Tag Archives: liberal hypocrisy

NYT refuses Muhammad cartoon but publishes offensive painting of Virgin Mary in elephant dung

Liberals have a special knack for hypocrisy.

After the January 2015 massacre by Muslim jihadists of 12 staffers of the Paris satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, the New York Times was one of several major print media that refused to reprint a Hebdo cartoon of Muhammad.

Charlie Hebdo Muhammad cartoonCartoon of Muhammad on a 2011 cover of Charlie Hebdo. The quote, in English, is “100 lashes if you are not dying of laughter”.

In an email, a NYT spokesperson explained why:

 Under Times standards, we do not normally publish images or other material deliberately intended to offend religious sensibilities. After careful consideration, Times editors decided that describing the cartoons in question would give readers sufficient information to understand today’s story.

Notwithstanding its professed standards of not publishing images that “deliberately intend to offend religious sensibilities,” on May 29, 2015, in a Scott Reyburn article on the sale of Chris Ofili’s controversial painting “The Holy Virgin Mary,” which shows the Virgin Mary clotted with elephant dung against a porn-collage background, the same New York Times saw fit to publish a photograph of the painting that is offensive to Christians, especially Catholics.

Chris Ofili's blasphemous Virgin Mary painting

Ofili’s 1996 painting caused a furor when it was shown at the Brooklyn Museum in October 1999. The 8 ft. painting of a black Virgin Mary encrusted with a lump of elephant dung, surrounded by collaged bottoms from pornographic magazines, outraged religious leaders and then Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who described the painting as “sick stuff” and tried to close the exhibition by withholding public funds. But Giuliani’s attempt was rejected by a federal judge. The painting was subsequently acquired by Australian entrepreneur David Walsh, who now wants to sell it.

Source: NewsBusters

Chris OfiliChristopher Ofili, 46, was born in Manchester, UK, of Nigerian parents. Wikipedia describes him as a “Turner Prize-winning painter who is best known for his paintings incorporating elephant dung.”

Mary crushes serpent2

 

~Éowyn

Liberal Hypocrisy: 13 homosexual bakeries refuse to bake traditional marriage cake

The Gaystapo are suing — and winning — privately-owned small businesses that decline to bake a same-sex wedding cake or rent their facilities for a same-sex wedding. See:

So Theodore Shoebat, communications director for Rescue Christians, decided to see how tolerant pro-homosexual bakeries are when the shoe is on the other foot.

Surprise! (not)

Of the 13 pro-homosexual bakeries that Shoebat approached, not a single one accepted his request to bake a pro-traditional marriage cake.

liberal hypocrisy

Jennifer LeClaire reports for Charisma News, Dec. 23, 2014, that Shoebat called 13 pro-gay bakeries and asked them if they would bake a cake—or a cookie or even a pie— with the words “gay marriage is wrong” for a traditional marriage appreciation event.

Not one of them would oblige—and at least one of them went on a profane rant about “hypocritical Christians.”

Shoebat says: “The big lie of the homosexual agenda is this: They claim that they are only fighting for equality and tolerance. This is false. What then is their agenda?”

See also:

H/t FOTM’s MomOfIV

~Eowyn

Virginia Democrat wishes Ebola on the NRA

File this in the now-voluminous “Liberals Are Such Nice People” folder.

Mike Dickinson1

See the bald, fat guy with the double chin in the photo above?

He’s Mike Dickinson, a Democrat running for Congress from Richmond, Virginia.

In his “Dickinson For Congress” Twitter bio, he describes himself as:

Left wing liberal and soon to be radio host. Published in Hustler. Seen on Fox news. Written about in major media.

He’s proud to be published in the hard porn mag, Hustler. Good grief.

Hey, Dickinson! You can add this FOTM post to your “written about in major media” bio.

Douglas Barclay reports for Rare that on Aug. 31, 2014, the warm-and-fuzzy oh-so-tolerant “left wing liberal” Dickinson sent out this tweet to his 2,285 Twitter followers, wishing that members of the National Rifle Association be infected with the deadly Ebola virus that has a fatality rate of 60-90%:

Dear god [sic]. Please use Ebola to infect the @NRA and it’s [sic] various members. For they are A (sic) true virus and true terrorists in America.

Mike Dickinson

Not only is the man vicious, he’s also a grammar idiot.

Note to Mike Dickinson:

It’s “its,” not “it’s”!

Earlier this July, dirty-old-man Dickinson had made headlines for offering money for nude photos of 19-year-old Kendall Jones, the Texan cheerleader who hunts exotic wild animals.

Dickinson is not endorsed by the Democrat Party.

H/t Clash Daily

See also these other warm-and-fuzzy oh-so-peaceful leftwing liberals:

~Eowyn

Lucifercare fines charitable hospitals that treat poor people for free

If anyone is still so deluded as to think Obama actually cares about the poor, this should extinguish your delusion for good.

The (un)Affordable Care Act, better known as Obamacare and more truthfully should be called Lucifercare, will fine charitable hospitals that provide healthcare for poor people — for free.

The fines can be as high as $50,000.

After that, Lucifercare — via its minions in the IRS — will remove the nonprofit status from those hospitals. Currently, some 60% of U.S. hospitals are nonprofits.

Of those, a sizeable number are Catholic. 615 Catholic hospitals account for 12.5% of community hospitals in the United States, and over 15.5% of all U.S. hospital admissions.

Last year, it was Chief Justice John Roberts’ siding with the four liberals on the Supreme Court which led to the court’s narrow 5-4 ruling that Lucifercare is a tax and therefore is constitutional. Roberts is a Roman Catholic. I hope you’re happy with yourself, Roberts you POS.

Lucifercare’s fining and hounding-int0-extinction charitable hospitals should tell you, once and for all, that when Obama and all Democrats say they care about the poor, it’s all lip service, otherwise called *Lies*.

What they care about is *POWER*their power.

H/t FOTM’s pnordman and New American

~Eowyn

Fuhrer Obama by Bill DaviesImage by Bill Davies

Patrick Howley reports for The Daily Caller, Aug. 8, 2013:

Charitable hospitals that treat  uninsured Americans will be subjected to new levels of scrutiny of their nonprofit status and could face sizable new fines under Obamacare.

A new provision in Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code, which takes effect under Obamacare, sets new  standards of review and installs new financial penalties for tax-exempt charitable hospitals, which devote a minimum amount of their expenses to treat uninsured poor people. Approximately 60 percent of American hospitals are currently nonprofit.

Charity for the uninsured is one of the factors that could discourage enrollment in Obamacare, which requires all Americans to purchase health insurance or else face new taxes themselves from the IRS.

“It requires tax-exempt hospitals to do a community needs survey and file  additional paperwork with the IRS every three years. This is to prove that the  charitable hospital is still needed in their geographical area — ‘needed’ as defined by Obamacare and overseen by IRS bureaucrats,” said John Kartch, spokesman for Americans for Tax Reform.

“Failure to comply, or to prove this continuing need, could result in the loss of the hospital’s tax-exempt status. The hospital would then become a for-profit venture, paying income tax — hence the positive revenue score” for  the federal government, Kartch said. “Obamacare advocates turned over every rock to find as much tax money as possible.”

Additionally, the rise in the number of insured Americans under Obamacare will make it more difficult for tax-exempt hospitals to continue meeting required thresholds for treating the uninsured, driving more hospitals into the for-profit category and yielding more taxable money for  the federal government.

“The requirements generally apply to any section 501(c)(3) organization that  operates at least one hospital facility,” according to a “Technical Explanation” report of new Obamacare provisions prepared by the congressional Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) on March 21, 2010, the day Obamacare passed.

Obamacare’s new requirements could slam hospitals with massive $50,000 fines if they fail to meet bureaucrats’ standards.

“The hospital must disclose in its annual information report to the IRS  (i.e., Form 990 and related schedules) how it is addressing the needs identified  in the assessment and, if all identified needs are not addressed, the reasons  why (e.g., lack of financial or human resources). Each  hospital facility is required to make the assessment widely available. Failure to complete a community health needs assessment in any applicable three-year  period results in a penalty on the organization of up to $50,000,” according to  the JCT report.

The government is particularly interested in how and why hospitals will be  providing discounted or free care to poor patients, requiring each of them to  “adopt, implement, and widely publicize a written financial assistance policy”  and explain the methods they use to screen applicants for assistance and how  they calculate patients’ bills.

A delegate working under the Department of Health and Human Services must  review the innumerable reports charitable hospitals file every three years, along with copies of their audited financial statements.

After sifting through this massive amount of information, the delegate and HHS secretary must attempt to identify trends in the hospitals’ spending and send in a comprehensive report of their findings to Congress by 2015, according to the JCT report.

Healthcare experts warn that the Obamacare’s new requirements make it almost impossible for charitable hospitals to navigate treacherous new waters.

“Nonprofit hospitals should be advised that the new PPACA requirements will  play a significant role in how they operate and report, specifically when it comes to billing and collections for services provided to the uninsured. The new law leaves many gray areas and hospitals themselves will have to establish eligibility criteria for financial assistance. Following the new procedures as  best they can will ensure the best chance of maintaining their tax exempt status,” wrote D. Douglas Metcalf, partner at the law firm Lewis and Roca, in a 2013 op-ed entitled “Will nonprofit  hospitals disappear under Obamacare?”

The White House did not return a request for comment.

Do it for the starving Washington staffers

This tragic event may trigger a catastrophic run on trust funds. –TD (snark)

wet poodle

This photo deserves a caption contest.

Debbie Wasserman Schultz: Sequester nearly starving staffers

By Cheryl K. Chumley – The Washington Times

Automatic federal cuts are bringing staffers to the brink of starvation, suggested Debbie Wasserman Schultz, at a recent House Legislative Branch Appropriations Subcommittee hearing.

Restaurants on the House side of Congress are increasing in cost so much that aides are being “priced out” of a good meal, she said, as Fox News reported. The comments came by way of a discussion about the impacts of the sequester on lawmakers’ office budgets. Rep. Jim Moran said he may be forced to lay off a staffer — and then Ms. Wasserman Schultz weighed in with her tale of hard times.

Just to clarify: An 8-ounce bowl of Ham and Bean soup at the Cannon Office Building’s carry-out café costs $2. A gourmet wrap or sliced bread sandwich sells for about $5. And in the Longworth Building’s sit-down cafeteria, a serving of stuffed chicken, asparagus and mashed potatoes sells for about $7, Fox News finds.

Meanwhile, Ms. Wasserman Schultz’s staffers earn between $60,000 and $160,000 per year, Fox News reports. 

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/mar/22/debbie-wasserman-schultz-sequester-nearly-starving/#ixzz2OOh1hKkr
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter

Would President Lucifer re-tweet this bloody photo?

Byron Wolf reports for ABC News that last night, the POS’s Twitter account @BarackObama retweeted this picture of John Lennon”s bloody glasses from the day he was murdered.

bloody glasses

The picture was first tweeted by the no-talent insufferable Yoko Ono, who accompanied the pic with text saying that more than a million people have been killed by guns since Lennon was shot in 1980.

The POS’ retweet of the bloody-glasses photo, in turn, was forwarded to his more than 28 million followers.

THEODORE B, a reader of this news on Yahoo!, asks this excellent question:

Imagine a right wing conservative tweeting a picture of bloody instruments used in an abortion and what the media would say about it?

An even better question is:

Since President Lucifer is so against murder, would he ever re-tweet this picture?

8-week-aborted-fetus

~Eowyn

Dianne “gun-ban” Feinstein wants you to know she’s not a 6th grader

Yesterday, during a committee hearing in the U.S. Senate on gun control legislation, newly elected Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and long-time Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) engaged in a heated exchange over the constitutionality of her proposed bill, Assault Weapons Ban of 2013, to ban “assault weapons” that include more than 150 rifles, shotguns, and handguns.

By far the most ambitious of and just like the gun-control bills introduced across the United States in the wake of the Sandy Hook massacre, Feinstein’s bill exempts government officials (including Congress, of course), law enforcement and retired law enforcement personnel.

At yesterday’s hearing, Sen. Cruz questioned the constitutionality of new gun laws: “It seems to me that all of us should begin, as our foundational document, with the Constitution. And the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights provides that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Cruz went on to expound on the phrase “the right of the people,” its origins and its prolific use by the Founding Fathers in a number of Constitutional provisions, including the First and Fourth Amendments.

To that, Feinstein huffily replied: “I’m not a sixth grader.” Blah. Blah. Blah.

Like another Democrat senator, Chucky Schumer, Feinstein carries a concealed weapon and is also protected by armed police escorts, although she has plenty of moolah to hire her own body guards. One of the 10 wealthiest members of Congress, Feinstein reported a net worth of between $46 million and $108.1 million in 2010, according to financial disclosures.

Feinstein’s investment-banker husband Richard Blum was on the Board of Directors of Current TV and had facilitated the $500 million sale of Al Gore’s failing TV network to Al Jazeera.

The Hollywood Reporter reports that according to a lawsuit filed by John Terenzio, who claims it was his idea to sell to Al Jazeera but he was cut out of the lucrative deal, Gore at first was reluctant to sell to Al Jazeera but was persuaded by Blum. Feinstein’s husband pushed for the sale because “he and other Current investors were concerned about the prospect of losing their shirts in the financially troubled Current.”

As the spouse of a powerful senior U.S. senator, some of Blum’s lucrative business dealings have been questioned for potential conflicts-of-interest. From Wikipedia:

Blum’s wife, Senator Dianne Feinstein, has received scrutiny due to her husband’s government contracts and extensive business dealings with China and her past votes on trade issues with the country. Blum has denied any wrongdoing, however Critics have argued that business contracts with the US government awarded to a company (Perini) controlled by Blum may raise a potential conflict-of-interest issue with the voting and policy activities of his wife. URS Corp, which Blum had a substantial stake in, bought EG&G, a leading provider of technical services and management to the U.S. military, from The Carlyle Group in 2002; EG&G subsequently won a $600m defense contract.

In 2009 it was reported that Blum’s wife Sen. Dianne Feinstein introduced legislation to provide $25 billion in taxpayer money to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp, a government agency that had recently awarded her husband’s real estate firm, CB Richard Ellis, what the Washington Times called “a lucrative contract to sell foreclosed properties at compensation rates higher than the industry norms.”

Hey, Dianne Feinstein.

At age 79, you are most certainly not a sixth-grader. But I doubt there’s even ONE sixth-grader in all of America who’s as hypocritical as you!

H/t FOTM’s CSM

~Eowyn