moonbattery.gif


« Time Mag Links Bangladesh Cyclone to Global Warming, Muslim Colonization | Main | Why Bush = Hitler Explained on NPR »


November 20, 2007

Saying "Get Osama" Is Racist

Retired NYPD officer Arno Herwerth's "GETOSAMA" vanity plates have been banned by New York State, on the grounds they violate the DMV's rule against anything "obscene, lewd, lascivious, derogatory to a particular ethnic or other group or patently offensive."

Since the plates aren't obscene, lewd, lascivious, or patently offensive, we're left to assume they are racist, since most anything bureaucrats don't like can fall under this category. It being racist to want to get Osama explains the lengths to which Democrats and their media allies have gone to obstruct the War on Terror.

Herwerth actually has the plates — New York bureauweenies didn't forbidden them until after he asked for the matching registration, at which point he was told he had never received the plates in the first place.

Here's Herwerth with a nonexistent racist license plate:

arno_herwerth.jpg

Soon the sort of people who run the DMV will take control of our healthcare.

On a tip from Wiggins.

Posted by Van Helsing at November 20, 2007 8:04 AM

Comments

We are trying very hard to kill ourselves.

Posted by: Trace at November 20, 2007 8:24 AM

I wonder if any of these plates would likewise be banned?

SKREWBUSH

BUSHSUXX

LUVCHAVEZ

4JIHAD

Probably not! In the Moonbat state of NY.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 20, 2007 8:26 AM

I took my son to the MVA today to purchase plates for the used car I bought him. Due to a bureaucratic error that was not my fault, this straightforward transaction took an hour and a half to resolve.

As my son was sitting there, he said, "Wow, imagine when these people are in charge of health care. One little mistake in your paperwork... AND YOU DIE!"

Posted by: V the K at November 20, 2007 9:59 AM

TV fulfills our fantasies again: Rosie O'Donnell's Mouth Gets Sewn Shut on Nip/Tuck.

Posted by: V the K at November 20, 2007 10:36 AM

Osama Bin Squirrel !!!!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071120/ap_on_fe_st/odd_squirrel_outages

Posted by: Anonymous at November 20, 2007 11:19 AM

actually he can keep them,, the NY dmv states you must have the plates in the car, not displayed.

as long as he keeps the real plates inside the car, he can display them outside, when he gets pulled over he just shows the cop the real plates.

we do this for vintage cars all the time, when you want to display a 1966 plate on your mopar, you just keep the new state issued plates inside the car.

the new cops may give you grief about it but Screw the facists.

Posted by: furballz at November 20, 2007 12:25 PM

Caption: Don Adams announces his new show about a secret agent who converts to Islam.

Posted by: V the K at November 20, 2007 1:13 PM

That's agood one V the K! Now can you incorporate "The Cone of Silence" into the mix? Barbara Feldon was such a babe too!

Posted by: Bryherb at November 20, 2007 2:28 PM

Actually it is `derogatory to a particular... group` -
"Ghettoes of the American Medical Association"

Posted by: teqjack at November 20, 2007 3:27 PM

YOu might like this story about anti- Bush ITMFA Plates issued NATIONWIDE--They Stand for IMPEACH THE MOTHERF_____R ALREADY.

I contacted ALL the DMV offices and had the plates taken away.

http://matwellworld.blogspot.com/2006/09/how-to-battle-loony-left-one-vanity.html

Posted by: Cepan at November 20, 2007 5:44 PM

Woot! Nice pwns, cepan!

Posted by: Scott at November 20, 2007 7:27 PM

Is EVERY SINGLE liberal organization built on hypocrisy and lies? Global warming scaremongers spewing out CO2, 'peace' activists attacking police and infrastructure, and now animal 'lovers' committing mass murder and covering it up.

http://consumerfreedom.com/advertisements_detail.cfm/ad/63

Via Malkin.

Posted by: Scott at November 20, 2007 10:37 PM

Muslim rapes, impregnates and marries own daughter 'cos Allah told him to.'

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/190178.php

Posted by: Scott at November 21, 2007 1:28 AM

That dood may have decided to justify his behaviour as one-upping the Prof, who only married his own daughter-in-law and invoked Jibril's revelation.

http://www.muhammadanism.org/Muhammad/Muhammad_Married_DaughterIL.htm

Posted by: Scott at November 21, 2007 1:32 AM

Not on topic for this thread, but I thought some of you USAian people may like this despicably pro-American article from (British) Sp!ked Online-

http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/4099/

Posted by: Ian from the EUSSR at November 21, 2007 6:01 AM

You'll love this, even though it's at a gossip site:

Roseanne Barr claims Bush backed Hitler, is ruling South America via terror and calls for the communist "making the utopian promise" and outlaw of all assets over $100 million. Here are the pics of her blog, albeit from a trashy gossip page:

http://perezhilton.com/?p=9203

Here's a link to the blog screen caps directly:
http://img.perezhilton.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/1.jpg
http://img.perezhilton.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/2.jpg
http://img.perezhilton.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/3.jpg
http://img.perezhilton.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/4__oPt.jpg

Posted by: watcher at November 21, 2007 7:42 AM

I've seen Spiked Online's stuff before, Ian, and generally like it. One complaint about this otherwise stellar article: while the token bash against Bush was not unexpected, I take exception to this line:

and however hard recent American governments have tried formally to restrict the free flow of people across their borders,

What is it with America's borders that is so different than the borders of other nations? Don't other nations have immigration law that they try to enforce? Why is it that America is expected to simply welcome anyone and everyone who wants to come in? As a sovereign nation, it's our right -- nay, our responsibility -- to create and enforce legislation that keeps our country from becoming a free for all for every Tom, Dick and Harry.

Otherwise I enjoyed the read...thanks for the heads up! It's nice to know that not everyone automatically despises us as a matter of course.

Posted by: Pam at November 21, 2007 8:47 AM

I posted this before, but Rosenanne Barr has gone on a seriously hilariously moonbat Communist rant on her blog.

Complete with actual calls for a communist utopia, a "maximum wage" and the divestiture of all assets over $100 million to the state.

Goofy gossip blogger Perez Hilton screen capped her insane moonbat blog. It's glorious. Here is the link:

http://perezhilton.com/?p=9203

Almost as funny as the blog are some of the insane leftwing nuts commenting on that gossip blog. Honestly, you'll probably want to cut and paste a few of those, as well.

Posted by: IPostedBefore at November 21, 2007 9:46 AM

Hi Pam, I don't think Spiked are specifically criticising America in regards to immigration controls. They're taking the standard libertarian line on it, which is that border controls are an intereference with peoples' human right to live where they wish. That's a pretty standard libertarian view, and while I tend to self-identify as libertarian it's not one I agree with on the basis that while in a perfect world you wouldn't need migration controls, we live in a disaster areas fuxx0red up by a century of statists, resulting in gross national economic inequality, welfare shopping etc- and also there are important cultural issues regarding indigenous people being swamped by new migrants. Not to mention when many of the new migrants are followers of a mediaeval death cult :D

Anyway, I don't think it's America being singled out there, it's a general crticism they'd apply (wrongly in my view) to any nation controlling its borders.

Just think it's worth mentioning that there is IMV a distinction in the motivations for dropping immigration controls comparing libertarians and "liberals". The "liberals" see it as part of a plan to, well, punish the west for our original sin of being successful, and to wipe out western values deliberately. The libertarian view is a more naive but benign one- they simply see migration controls as an intereference in individual freedom. They've no desire to wipe out civilisation. They also view migration as economically good (which it probably is from a purely economic perspective, without welfare attracting welfare shoppers and so on).

But I'm only repeating the views of others here. I don't agree with the standard libertarian line on this one.

Posted by: Ian from the EUSSR at November 21, 2007 4:25 PM