Tag Archives: Human Rights

Humor

Hilarious Saturday Night Live sketch attacks Obama’s government spending

5 Comments

Here’s the video: (H/T Neil Simpson)

If the video is removed, try watching it here.

And here’s the transcript:

ANNOUNCER: We will now take you live to Beijing for the joint press conference already underway between U.S. President Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao.

OBAMA: As I already said privately, I would like to thank President Jintao for his kind welcome and generous hospitality, and I hope that during this visit we can have a productive dialogue about the serious issues of concern that remain between our two countries — issues ranging from the unfair valuation of your currency to the trade imbalance, and most importantly, human rights. I believe there can be a great partnership between us but it will require compromise and understanding.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Thank you, Mr. President. I would like to add that I completely understand why you feel entitled to come here and lecture China on our shortcomings. After all, my country does owe the United States a great deal of money. Oh, wait. Hold on a moment. I believe I had that backwards. In fact, now that I think about it, it is your country that owes us a large sum of money. Is this correct?

OBAMA: Uh… yes.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Now, it’s coming back to me. I believe it’s $800 billion.

OBAMA: That is correct.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Such a large sum.

OBAMA: Yes, it is.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: And yet you haven’t even mentioned it. That’s so odd.

OBAMA: Uh, look, you’re going to get your money.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Are we? Are we going to get our money? Because from what I read your country is in the middle of a serious recession.

OBAMA: Uh, while this is true, there are signs that our bailout has steadied the financial markets and our stimulus package has been effective in fixing the job crisis.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: I’m curious. How many jobs has it created?

OBAMA: Uh, so far, none.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: I see.

OBAMA: But our health care reform plan, we’re confident, is going to lead to enormous savings.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: How exactly is extending health care coverage to 30 million people going to save you money?

OBAMA: I… don’t know.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: And this “Cash for Clunkers” program– I have read that you purchased many clunkers with our money.

OBAMA: Yes, we have.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: What does this word “clunkers” mean?

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

OBAMA: Well, a clunker is a car…

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: I know what a clunker is. And just so there is no misunderstanding, you are not allowed to pay us back in clunkers.

OBAMA:Of course not.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: You know, as I listen to you, I am noticing that each of your plans to save money involves spending even more money. This does not inspire confidence.

OBAMA: I assure you, you’re going to get your money.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Will you kiss me?

OBAMA: Sorry?

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Will you kiss me?

OBAMA: I don’t understand.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: I like to be kissed, (shouts) when someone is doing sex to me!

OBAMA: There’s no need for that.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: No? You know how many uninsured we have in China? One and a quarter billion, billion. But I’ll tell you this: We don’t owe anyone $800 billion.

OBAMA: Well, obviously, we take our debt to you very seriously.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: I suppose if I really wanted to get my money I could call and say I was a Wall Street banker who needs his bonus. But really, why should I have to stoop to that level?

OBAMA: You don’t have to stoop to any level.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Please understand if it were my $800 billion I wouldn’t care, but it belongs to my country. I feel like I should bring it up.

OBAMA: You’re going to get your money.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Say, while you’re here, are you at least going to treat me to dinner and a movie?

OBAMA: I’m sorry?

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: I think it’s the polite thing to do, (shouts) before doing sex to me!

OBAMA: Mr. President, please.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Very well.

OBAMA: I assure you that as soon we solve this economic crisis…

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Which one? The one that your country’s reckless real estate speculation caused? That one? I just want to make sure I know which one we’re talking about.

OBAMA: We are taking steps to make sure that what happened will never happen again.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: What steps?

OBAMA: Uh, reform of banking regulations.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Do I look like Mrs. Obama?

OBAMA: What?

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Do I look like Mrs. Obama?

OBAMA: Of course not.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Then why are you trying to (shouts) do sex to me like I was Mrs. Obama?

OBAMA: Now, now.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Just do it. Get it over with.

OBAMA: Mr. President!

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Don’t be a tease.

OBAMA: I just…

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: I can take it.

OBAMA: This is not the time or place.

(Hu Jintao “speaks.”)

INTERPRETER: Very well. In that case, I call this press conference to a close, and Live from New York, it’s Saturday Night!

News

Focus on the Family Canada edits radio show to adapt to hate crime law

1 Comment

In case you hadn’t heard, Obama signed a hate crime bill into law.

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council responds in this Christian Post article.

Opponents of the bill, dubbed by some as the “thought crimes” legislation, argue that it is unnecessary because gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people are already protected under existing state laws. They also say the bill could be used to prosecute Christian broadcasters and pastors who preach homosexuality as sin because they could be accused of inciting violence.

“This hates crimes provision is part of a radical social agenda that could ultimately silence Christians and use the force of government to marginalize anyone whose faith is at odds with homosexuality,” said Tony Perkins, president of Family Research Council, following the bill’s passage.

I thought that I would remind my readers where these laws lead by looking north to Canada. In Canada, Dr. Laura was effectively banned from radio stations for being critical of homosexuality, and Focus on the Family has to edit programs in order to comply with federal hate crime laws.

Consider this post from LifeSiteNews.

Excerpt:

A statement from a director at Focus on the Family confirms that the major Christian organization has been editing its radio programs in order to accord with Canadian “hate crime” laws.

“In particular, our content producers are careful not to make generalized statements nor comments that may be perceived as ascribing malicious intent to a ‘group’ of people and are always careful to treat even those who might disagree with us with respect,” Gary Booker, director of global content creation for Focus, told WorldNetDaily.com.

“Occasionally, albeit very rarely, some content is identified that, while acceptable for airing in the U.S. would not be acceptable under Canadian law and is therefore edited or omitted in Canada.”

A representative from Focus told LifeSiteNews.com that the organization is not prepared at this time to expand upon the statement sent to WorldNetDaily.com.

In April 2004, Canada enacted Bill C-250, a bill that added “sexual orientation” to “identifiable groups” protected from communication that would incite hatred towards them. In the months leading up to its passage, many conservative thinkers and activists prophesied that adding “sexual orientation” to the hate crime laws would give homosexual activists the leverage needed to persecute those opposed to their lifestyle for nothing more than expressing disagreement.

According to the Criminal Code of Canada, a person is not to be convicted of a hate crime if “he expressed or attempted to establish by argument an opinion on a religious subject.”

Despite the nod to religious conviction, however, the Canadian Human Rights Commission has already investigated and punished numerous individuals for promoting opposition to homosexual practices based on traditional Christian teaching.

In November of 2007, the CHRC threatened the Christian Heritage Party of Canada (CHPC) with legal penalties for material on their website. Printer Scott Brockie has also been found guilty by the Commission and fined for refusing to print pro-homosexual materials, as was Christian pastor Steve Boissoin, who wrote a letter to the editor outlining Christian teachings on homosexuality. Bishop Fred Henry was hauled before the Commission for speaking out against homosexuality, and recently a complaint was made against the Catholic magazine, Catholic Insight for similar reasons.

Advocating for the traditional family is a criminal activity in Canada, because it may incite violence and then you would be charged with a hate crime.

You can hear more about Obama’s hate crime bill in this current events podcast from William Lane Craig.

The silencing of Christians in the public square is now quite common in Canada and the UK.

Here are some stories from the UK:

Here are some stories from Canada:

And bad things are already happening the United States.

Something to think about, especially since a lot of “Christians” voted Obama because they supported wealth redistribution and the appeasement of terrorists abroad. I am sure that in time those same “Christians” will learn to redefine Christianity so that it complies with Obama’s hate crime bill, and then they will turn to demonizing authentic Christians who still think the Bible is authoritative on moral questions.

News

Australia considers bill to criminalize free speech by Christians

2 Comments

From the Australian. (H/T Thoughts Out Loud)

Excerpt:

Australians who wear a crucifix to work or offer to pray for a patient in hospital could run foul of a charter of rights, according to a British legal expert who says its introduction in this country would trigger an attack on religious expression.

Barrister Paul Diamond said equivalent laws in Britain had intensified religious resentment and introduced a degree of uncertainty into the rule of law.

He cited the example of a workplace dispute at British Airways in which the company had tried to prevent an employee from wearing a crucifix while permitting other workers to carry Sikh ceremonial knives and wear turbans and Muslim head scarfs.

Mr Diamond said the secular ideology of the British Human Rights Act was being used to politicise the judiciary and eradicate “unacceptable religious viewpoints on same-sex, on women, on a whole range of moral issues”.

[…]He said one of his most frightening cases concerned a man known as David Booker who was threatened with dismissal for telling a co-worker that Christians opposed pre-marital sex and same-sex relations.

“She had asked him about his Christian faith. She complained and he was suspended and would have been sacked had we not intervened. It was a private sector employer interpreting their diversity policy to eliminate offensive Christian viewpoints from the culture.”

Here are some stories from the UK:

Canada has similar infringements on religious expression because of the anti-Christian Canadian Human Rights Act.

And bad things are already happening the United States.

My recommendation? Don’t vote for Democrats like Obama.