From Conception...To Election

"Preventing an individual with plural loyalties, whether by biological, political or geographic origins, which may present lawful or perceptable doubt as to his allegiances thereof, other than one with the fullmost sovereignty of advanced citizenry, which is that of one who remains Natural-born from conception to election, from assuming the great power of this fragile office, was, without tolerance or vulnerability, the exaction of purpose of our fathers to induce the mandate of presidential eligibility upon our blood-ransomed Constitution..." Pen Johannson ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------.

Thursday, June 25, 2009

Silly Democrats....The Difference Is Clinton Lied About It

by Danny Crosby

When South Carolina Governor, Mark Sanford took the podium today, he knew he had some explaining to do. And, despite the pressure from historical examples by his liberal counterparts, under similar circumstances, to become an even worse reprobate by lying, Sanford explained with all the honesty and forthright disclosure that one should in his precarious situation.

Perhaps, he even gave us a little too much information. But, we understand why. Its better for him in the long run, and for his place in history, to be honest from the very start.

Given the hordes of perverted liberal stone casters poised at the city gate, Mark Sanford could have turned a personal mistake into a public catastrophe. Instead, he will suffer the private consequences of a lost marriage and, thankfully, only incoherent ridicule from the miscreant, sin-sniffing residue on the left.

The rest of us accept his apology and explanation for whatever responsibility he felt was necessary to own on our behalf.

But, more importantly, as the degenerates of the liberal media celebrate the destruction of Sanford and his family, pathetically using him as a microcosmic target for accusations of hypocrisy against the entire 60 million membership of the Republican Party, convenient dissonance rules the liberal festivities.

Seeking a license for their perversion and chronic lack of morality throughout human history, the liberal establishment is attacking Sanford because of his conservatism, not because of his mistake. Liberals love it when decent people make the occasional moral mistake. It actually makes them feel like valid members of society in spite of their perennial degeneracy. Conservatives may step in holes once in a while, but everone knows that liberals actually live in them.

Now that Sanford has come forth and confessed his mistake, the radical left is trying to draw righteous justification for their bad behavior out of the way Republicans treated the Clinton/Lewinsky scandal of the 1990's to expose Sanford and his party, as hypocrites.

However, liberals fail miserably to realize their sadistic fetish for the destruction of the "Good" political party when they conveniently deny the facts about the two cases. This divergence from reason has become a blueprint for most cases of infidelity and perversion by liberals.

If Democrat politicians spent half as much time solving problems as they did looking for faults in their political opponents, they might actually find themselves worthy of the current position to which they have been elected. Afterall, they love to justify their current endowment of power under the guise they must possess the criteria for the kind of change America wants. But, unfortunately, for the delusional left, the election of democrats was not an affirmation of what they are as much as it was an detraction from what they are not. Democrats were merely the only other option, not the actual solution.

Liberals have a very difficult time understanding that America needs change based on the principles of decency, righteousness, truth and justice...........not just change that comes from "not being George Bush". You actually have to make an affirmative difference to fulfill the credibility of winning an election. Otherwise you are merely a place holder until the right leadership returns home.

First of all, the problem America had with Clinton was not so much the idea of his sexual exploitation of a subordinate.......during business the offices of a municipally funded facility.....universally held as the symbol of American responsibility and leadership.....painted white by our founders for reasons only a liberal could possibly soil. The problem America had with Bill Clinton's adultery with Monica Lewinsky was that the idiot lied about it......multiple times.

Not only did Clinton lie about his affair with Lewinsky to the press, and the American people for 7 months, he carried that lie into the American legal system when he misled a grand jury about the nature of his relationship with Lewinsky.

Clinton was summarily impeached for obstructing justice and lying under oath.......not having an affair.

But, if gutter reasoning is justification for such comparisons, at least Sanford's mistress was attractive.

At least he cheated up.

Conservatives not only give the best, most authentic, confessions, they even make better mistakes that are far closer to "worth it". Not to mention, at least Sanford was decent enough to cheat with an anonymous foreigner on his own her place. Contrarily, liberal politicians can't seem to be perverts anywhere except in places, and during schedules, where American tax money provides them with cover......physically, politically and figuratively.

Yet, liberal idiocy loves to caterwaul about hypocrisy along political lines when a rare indescretion by a Republican raises an infrequent headline. They love to parrot the tired line about the personalized nature of a sexual affair, and how it is something that is no one else's business.

But, the funny thing about the liberal take on Clinton is that if they truly believe that sexual indescretion is harmless, and that it is a personal matter that the public has no right to criticize him for, then why can't they explain why he lied about it?

It was harmless, right? Then why lie about it? Why did Clinton, one of history's most renowned liberals, choose to lie about something that was harmless and nobody else's business?

Enter Mark Sanford.

Welcome to "Confessions By Government Officials 101." Biased members of the liberal media need to take notes, and please try to keep up.

1. Be humble

This requires character, so we can't expect too much from liberals. But, when Sanford stood in front of the American people today, he was humble when he confessed his indescretion. He did not lie about it. He did not posture like a requisite liberal tool would, in front of lights and microphones, with a wagging finger, excoriating the press and public for having the audacity to think he had actually done something wrong. As if we were the idiots.

And, because of this, Mark Sanford will be forgiven for his personal mistake, in the political world. Clinton will not.

2. Tell The Truth.....Duh!

Let's do a comparison, shall we?

We all remember the line that defines Bill Clinton's legacy:

"I did not have sexual relations with that woman.....Ms. Lewinsky."

Well........uh........actually, yes, he did have sexual relations with that woman. Now, let's look at Sanford's coming out with the media.

"I have been unfaithful to my wife....."

Now, which one is the truth?

Bill Clinton went from being merely an idiotic, perhaps more forgivable, adulterer to an evil, cowardly, contriving, condemned liar in the time it took him to vomit 10 pathological words.

Sanford made no such attempt to insult his witnesses. And, history has a short memory when politicians make the right choice to be honest under pressure. We eventually remember the courage it takes to tell the truth when circumstances tell us to lie.

Clinton was a coward. Sanford was not.

3. Don't Make Public Mountains Out Of Private Mole Hills

Bill Clinton forfeited his credibility when he allowed the Lewinsky affair to advance to the next level by lying about it in the public media realm. If he had been as open and truthful as Sanford, he would have never been called before a grand jury, where the stakes are raised and pressure increases to lie again.

The bigger the penalty, the harder it becomes to tell the truth. So, its better to tell the truth when the penalty is the smallest. And, traditionally, it seems conservatives, not liberals, are intelligent enough to know when the penalty for lying is greater than the penalty for their indescretion.

If Mark Sanford was supoened before a grand jury to give account, he would tell the truth because he understands the penalty for telling the truth now is less than the penalty for lying later. Bill Clinton was far too conceited, too liberal, too cowardly, and too stupid to understand this.

Exposed by far more instances of infidelity and illicit sexual behavior, liberals look desperate for justification when they attempt to justify the repulsive behavior of Democrats by pointing at the rare bad decisions of decent Republicans. Especially when they deny their conviction after turning the personal mole hill into a public mountain of legal ramifications because of their dishonesty.

Its not like they are never given the chance to tell the truth.

4. When Throwing Stones, At Least Hit The Correct Target For God's Sake

Its easy to mock Republicans for an occasional slip into the gutter when those heckling them live there. Besides, conservatives understand the human propensity for indescretion in times of passion. But, the difference they have with liberals is that they understand its more honorable to be accused of being a hypocrite by notorious degenerates than to have never been righteous in the first place.

Its easy for liberals to yelp, "Hypocrite!!" because they have never had the responsibility that goes with being decent to begin with.

Here endeth the lesson.

No comments:

Post a Comment