Truth Before Dishonor

I would rather be right than popular

“Crazy” Larry is at it again

Posted by Hube on 2011/10/07


… about “sitting on the sidelines” during the nascent civil rights movement in the 50s and early 60s … forgetting that he admitted he does precisely the same thing for the reason Cain’s father told Cain. Check it:

Where do you think black people would be sitting on the bus today if Rosa Parks had followed your father’s advice [for Herman not to make trouble if told to sit in the back of the bus; my note, Cain was 9 years old at the time of Parks’ act of defiance.]

You watched black college students from around the country and white college students from around the country come to the south and be murdered, fighting for the rights of African-Americans; do you regret sitting on the sidelines at that time?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

So, Crazy Larry chides Mr. Cain, yet admitted himself that he doesn’t criticize radical Muslims like he should … because he fears for his life:

HUGH HEWITT: Would you say the same things about Mohammed as you just said about Joseph Smith?

O’DONNELL: Oh, well, I’m afraid of what the…that’s where I’m really afraid. I would like to criticize Islam much more than I do publicly, but I’m afraid for my life if I do.

HEWITT: Well, that’s candid.

O’DONNELL: Mormons are the nicest people in the world. They’re not going to ever…

HEWITT: So you can be bigoted towards Mormons, because they’ll just send you a strudel.

O’DONNELL: They’ll never take a shot at me. Those other people, I’m not going to say a word about them.

Nothing like an admitted socialist like O’Donnell lecturing a black man on what he “should have done” during the civil rights movement when he was a minor and a young college student (because, in part, he feared violence), yet is afraid to do his job as an adult because he fears for his life.

What a sanctimonious hypocritical a-hole.

About these ads

5 Responses to ““Crazy” Larry is at it again”

  1. DNW said

    Regarding MSNBC commentator Lawrence O’Donnell’s willingness to publicly abuse LDS types, while closeting his secret hatred of the Koran …and his antagonism toward Muslims

    “O’DONNELL: They’ll never take a shot at me. Those other people, I’m not going to say a word about them.”

    Gee, why is this not at all surprising? Liberals that is, shi**ing on some of those they will eventually expect to save them from others they despise just as much, but fear more.

    It makes me wonder what would happen if one of Larry’s fellow socialists decided to place a counterfeit web site bearing Larry’s name up on the internet, just like they did with yours, and then “reveal” that Larry O’Donnell has lined his gerbil cage with pages torn from the Koran.

    Sounds unlikely doesn’t it.

    Like

  2. Dana Pico said

    I sat on the sidelines, too, in the 1950s and 1960s . . . when I was a minor.

    I have never, ever, been in a protest march, nor do I ever see myself in one. I didn’t march for civil rights, I didn’t march against the Vietnam War, and I didn’t join the TEA Party protests.

    But one thing I do, without fail, is to vote! I wonder just how many of the idiots concerned individuals in the occupy Wall Street protests actually vote regularly?

    Like

  3. scatback said

    “Sanctimonious,” “self-righteous,” and “hypocritical” are all splendid adjectives for the left. 1 dept. where I will give Crazy Larry credit, though, is his refusal to use the grossly inaccurate term for himself and his ilk. You know – the 1 that is also the name of an auto insurer.

    Like

  4. Heh, that’s a good point there, Scatback. O’Donnell refuses to call himself a “Progressive” when in fact all “Progressives” are socialist.

    Like

  5. AOTC said

    these leftists have fallen into the ‘black hole’ of the moral universe. unfortunately, they plan to take the rest of us down the wormhole with them. over time they have changed foundational definitions and fed their ‘new meaning’ to the culture at large. their brand of lawlessness, if left to increase, will void any lawful attempt sane people use to maintain order. when they have the power to void civic law the same way they have voided moral law, chaos is all that remains. except for a few places on the globe, i think we are already there.

    the tactic they use to force peoples of religious morality and virtue to follow their own rules yet not care if the leftist themselves follow them , is the exact same tactic being used with political and civic matters. they dont have to follow any rule, not even one proclaimed by them, much less one they goad you into following. its a trick.

    lawlessness… even if you do not believe in a literal devil, you have to agree the definition the old texts use to describe the devil, chaos, lawlessness, hatred, greed, envy, (the antithesis of love) surely look a lot like what we seen presently overtaking culture. the leftists looked to lucifer’s example and tactics to fulfill their ends, ala, alinsky’s conclusions.

    here is an ironic clue. they found their tactics in the very same texts that explains how they will be defeated. no wonder they have gone to amazing lengths to obscure and discredit it.

    Like

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 233 other followers

%d bloggers like this: