It's Called "Freedom of Speech"

Someone wrote into FactCheck.org to start the rumor that the Obama's were not invited to Prince William's wedding because the royals were afraid that Michelle Obama would upstage Kate Middleton. 

Yeah right. This lady...

is going to upstage this lady...

Ya gotta hand it to the Obamabots though.  If they see any chance that their lord and master, or even his wife, is going to be dissed in any way at all, then they are on the attack.  There are plenty of reasons that the Obamas might not be invited (though they likely will be invited).  First and foremost, could be the many insults Obama has given to the Brits.  Maybe William took them to heart, and has decided that his wedding need not include someone who has insulted his country, his Prime Minister and his grandmother.

But really, to think that the Obamas might not be invited because Michelle would upstage Kate?  Laughable. 

The countdown now begins.  With DADT repealed, by this coming summer, there will be at least one suit pending in federal court where a gay servicemember (doesn't matter, male or female) that was married in a state that has legalized gay marriage will have joined the service and been denied either "with dependent" pay or housing. 

The regulations mention nothing at all about the spouse needing to be of the opposite sex.  So the suit will be legitimate, and the federal courts will require that the services provide the same benefits for the gay couple that they provide for married couples who are not gay.  This is a very good backdoor way to get the federal government to recognize gay marriage, and there won't be a thing anyone can do about it. 

The law of unintended consequences will strike the 111th Congress once again. 

The shooting in Arizona, as tragic as it is, illustrates one point precisely. 

When the progressives were using violent rhetoric, including calls to kill Bush, there wasn't one single conservative calling for the elimination of free speech, including theirs. 

When the shooting occured in Arizona, the progressives have called for elimination of the First Amendment in so far as it protects free speech for conservatives.  Even though they cannot site one single piece of evidence that the shooter was provoked by conservative speech, they still think that the First Amendment needs to be quashed.  For conservatives only, of course. 

There isn't a better example of the differences between progressives and conservatives.  We conservatives believe that the Constitution is a bedrock of our society and our greatness and applies to every citizen in America.  Progressives believe that the Constitution is simply a 200 year old piece of paper that doesn't really mean anything at all.

Just asking.  Does anyone have any Democrat Party politician or official on record stating that the heated rhetoric needed to be toned down when their base was calling for the assassination of George Bush, or claiming that anyone who opposed Obama was a racist?

To every single Leftist fuckwad like Kos, Sullivan, Krugman....hell, every single one of them, that wants to try to claim that right-wing hysteria is causing violence, I show this picture of Leftists in action. 

These are Leftists, inciting (well, hoping to incite) violence.  Not just misunderstood words that have a double meaning like "target".  Out and out murder.  There has been nothing, on any conservative site, that would match this incitement to murder.  When this picture was taken, I was an Army Officer, so I kinda take this personal.  When these shitbags marched with this sign, my best friends were, and many still are, Army Officers.  When these Leftists were demanding that soldiers kill their officers, my wife was and now still is, and Army Officer.  So to the Leftards who are now claiming that the rhetoric is getting a bit too heated: FUCK YOU, you slimy shitbags.  The day I read any of you fuckwads claiming that these fellow travelers of yours are also using rhetoric that is too heated is the day I think you are even capable of knowing what heated political rhetoric is.  Until then, go fuck yourself. 

Arizona Rep Gabrielle Giffords has been shot in Tucson, AZ. Without a second thought, or a prayer for her and her family (no belief in God, so no need) liberals are already trying to make political hay.  Some retard writing on Althouse's blog says:

Can we please drop the hysteria now? All the "reload," drawing targets on people, describing opponents as traitors, all of it that we've heard for years. Just STFU already.

It would be interesting to find out how many times AlphaLiberal, the one who wrote the above, wrote anything at all like that during the eight years that Leftards were saying, writing, preaching, wishing death on President Bush. 

My guess is that like all Liberals, he's (she's?) full of bullshit.  That he never once complained about his fellow travelers who daily screamed for Bush's assassination.  Now that some whacked-out leftist decided to kill a Democrat, he's all upset about a Sarah Palin ad that ran months and months ago and never once mentioned killing anyone.  So to recap: liberals who demand the assassination of George Bush = patriots who are just using their First Amendment rights.  Convservative politicians who use terms like "reload" = hysterical nuts who are getting people killed and need to STFU.  First Amendment be damned. 

Got it.  Liberals can't see the inherent evil in muslims who hang explosives around their body, then explode them when they are on a bus full of kids with the intent to kill as many children as possible.  But they can see evil in anyone who simply has a political disagrement with them.  Isn't that about it, AlphaLiberal?