacs driven by psychotic ideology–rationally see the implicit threat to other innocent Americans, too. It is not cowardly to note a threat and protect the innocent from it. It is smart.
Sending KSM and his terrorist minions to New York City doesn’t demonstrate the lefts’ bravery, it demonstrates their stupidity. They would put innocent citizens at risk while costing the state millions. Oh yeah, brave.
UPDATED:
And this goes for you, too.
UPDATED AGAIN:
Brian Faugham notes that Mike Lupica has turned against the terrorist transfer to NY for civilian trial:
Is it truly so hard to see – as Lupica does – that Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is getting exactly what he wants – the attention of the world as he mounts his own defense? Recall: the first thing Mohammed said after his capture was that he wanted to go to New York to consult with his lawyer. Rather than keeping him buried in a cell, the White House is rewarding him with the show trial of the century – one which will allow KSM to make his case to the entire world. How does this further American interests?
The great irony in this is that this process began when liberals told us that the prison at Guantanamo Bay had to be closed because it was the greatest terror recruiting tool Al Qaeda had ever had. Thanks to Barack Obama and Eric Holder, they’re getting a better one.
And that’s why the libs like Greenwald are so disingenuous. They lick their chops at making Bush look bad and fail to recognize that they kill the country in the process and feed Al Qaeda along the way. Or, maybe they do see those implications and seek the destruction of their own.
Paul Krugman Reveals The Democrats Single-Payer Government Run Health Care Aims
Wednesday, October 21st, 2009Why is Paul Krugman playing so coy this year, when he was so forthcoming during the campaign season? He’s not pushing for a certain outcome is he? According to audio Morgen Richmond of Big Government found, Krugman is actually quite clear about what he wants the Democrats to achieve [audio and much more at link]:
Just a couple of quick points on this. Since I already knew about this hidden agenda, what I found most striking was Krugman’s admission that even without a public option the system would largely look like a single payer system. Based on the subsidies for lower wage earners, and the fact that everyone else is paying for these with taxes on top of their insurance premiums. (And with the bills being discussed in Congress, subsidies are provided up to 300-400% of the federal poverty level).
Also, I should point out that a “Rube Goldberg device”, which Krugman used as a metaphor, is a term for an over-engineered solution to a simple problem. In this case, designed to obscure the solution they are actually looking for, i.e. single payer.
However, the critical point in all of this is the sheer scope of this deception on the part of the Administration – and the media. Paul Krugman and Ezra Klein have been two of the most prominent media advocates for healthcare reform throughout the debate this year. With numerous appearances on television and their blogs at the New York Times and the Washington Post, respectively. And while they are both unabashedly partisan, this should not excuse them from direct and honest reporting. But of course they have not been fully candid, as they were last year, because in doing so they would reveal the dishonesty on the part of the President and his Administration. (Klein has recently added a whole new layer of deceit.)
Any foot in the door will be a way for government to control health care. That’s the goal here. Krugman put it forth last year. He should be as obvious now.
PETA: People For The Ethical Treatment Of Their Own Big Fat Wallets
Thursday, October 15th, 2009What do the PUSH Coalition and PETA have in common besides catchy acronyms? They’re shakedown artists extraordinaire. Over at Big Government, Mary Grabar has an excellent exposé on PETA (whom I’ve written about for Pajamas Media before). Here’s a bit of what she finds:
But as the corporate representative finds himself fending off charges by PETA, PETA may be profiting from donations and business deals with his competitors. For example, PETA on its website discourages supporters from attending the Ringling Brothers Barnum & Bailey Circus; it encouraged them to protest its Denver show on September 29, 2009, for alleged animal cruelty. In 2002, PETA president Ingrid Newkirk and several colleagues reportedly hectored families attending the circus in Savannah. Then, PETA targeted MasterCard for sponsoring the Circus and encouraged supporters to send their cut-up credit cards back to the company. Ringling Brothers spokeswoman Amy McWethy, disputing PETA’s claims of animal cruelty, pointed to the company’s licensing by the USDA under the Animal Welfare Act, open access to visitors and inspectors, and an elephant conservation center that harbors retired Asian elephants and contains the largest herd of the endangered species outside of Southeast Asia. A July 28, 2009, press release on the website claims that the PETA undercover video was “deceptively edited.” McWethy says the partnership with MasterCard was for a limited duration, but PETA claimed in 2004 that their pressure led to MasterCard’s decision to end the program.
MasterCard competitor, Visa, however, offers a PETA credit card that donates one percent of all purchases back to PETA. Visa, furthermore, is a sponsor of the 2010 Winter Olympics, the very same organization that PETA targets as one of its ten prominently displayed “campaigns” for cruelty on its homepage—as it does Barnum and Bailey. The link emblazoned with the Olympics logo leads the visitor to a page that tells him to “urge the Olympic Committee to help end seal slaughter.” Visa also has relationships with other companies whose practices conflict with PETA’s stated mission: the Kentucky Derby, Omaha Steaks, Nine West shoe company, and PETCO (against whom it waged a campaign several years ago).
It’s not about the poor, persecuted pets, it’s about pockebooks and power–PETA’s. PETA is like all the rest of the leftist-grievance exploiters: they want to radically change America to a place where all living things are equal. You, a human, are equal to Fido who is equal to your potted plant who is equal to that roach you just killed. No one is better or worse. No country is better or worse. Etc.
At PETA’s own website, there’s a hilarious post about Iams, the dog food maker, being cruel because, wait for it, they test the food with dogs to see if dogs will like it. PETA does endorse V-dog, though, which is a Vegan dog food ostensibly fed to…dogs. No dog testing though, so I’m guessing eating dog vegan sucks as bad as being a human vegan. How much money does PETA get to endorse V-dog? I’m guessing that it’s enough to not inspire too much curiosity on PETA’s part.
Businesses need to stop caving to these hypocritical crazies. PETA, like all these groups, is about empowerment–their own.
