Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Standing Up for Senator Larry Craig and the "Wide Stance"

Those of you who can still stand getting your news from the liberal media have probably seen reports that Idaho's Senator Larry Craig is being unfairly targetted by the press because of a simple misunderstanding in Minnesota (a known bastion of socialism). While I'm not surprised that the normal collection of socialists is unconstitutionally calling for Sen. Craig to be forced from office, I'm disappointed to see several Patriots (like Adam Graham, Clayton Cramer, Bryan Fischer, and Halli) falling for Speaker Pelosi's obvious plan to force this honorable man from office so she can appoint someone like Liberal Larry Grant to take his place in the Senate. These Patriots should have followed the advice of Idaho's Head Patriot, Congressman Bill Sali, who said through his spokesman: "It is prudent to not rush to judgment, to give Sen. Craig an opportunity to respond and to give him the benefit of the doubt."

It seems like a lot of people are rushing to judgment without applying any logic. If you think about it, you'll see clearly that these charges that Senator Craig is some sort of pole-smoking turd burglar must be completely fabricated. Consider this: Senator Craig is married. Since married men have sex with women, it follows logically that they don't have sex with men. This in and of itself is enough to show that Senator Larry Craig doesn't have a hankerin' for some anonymous slab of man-meat tickling his Senatorial tonsils.

Senator Craig explained most eloquently today why he had to mislead the socialist judge in Minnesota by signing a plea petition saying he knew he was guilty when in fact he was innocent of the charges. The reason, as all right-thinking people already knew, was that the media (clearly working under Pelosi's orders) forced him to do it! By investigating earlier claims of knob gobbling by Senator Craig and asking him about them, the socialist reporters of the Idaho Socialist Statesman left Sen. Craig with no choice but to investigate the world of depravity they claimed he was part of, if only to be better able to disprove their charges later. Even if it turns out that Sen. Craig did at some point engage in some cock-thirsty gloryholing as part of his research, it was clearly only because of the suggestions from the reporters that he learn to appreciate that lifestyle.

Many people have criticized Senator Craig for his explanation that he was only touching the foot of the undercover policeman because he takes a "wide stance" in the toilet. I find this highly believable, because I, too, find that a wide stance gives me more leverage in getting out the really stubborn turds. Since Senator Craig is an older guy, I bet it's even more of a problem for him. So, it really comes down to the word of the Senator vs. the arresting officer. What do we really know about his truthfulness, anyway? Is he really a police officer?

Here's a picture of the "officer" in question:

And here's a picture of actor/singer Kirby Heyborne:

I think you can tell that it's fairly apparent what really happened. Speaker Pelosi, wanting to get back at Congressman Bill Sali for standing up to her so effectively, hired an actor to falsely accuse Sali's ally Senator Craig of attempted rump rangering, and then had her minions spike Sen. Craig's food with drugs to make him plead guilty. It's the only logical explanation!

I have complete faith that, with Bill Sali's help, Senator Larry Craig will come through this ordeal stronger than he ever was, and will continue to stand up - with a wide stance - for Idaho values in the Senate and its restrooms. And, even if he doesn't survive politically and ends up resigning, that would just mean that Bill Sali will be able to win election to his seat in 2008 and will have even more power than he does now. Pelosi's plans are thwarted again!

P.S. (September 6) Thanks to everyone who's come to see my blog because on my defense of the great American Senator Larry Craig, including readers from HuckleBerries Online. (I didn't know if the guy who writes that blog, "DFO", is a Pro-Sali Patriot or Anti-Sali Socialist, so I made a new category for him.) Also welcome to everyone who has come here from Google searches; I seem to get a lot of people looking for information on "cock-thirsty gloryholing" for some reason.

If you'd like to read the rest of my blog about how Congressman Bill Sali is defending American Christian Values by standing up to Speaker Pelosi, please read my main page.

Friday, August 10, 2007

Bill Sali Speaks the Truth to Pelosi's Power

Congressman Bill Sali, the most stalwart defender of American values in the godless Democrat-controlled Congress, is once again standing up to Pelosi and her plan to destroy America through demanding Hindu prayers in the Senate and ordering the election of Muslims to the House.

In a recent radio interview, Congressman Bill Sali spoke out against the dangerous precedent of allowing a non-Christian into Congress in any capacity.

"Last month, the U.S. Senate was opened for the first time ever with a Hindu prayer. Although the event generated little outrage on Capitol Hill, Representative Bill Sali (R-Idaho) is one member of Congress who believes the prayer should have never been allowed.
"We have not only a Hindu prayer being offered in the Senate, we have a Muslim member of the House of Representatives now, Keith Ellison from Minnesota. Those are changes -- and they are not what was envisioned by the Founding Fathers," asserts Sali.
Sali says America was built on Christian principles that were derived from scripture. He also says the only way the United States has been allowed to exist in a world that is so hostile to Christian principles is through "the protective hand of God."
"You know, the Lord can cause the rain to fall on the just and the unjust alike," says the Idaho Republican.
According to Congressman Sali, the only way the U.S. can continue to survive is under that protective hand of God. He states when a Hindu prayer is offered, "that's a different god" and that it "creates problems for the longevity of this country."

Congressman Sali started standing up for God and America when he refused to take the oath of office on the Koran. Now, as Bryan Fischer of the Idaho Values Alliance points out, Hindus and Muslims really don't fit in with America.

"Hindus believe in a virtually infinite number of gods and worship cows, monkeys and snakes, while our Founding Fathers believed in one God, the Creator God revealed in the Old and New Testaments.
We pledge allegiance to “one nation under God,” not to “one nation under gods.” Quite simply, Hindus, who of course are free in America to worship as many gods and animals as they would like, do not pray to or worship the God who is enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.
Rep. Sali recognizes that congressional invocations are not just ceremonial in nature, but substantive. They are one of the crucial ways in which our leaders seek the favor of the same God who granted us such signal blessings at the time of our founding and for over 200 years since.
And Congressman Sali’s caution with regard to Islam and public policy is wise. When you examine nations whose public institutions have been shaped by Islamic politicians, you find no freedom of religion, no freedom of speech, no freedom of conscience, no fundamental rights for women, and no freedom for ordinary citizens to choose their leaders."

While there are those anti-Sali socialists who believe that the Constitution contains some sort of prohibition on a "religious test", it's clear that the Founding Fathers believed that only Christians of northern European descent should serve in Congress. If we fall into Pelosi's trap of accepting Muslims in Congress, pretty soon we'll have lots of people who don't believe in the divinity of Jesus Christ in the House or even the Senate -- and then where will we be? Congressman Sali points out that only the protective hand of God protects us; those who believe we're protected by wide oceans and a strong military are just fooling themselves. After all, how long have Hindu and Muslim countries like India and Saudi Arabia been able to survive without God's protection?