Libtards don’t know history, from Sister Toldjah: [1]
This is absolutely positively too priceless for words. In a speech to Tea Party supporters in Nevada on Monday [2], Sarah Palin told the crowd that they shouldn’t “party like it’s 1773? just yet (via [3]):
Seeking to channel the sign-bearing, flag-waving enthusiasm of the “tea party” movement into ballot-box victories, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin told hundreds of supporters Monday they couldn’t “party like it’s 1773? until Washington was flooded with like-minded conservatives.
“I can see November from my house!” said Palin in a self-deprecating call to action that had been reprinted on buttons.
Prominent liberals like Markos Moulitsas and others [4] hilariously jumped all over what they believed to be a “Palin gaffe” – thinking perhaps she meant 1776.
Er, wrong.
Or the Constitution, from Daily Caller [5]:
The Delaware Republican [Christine O’Donnell] running for the U.S. Senate asked Coons, her Democratic opponent, “Where in the Constitution is the separation of church and state?” during Tuesday’s debate. Listen to the audio of the debate here [6].
She was mocked in subsequent news reports after Coons pointed out the First Amendment clause that says Congress [7] “shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”
The words “separation of church and state” can be traced back to Thomas Jefferson, but are not written in the Constitution.
Asked if there are law experts who reject that the concept of “separation of church and state” is reflected in the constitution, Susan Low Bloch, a professor of law at the Georgetown University Law Center, said, “I don’t think so.”
Oh libtards may think their favorite pet phrase “separation of church and state” is contained in the Constitution. Actually the phrase is attributable to Thomas Jefferson. What the First Amendment actually dose is preclude Congress from establishing an official state religion, analogous to the Church of England, but that is too much to expect Chris Coons to actually know that.
Or women, from a befuddled MSNBC, video:
Commentary from a clearly peeved LauraW, Ace of Spades [8]:
Now, you might think most MSNBC contributors are retards, and you would be correct. However, this marks a moment of personal development for these snot-drooling imbeciles. Although they have sailed past RealityLand once again (where women join and lead the Tea Party FOR THE SAME REASONS EVERYBODY ELSE DOES), they’re getting closer.
They sense somehow, some way, that this must have something to do with money, and that people think about money, and came up with “Eureka! Women must be having thoughts about money.”
And they did not accuse us of being three-toothed trailer-livin’ cousin-kissin’ chicken-rapin’ redneck hilbilly racists. For once.
The LSM coming Dononvan McNabb moment. Noemie Emery, Weekly Standard [9], details the coming crash of the paper mache facade, to wit Barack Obama, so painstakingly contructed by the media:
It better be out there, for the alternative is much too depressing. He’s your ideal, and if he fails, it means that the things that you value—the smoothness, the snark, the verbal facility, the elevation of talk as against thought and action, the veneer of worldliness; the right schools, the right clothes, the right frame of reference; the nuance; the sophistication—that these things are, in the real world, not all that important.
Hat tip: Clarice Feldman, American Thinker [10].