Hate Day At The HuffPo - Lying Headline #246

Another fabricated headline by the HuffPo, and once again the moonbats prove that they are knee-jerk reactionaries.

The NY Post article that the HuffPo article links to does NOT make fun of Nancy's veil. In fact, she IS NOT EVEN WEARING A VEIL. She is donning a scarf before entering a Christian site, which is customary practice. The only mention of the scarf in the entire article is:

"After raising her cream scarf from her neck to cover her head when she entered the historic 8th-century Omayyad Mosque, Pelosi inspected a tomb that is said to contain the head of St. John the Baptist."

WOW. What a scathing attack by the media. SanFran Nan should sue for damages!!! Let's all pick up rocks and stone Laura Bush!

And that's exactly what they did. This is just another redmeat-non-story from the HuffPo and their digital brownshirts reacted in a completely predictable fashion.

Also, the HuffPo claims "news outlets" as in plural, yet they only show one article and it DOES NOT make fun of Pelosi.

Out come the attacks on the First Lady and the President. That's what it's really all about....

If I were Laura Bush, I'd be wearing it OVER my face!! Then again, Im not dumb enuff to marry someone like George!
By: anangryamerican on April 04, 2007 at 12:45pm

I think Nancy has a prettier vail than Fat Laura does.
By: CaptEdwardGraham on April 04, 2007 at 10:20am

Syria the sponsor or Terror? How many gullible Americunts are going to swallow that? Which country is the largest purveyor of STATE SPONSORED TERRORISM in the world? The Useless Statee and Israel a close second.
By: PissedoffVietVet on April 04, 2007 at 10:22am

Fuck Bush, I have no interest in anything that comes out of that lying sack of shits mouth. He is a liar and a murderer. I hope he burns in hell.
By: Sinkablehail55 on April 04, 2007 at 10:56am

just fuck off and die bush, your little rant about pelosi sponsoring terror is absurdly riduculous. bush really has to come up with some meaningful dialogue, not the same crap he has been spewing for 6 year. die bush die!!!!
By: bushindrag on April 04, 2007 at 11:15am

american are the savages in the mid east disaster. slaughtering women and babies is what americans do best.
By: bushindrag on April 04, 2007 at 11:18am

Anybody surprised? Interestingly, the story has disappeared from the HuffPo site in the last half hour.

President Pelosi

For some curious reason, San Fran Nan thinks she is the President.
Pelosi has taken it upon herself to handle foreign relations by traveling to Syria to meet with Syrian government, against the wishes of the State Dept and the Bush Administration.

Nan doesn't care. The People have spoken and she is now the Commander In Chief. You would think that she would respect the wishes of the State Dept and President Bush regarding this sensitive matter. Nan will no doubt return with glowing praise for her newfound Syrian friends.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the speaker "should take a step back and think about the message that it sends."

"This is a country that is a state sponsor of terror, one that is trying to disrupt the Senora government in Lebanon and one that is allowing foreign fighters to flow into Iraq from its borders," Perino said.

Syrian President Bashar al-Assad "probably really wants people to come, and have a photo opportunity, and have tea with him, and have discussions about where they're coming from. But we just think it's a really bad idea," Perino said.

Pelosi's office did not immediately return a call seeking comment on why she was not heeding administration warnings.

Breitbart link

Yes, another fine example of liberal patriotism.

San Fran Nan went into liberal crybaby mode after Cheney stated that the Dem strategy of denying funding for the troops 'validates Al Qaeda's strategy'.

He didn't say anything about patriotism and Nan knows it. The facts are clear: If we don't complete the mission we have failed. If we fail, Al Qaeda wins. It's really quite simple.
Here's what he said:
"I think if we were to do what Speaker Pelosi and Congressman Murtha are suggesting, all we will do is validate the al-Qaida strategy," the vice president told ABC News. "The al-Qaida strategy is to break the will of the American people ... try to persuade us to throw in the towel and come home, and then they win because we quit."

And Al Qaeda is banging their heads on the floor and praying to Allah that the Dems prevail.

Is there anybody out there who would deny that?

What does Nan do? She actually tries to call the President to whine about Cheney's comments. I'm sure that after being put on hold for an appropriate amount of time, the White House operator informed her that, "The President has more pressing issues to deal with. Thanks for calling...."

This is the same lame liberal strategy that's been used countless times already; If somebody attacks your ideas then you should claim that they are questioning your patriotism.

Read the article for yourself. Nowhere does Cheney question anybody's patriotism.
AP Newswire
(HotAir)

UPDATE:

During Friday's interview in Sydney with ABC News, Cheney said, "I'm not sure what part of it is that Nancy disagreed with. She accused me of questioning her patriotism. I didn't question her patriotism. I questioned her judgment."

"You also have to be accountable for the results. What are the consequences of that? What happens if we withdraw from Iraq?," he said. "And the point I made and I'll make it again is that al-Qaida functions on the basis that they think they can break our will. That's their fundamental underlying strategy, that if they can kill enough Americans or cause enough havoc, create enough chaos in Iraq, then we'll quit and go home. And my statement was that if we adopt the Pelosi policy, that then we will validate the strategy of al-Qaida. I said it and I meant it."

Asked if he was willing to take back his criticism of Pelosi, Cheney replied, "I'm not backing down."

"We must heed the results of the November elections and the wishes of the American people," said Majority Leader Harry Reid (news, bio, voting record).

Reid, D-Nev., spoke moments before a vote that sidetracked a nonbinding measure expressing disagreement with Bush's plan to deploy an additional 21,500 troops to Iraq.

The vote was 49-47, or 11 short of the 60 needed to go ahead with debate, and left the fate of the measure uncertain.

First of all, Harry, just because your party picked up the Senate and House doesn't mean you are now the president. That job is already taken. You don't get to order a complete surrender to the enemy. Try again in 2008.

Second, If the 'people had spoken', as you claim, then your party would have the votes needed to pass this resolution.

But they don't, do they? And they didn't, did they? Think you can overturn a presidential veto?

I don't.