George Zimmerman, Hero (Video)

After being acquitted of murder, George Zimmerman was probably asking himself, ‘now that I have my life back, how do I get my reputation back?’ A week later, an opportunity arose, and the famed neighborhood watchman leaped into action.

On Wednesday, July 17 at about 5:45 PM  Sanford Police responded to a single car accident in the area of I- 4 and State Road 46 in Sanford. A blue Ford Explorer SUV  traveled off the road and rolled over. There were four occupants inside the vehicle, two parents and two children.

The deputy reported, when he arrived on the scene that one of the two men there was George Zimmerman. According to Sanford Police Zimmerman had a fire extinguisher and helped assist the family to get them out of the vehicle.

Kerry Picket of Breitbart News reports that according to an eyewitness, people on the scene  recognized Zimmerman and thanked him for his help before he left.

The left’s attempt to demonize Zimmerman just took a major hit, folks.

(His favorability rating was already higher than Al Sharpton’s.)

John Hayward wrote at the Conversation, that Obama had delivered the  Zimmerman Coda with his “Trayvon speech”, last week, signaling to his “media bots” to focus now on Stand Your Ground laws.

But Obama’s attempt to wrangle political leverage out of the Zimmerman verdict is falling flat:  There’s No Appetite For Repealing Stand Your Ground Laws.

This latest news about George Zimmerman, I think is the “Zimmerman Coda.”

Rep. Moran’s Son Likely a Victim of Right Wing False Flag Operation

tumblr_mexjvt1bsx1ryan7u

Pat Moran, victim of the right-wing smear machine.

/Channeling Left-wing blogger, Marcy Wheeler of “Emptywheel”….

Rethuglicans are at it again, smearing a good man’s name for their own political ends. One of the teabagging ringleaders, the execrable Jeff Quinton, “reported” this slanderous drivel, earlier today:

Rep. Moran’s son pleads guilty to assaulting girlfriend

When we last heard from Patrick Moran, son of Rep. Jim Moran, he was on video describing how to commit voter fraud. He later resigned from his father’s campaign over the video.

Today, the Washington City Paper reports:

Moran and his girlfriend were fighting outside 14th St. bar The Getaway around 1:23 a.m. on Dec. 1, according to a police report, over Moran talking to another woman at the bar. Suddenly, Moran allegedly slammed his girlfriend’s head into the bar’s metal trash can cage.

After the attack, police described Moran’s girlfriend as “bleeding heavily from her nose nose and also observed that her nose and right eye were extremely swollen.” One of the ambulance technicians who transported her to Howard University Hospital told police that Moran appeared to have broken her nose and given her a skull fracture under her right eye.

When I saw this story–claiming that a “violent Moran” beat his girlfriend’s face in –I knew right away it was likely a false flag.

Exhibit A. “The last we heard from Patrick Moran”, he was being railroaded by Lee Stranahan’s buddy, the right wing con artist, James O’Keefe of Project something or other, in a heavily edited video that supposedly proved Moran was engaging in election fraud, but proved nothing of the sort. It was another completely discredited Breitbot hoax.

Exhibit B. Stranahan works for Breitbart, need I say more?

Exhibit C. Adding to the barrage of deceptive lies is the notorious, tip jar rattling grifter, RS McCain, a proven racist, who’s well known for reporting things that are not true.

Exhibit D. A source from the bar says that unknown persons wearing patriotic tea-bag type garb entered the bar, and deliberately provoked the peaceful Moran, causing him to take a few swings in their direction. According to the source, Moran’s fist missed its mark and in the confusion, he ended up slamming his girlfriend into the trash can cage. The teabaggers left the bar before police and paramedics got to the scene.

Exhibit E. A video of the source telling his story at the local Progressives for Progress office, has been posted onYouTube.

It appears the KochBots just staged another false flag!!!11!

Linked by Michelle Malkin, and Doug Ross, and Flopping Aces, thanks!

Something is Indeed Wrong

The American Spectator’s Ben Stein seems a little depressed lately, and looking out at the same Geo-political landscape he is, I can’t say I blame him. He concludes his latest morose diary by saying:

There is just a feeling in the air, a look in the sky at dusk, a look on people’s faces. Fear is everywhere. Mr. Obama cannot lose this election unless enough people believe it’s within their power to stop the ticking of the clock, and I do not feel that groundswell. Not at all. When the American media turns its back on our own religions of tolerance and adores a religion of intolerance, times are upside down. The MSM says it’s all fine, trust The Prince of Grant Park, Chicago. But I have always preferred the admonition, “Put not your trust in princes.” Something is wrong.

What set him off isn’t the depressing fact that ‘the United States is beaming TV ads all over Pakistan apologizing for a derogatory Internet trailer for a nonexistent movie demeaning the being that Muslims call “The Prophet Mohammed,”‘ because I guess we’ve come to expect such craven behavior from this administration, by now. He’s referring to something he considers much worse:

Have you noticed that in the past few years, and especially in the past few weeks since the murder of the Ambassador and his guards and colleague in Benghazi (a city that Erwin Rommel loved and whose inhabitants he praised), whenever the New York Times refers to Mohammed, they always call him, without quotation marks, The Prophet Mohammed, as if everyone with any sense understands that OF COURSE Mohammed is The One True Prophet and that it’s just understood that Mohammed is The Prophet.

I see this in other news outlets and on TV, too. Sober-looking newsmen and newswomen mention Mohammed as The Prophet Mohammed. No ifs, ands or buts. I hear it on the BBC World Service, too.

Now, if Muslims want to believe that Mohammed is The Prophet, God bless them. Fine and dandy. If anyone wants to believe that, good luck to him or her. But why does our mainstream media here in the USA, an overwhelmingly Christian country, refer to Islam’s prophet as “The Prophet”?

Have you ever seen any major newspaper here in the USA refer to Jesus Christ as “The Son of God, God Incarnate, The Lord Jesus Christ”? Can you imagine the New York Times running a story about a crucifix resting in urine at an “art gallery” as an offense against “The Lord Jesus, Son of God”? Can you imagine any large newspaper in this country running a story about the Pope and referring to him as “The Holy Father, The Bridge Between Heaven and Earth”? Or about Mary, as “Holy Mary, Mother of God”? It would never happen.

Yep. Something is wrong.

How about this one via Creeping Sharia:

Submitting troops to sharia law? Bring them home. via Paul Sperry: The Pentagon is blaming US troops for ‘friendly fire’ attacks that have killed dozens of Americans, ordering sensitivity training about Islam – NYPOST.com.

Afghan security forces, our supposed allies, are slaughtering American troops. Thirty-three soldiers have been killed by “green on blue” attacks this year alone. The situation is so bad that the training of Afghan forces has been temporarily suspended.

How has the Pentagon responded?

By blaming our troops.

Top officials believe culturally offensive behavior is the motivation behind the killings, so it’s stepped up Islamic sensitivity training for our troops.

If you don’t want to be shot in the back by your Afghan training partners, the Pentagon advises, don’t offend their religious sensibilities. Don’t kick your feet up on a table, for instance, and never ask to see a picture of their wives and kids. “There’s a percentage [of attacks] which are cultural affronts,” Joint Chiefs Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey said in a recent interview.

In the past three years, uniformed Afghans have murdered at least 97 US and NATO troops.

Hit the link to see a list of other “cultural affronts” our troops are being ordered to refrain from out of “sensitivity” to people who would kill over them.

Something JUST AIN’T RIGHT, there.

And today, after the secretary-general warned Ahmadinejad of “potentially harmful consequences of his inflammatory rhetoric”, the Iranian president told reporters in New York that Israel has “no roots” in Middle East history.

He called the country a “historical phase” that has only been “occupying the land” for about 60 or 70 years — as opposed to Iran, a nation with thousands of years of history, he said.

He also claimed Iran doesn’t take Israel’s threats of a military strike against its nuclear facilities seriously.

“We did not take [Israel] into account,” Ahmadinejad said. “They represent a small disturbance that will be eliminated in the future.”

Israel’s UN envoy walked out of the UN assembly, Monday, after Ahmadinejad began speaking about the ‘rule of law’.

“There is no law and no justice,” Prosor said, objecting to the fact that Ahmadinejad was allowed to speak at the forum. “The leader of an outlaw country that systematically violates the fundamental principles of the rule of law has no place here.”

“It’s a shame and a disgrace that someone like [Ahmadinejad] was given a voice on such an important issue,” the envoy added. “Allowing Ahmadinejad to give a UN speech on an issue like the rule of law is like appointing a pyromaniac as a fire commissioner.”

Prosor’s legal team followed him out of the UN hall.

Once upon a time the United States’ UN envoy would have joined them, as they always have in the past. But not this time.

A US Foreign Policy Expert  told Shep Smith today, “Israelis Really Don’t Think We’re On Their Side.”

Echoing Ahmadinejad, Obama called Israeli concern over Iran’s genocidal nuclear program “noise”

Nice. Top State Department Official Emails Reporter to Tell Him to “F**k Off”

Something is very very wrong.

Linked by Michelle Malkin, thanks!

Apology for Yemen Embassy Breach?

Now that the perimeter of the US embassy in Yemen has been stormed by men wielding sticks, knives, and hurling rocks, how will the White House lower the bar yet again for American humility?  Maybe another apology. It is not enough to pass blame for a region on fire by pointing to a YouTube video. In fact, we’ve been reminded in the press conference by Hillary that only a few bad people are involved. Really, have you seen the newsreels? They understandably maimed and murdered because a few Americans were insulting of Mohamed? Now it’s other embassies from western nations being attacked including Britain and Germany. Is that because of an American made trailer on YouTube? The apology must be morphed in a global religious tolerance oration from the Teleprompter.The Coice

There is a choice this election, as the Democratic campaign likes to frame it, preferring not to be a referendum election based on past performance and a near view into the future on what current policies will produce in the foreign arena and domestic economics. The two separate paths seem not just divided but more like a T intersection; Left or Right. And you better look both ways before you get onto the path or you might be run down by people racing from the left path and heading full speed past the intersection on down the Right path. Apologies and foreign aide for friendship or respect through strength.  Now that’s choice. We don’t have to look back any farther than Ronald Regan to see why voters chose him over Carter in not unsimilar situations. If you are a fence sitter independent there is not much middle ground left that the candidates share.  So let Obama make the apology and let Romney speak out on strength and help define the choice.

Mr Nice Deb

SEE ALSO:

Neil Munro, The Daily Caller: Obama submits to Brotherhood, asks for suppression of anti-Islam video:

President Barack Obama has bowed to the Muslim Brotherhood’s demand that the federal government suppress a satirical video of Islam’s prophet, Muhammad.

But Youtube denied the request late Sept. 14.

Tommy Vietor, a spokesman for the National Security Council, told the Washington Post midday that the White House has “reached out to YouTube to call the video to their attention and ask them to review whether it violates their terms of use.”

Youtube’s executives shut down videos that they deem “hate speech.” A YouTube spokesperson said Sept. 12 that the video “is clearly within our guidelines and so will stay on YouTube,” and repeated that message late Sept. 14, so rejecting Obama’s unprecedented request.

Obama’s request complied with the Sept. 13 demand and threat by the brotherhood, which now governs the Arab world’s largest country, Egypt.

“Hurting the feelings of one and a half billion Muslims cannot be tolerated, and… we demand that all those involved in such crimes be urgently brought to trial,” according to an English-language statement on the brotherhood’s website.

The brotherhood’s demand included a threat of additional violence during Obama’s re-election campaign.

How God-awful  is this administration? Until I read the complete sentence, I couldn’t tell if the following statement: “Hurting the feelings of one and a half billion Muslims cannot be tolerated, and… we demand that all those involved in such crimes be urgently brought to trial”, came from the radical Muslim brotherhood or our own State Dept.

Oh, wait…

AoSHQ: You Have the Right To Free Speech That’s Helpful To The Government: Feds Looking To Jail Filmmaker

Michelle Malkin: The White House declares war…on YouTube critics of Islam:

Last night, the LA Times reported that the White House leaned on YouTube to censor the anti-Islam movie that provided jihadis with handy cover and pretext for their long-planned attackon our diplomatic posts and embassies abroad:

Administration officials have asked YouTube to review a controversial video that many blame for spurring a wave of anti-American violence in the Middle East.

The administration flagged the 14-minute “Innocence of Muslims” video and asked that YouTube evaluate it to determine whether it violates the site’s terms of service, officials said Thursday. The video, which has been viewed by nearly 1.7 million users, depicts Muhammad as a child molester, womanizer and murderer — and has been decried as blasphemous and Islamophobic.

Yid With Lid: Did Romney’s Reaction to US Embassy Violence End Obama’s Convention Bounce?

Beginning with the 9/12 numbers (covering 9/10-12) Romney’s numbers began to rise while Obama’s began to fall.  Today’s poll shows which started the day the violence began shows Romney with a small 3% lead (essentially back to where they were as the DNC convention began).

Paul Ryan: FULL SPEECH: Paul Ryan speaks at Values Voter Summit:

Paul Ryan spoke to the Values Voter Summit this morning and it’s getting great reviews from people, including Rush who has already played a portion of it on the radio.

The Daily Caller: Steyn on Obama’s Las Vegas ‘performance’: ‘Every American should be ashamed of their president’ [AUDIO]

On Hugh Hewitt’s radio show Thursday night, National Review columnist Mark Steyn, author of “After America: Get Ready for Armageddon,” said President Barack Obama gave an embarrassing performance Wednesday during his campaign swing through Las Vegas, Nev., in the wake of attacks on U.S. diplomatic stations in Libya and Egypt.

“I thought that thing last night with the president saying he had ‘a tough day’ and comparing the dead Americans in Libya to campaign supporters, which he did — I thought was one of the most disgraceful, inept and embarrassing performances by a head of state or government that I have ever seen,” Steyn said. “Every American should be ashamed of their president.”

Steyn didn’t fault the president for going to Sin City, acknowledging that sometimes plans are in place and things have to move along. But the tone of Obama’s remarks set him off.

“He didn’t script his remarks,” Steyn said. “I mean, this is a man, for example, who doesn’t have, I think, great empathetic qualities at the best of times. But to slough it off in that bloodless language — you know, when he says, now I believe this is a direct quote, ‘Obviously, our hearts are broken today.’ If you say ‘obviously’ before it, your heart is not broken. He said, ‘Oh, it’s a tough day.’ It’s not a tough day [for him]. It’s a tough day for the families of the four people who were killed.”

In Which Obama Campaign Manager Unintentionally Provides Blogger With Awesome Opportunity To Do Tea Party/OWS Compare/Contrast

The President’s porcine and thuggish campaign manager, Jim Messina, has unintentionally afforded me an opportunity to engage in one of my favorite past times - comparing the ragtag collection of confused/violent/radical malcontents who make up the Occupy movement to the benign, patriotic, and genuinely peaceful tea party.

Here is his latest fundraising letter, via Weasel Zippers:

Last night, the President went to Congress and defined in clear terms what we’re going to be fighting for in the months ahead.

That means that right now, it’s on us to get his back and work like hell to build this campaign. If we want to see this President re-elected, it’s time:

Add your name and say you’re standing with the President — and our shared vision for this country.

We don’t know which Republican is going to be our opponent yet, but here’s what we do know: Whoever wins the Republican nomination will have done so by adopting the extreme Tea Party agenda.

Whatever could he mean by the “extreme” tea party agenda?

Here is Jenny Beth Martin of The Tea Party Patriots, voicing her “extremist” support for fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government, and free markets in response to Obama’s SOTU speech. . I’ve already posted this, but in case you missed it:

So, wow – yeah – that was pretty scary. God help us all if extreme principles like those are ever adopted by any Republican in government.

Meanwhile, here’s the Obamacrat endorsed Occupy Wall Street manifesto of “demands”:

Demand one: Restoration of the living wage. This demand can only be met by ending “Freetrade” by re-imposing trade tariffs on all imported goods entering the American market to level the playing field for domestic family farming and domestic manufacturing as most nations that are dumping cheap products onto the American market have radical wage and environmental regulation advantages. Another policy that must be instituted is raise the minimum wage to twenty dollars an hr.

Demand two: Institute a universal single payer healthcare system. To do this all private insurers must be banned from the healthcare market as their only effect on the health of patients is to take money away from doctors, nurses and hospitals preventing them from doing their jobs and hand that money to wall st. investors.

Demand three: Guaranteed living wage income regardless of employment.

Demand four: Free college education.

Demand five: Begin a fast track process to bring the fossil fuel economy to an end while at the same bringing the alternative energy economy up to energy demand.

Demand six: One trillion dollars in infrastructure (Water, Sewer, Rail, Roads and Bridges and Electrical Grid) spending now.

Demand seven: One trillion dollars in ecological restoration planting forests, reestablishing wetlands and the natural flow of river systems and decommissioning of all of America’s nuclear power plants.

Demand eight: Racial and gender equal rights amendment.

Demand nine: Open borders migration. anyone can travel anywhere to work and live.

Demand ten: Bring American elections up to international standards of a paper ballot precinct counted and recounted in front of an independent and party observers system.

Demand eleven: Immediate across the board debt forgiveness for all. Debt forgiveness of sovereign debt, commercial loans, home mortgages, home equity loans, credit card debt, student loans and personal loans now! All debt must be stricken from the “Books.” World Bank Loans to all Nations, Bank to Bank Debt and all Bonds and Margin Call Debt in the stock market including all Derivatives or Credit Default Swaps, all 65 trillion dollars of them must also be stricken from the “Books.” And I don’t mean debt that is in default, I mean all debt on the entire planet period.

Demand twelve: Outlaw all credit reporting agencies.

Demand thirteen: Allow all workers to sign a ballot at any time during a union organizing campaign or at any time that represents their yeah or nay to having a union represent them in collective bargaining or to form a union.

Yes, just to be clear, Democrats have openly and enthusiastically endorsed these out of the closet Marxists. See The #OWS Hall Of Shame: Democrats Who Support/Supported The Occupy Wall Street Movement for a non-exhaustive list. This is not your parents’ Democrat party – it has swung to the hard left in recent years, and the most extreme leftist wing of the Democrat party now occupies the White House.

So for the party that is in the process of destroying our capitalist system in the name of  “fundamentally transforming” our nation, to be calling people who want to get back to fiscal responsibility and a constitutional form of government, “extremists” is just too rich.

“If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard,” Messina once instructed Obama supporters. I believe in punching back twice as hard, rhetorically.

The Obamcrat mob, not so much. Here, once again, created and kept updated by the Jawas, is the Tea Party Versus (Dem endorsed)#Occupy Checklist:

They’ve got a hell of a nerve trying to paint the tea party as “extremist”  under these circumstances.

PS: There are some interesting opinions on the Messina photo, above, shared in Weasel Zippers’ comment section.

Share

Dear Paul Krugman: Examples Please

In Paul Krugman’s lame follow-up  to his despicable and now infamous 9/11 column, he writes:

The fact is that the two years or so after 9/11 were a terrible time in America – a time of political exploitation and intimidation, culminating in the deliberate misleading of the nation into the invasion of Iraq.

It’s probably worth pointing out that I’m not saying anything now that I wasn’t saying in real time back then, when Bush had a sky-high approval rating and any criticism was denounced as treason. And there’s nothing I’ve done in my life of which I’m more proud.

Since comments are once again turned off, I’ll use this space to beg the question: Can we please see some examples of this intimidation – these accusations of treason from the Bushies – any of them – Rumsfeld, Rove, Cheney, any Bush Republicans in the wake of 9/11?

The reason I ask is because  while I distinctly remember the howls of outrage from Democrats that their patriotism was being questioned, I don’t remember any  Republicans in power actually doing it. Who is he talking about? Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh? Ann Coulter doesn’t speak for the Republican party, and she certainly didn’t speak for the Bush administration. Limbaugh may call himself  “the titular head of the Republican party”, but obviously, he speaks for himself, too. The Democrats’ howls of outrage were directed at the Republican party.  I’d like to see some examples of this “terrible” intimidation of which they speak.

Krugman linked to Greg Sargent, who was able to dredge up a few examples of what could be deemed “political exploitation” of 9/11 by Bushies:

Here’s Karl Rove in the runup to the 2002 midterm elections (via Nexis):

President Bush’s top political adviser said today that Republicans will make the president’s handling of the war on terrorism the centerpiece of their strategy to win back the Senate and keep control of the House in this year’s midterm elections.

“We can go to the country on this issue because they trust the Republican Party to do a better job of protecting and strengthening America’s military might and thereby protecting America,” Karl Rove said at the Republican National Committee meeting here.

Here’s Rudy Giuliani, at the 2004 Republican National Convention (via Nexis):

I looked up and seeing the flames of hell emanating from those buildings and realizing that what I was actually seeing was a human being on the 101st, 102nd floor that was jumping out of the building, I stood there; it probably took five or six seconds. It seemed to me that it took 20 or 30 minutes. And I was stunned. And I realized in that moment and that instant, I realized we were facing something that we had never, ever faced before…At the time, we believed that we would be attacked many more times that day and in the days that followed. Without really thinking, based on just emotion, spontaneous, I grabbed the arm of then-Police Commissioner Bernard Kerik and I said to him, ‘’Bernie, thank God George Bush is our president.’’ I say it again tonight, I say it again tonight: thank God that George Bush is our president.

Here’s top McCain adviser Charlie Black, during the 2008 campaign:

A top adviser to Sen. John McCain said that a terrorist attack in the United States would be a political benefit to the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, a comment that was immediately disputed by the candidate and denounced by his Democratic rival.

Charles R. Black Jr., one of McCain’s most senior political advisers, said in an interview with Fortune magazine that a fresh terrorist attack “certainly would be a big advantage to him.”

So we have Karl Rove, (the Architect)  noting the obvious, and Giuliani’s honest recounting of what he (and  a whole lot of people) were thinking on 9/11. What McCain’s adviser said in 2008 was certainly crude, but I thought we were talking about the period of time immediately following 9/11 when this atmosphere of intimidation and gross political exploitation was so palpable.

And I, of course,  could cite Democrat operatives saying  equally crude things, such as: Obama needs event ‘similar’ to OKC to ‘reconnect’ with voters. Nowhere will we find Republicans scheming with Hollywood to release a movie in October 2004, positioning the “gutsy” President as the hero of 9/11. Now that would be some political exploitation worth mentioning!

Given how the Democrat Media complex  really knows how to play up the missteps of Republicans, you would think Google with be rife with examples of Bushies accusing the Krugmans of the world of treason.

I can certainly  cite for you examples  of the Obami accusing Republicans and/or the Tea Party of treason, terrorism, (or worse).

Democrats have verbally maligned their opposition in the most shockingly abusive terms imaginable, and much of it has come from Democrats in Congress and in the Obama administration. Yes, they have literally questioned Republicans’ patriotism in very overt, stark, impossible to misread terms.

Within hours of the tragic Tucson shooting in which nine people were shot, six fatal, last January, Paul Krugman himself, leaped to the outrageous conclusion that the shooter had to be a Tea Partier. He blamed conservatives for the attack that critically injured Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, accusing them of fomenting “a climate of hate.” I can’t think of a more shameful way to exploit a tragedy than to immediately, and without any evidence what-so-ever,  blame  political opponents for it. You could even call it an attempt to “intimidate” the opposition into silence.

Of course,  the Democrats were, as usual, wrong. The gunman turned out not to be a conservative Tea Party supporter. His writings and obsessions indicated if anything, the deranged, disordered mind of a left-wing lunatic.

I’d love to see some similar examples of unhinged venom and hatred against the opposition from Republicans during the Bush era.

But I’m not going to hold my breath. Because it didn’t happen.

As James Taranto noted in 2004:

Surely it is fair for any politician to take issue with his opponent’s official acts. And if those acts were motivated by something other than antipathy toward America–as any fair-minded observer must presume they were–they could have been defended on their merits. Instead, Democrats themselves raised the issue of patriotism by defensively denying that they lacked it. A cardinal rule of political communication is never to repeat an accusation in the course of denying it (“I am not a crook”). These candidates “repeated” a charge no one had even made.

The Democrats doth protested too much.

Share

Video: Glenn Beck Show Flames Al Gore For Civil Rights/Global Warming Comparison

Glenn Beck’s sidekick, Pat Gray,  alternated between a high pitched Sam Kinison screech, and a slow, condescending Al Gore drawl, to lambast Goracle for comparing Climate Change skeptics to racists.

It’s relentless, unforgiving, and hilarious — Al Gore so deserves this.

Will Al Gore and his warmist friends ever go away? The wheels have come off the global warming scam. The jig is up.

They’re just embarrassing themselves, now.

SEE ALSO:

Breitbart TV: Major Garrett Lays into Al Gore and Global Warming Hysterics

In a candid and revealing interview with Dennis Miller, National Journal’s Major Garrett recalls the imperious, arrogant and condescending bearing of Al Gore as a Senator. Garrett believes that his recent statements comparing global warming skeptics to racists are a reflection of that same attitude.

SWEET:

Weasel Zippers: House Republicans Seek To Cut All U.S. Funding For U.N. Climate Change Agencies…-

WASHINGTON —House Republicans are applying a search and destroy tactic to international funding for global warming this budget season. It goes like this: Ax any line items with the words “climate change.”

Their primary targets are a pair of crucial United Nations initiatives designed to slow warming worldwide and educate policymakers about the evolving science of climate change.

We’ll see how far this goes. They also attempted to defund the Obama’s Czars in their $38 billion budget cuts bill, last April, but Obama prevented it in a signing statement, (which he had previously promised he’d never do.)

Share

Turning a Yawning Chasm into a Growing Gulf

“Ever get the feeling you’ve been cheated?”

-Johnny Rotten, at the close of the last Sex Pistols concert.

I’m starting to feel this way every single day.

 Each day, the cries that people who are rejecting or have rejected the status quo “Are stupid, insane, or my personal favorite, “handing the election to Obama” because they just don’t see the wisdom in any debt ceiling fix that gives more spenditol to the hopelessly addicted in D.C. without honest, true (not gimmicky) and most importantly immediate cuts to the Federal Government’s spending grow louder, and I find myself growing more annoyed with people I have more similarities than differences with, not because of the differences, but because their inability to convince me that the compromise they are rallying behind will prevent the calamity they fear has driven them to derision, name-calling, insults, and questioning our patriotism.  In other words, they are acting like the Democrats do when we tell them “No.” too.

Whether it’s the New York Times’ favorite “maverick” referring to the Tea Party as Hobbits, and claiming that “Others know better” than the Tea Party Freshmen in the Congress, or people I respect telling me in serial FB postings that anyone who isn’t for Boehner’s plan to raise the credit limit again in exchange for promises to make some piddling cuts at some time that history tells us will never be made anyway, and then bring us back to this point yet again during election season is the same as a Democrat such as the President, contempt is the tune played with the complete expectation that we will dance, and its put me into a position I never wanted to be in.  I’m being pushed into declaring for the Tea Party.

It isn’t that I had any particular beef with the Tea Party.  My objections have really been more dealing with the movement’s long-term prospects.  As I said to a Republican Tea Party basher on FB:

‎1. I am not a Tea Party member. I enjoyed the fact that it was grassroots and genuine. I never signed on, because I knew that it was destined to be co-opted or marginalized because it threatened the political establishment and their power base.
2. Your willingness to appoint them with a responsibility to “shut people up” chills me a bit. The appeal of the tea party was a central message, and the ability for people who had felt marginalized or removed from the mainstream political process to participate and bring some of their own ideas to the fore. A “leadership” would be counter to that idea.
3. Much of what I’ve feared has come to pass…a degree of co-opting, both actual, and presumed by those for whom it would be handy to do so, and marginalization…by a corrupt media that needed a group of “extremists”, and a political establishment that needed a boogeyman to save us from.
4. And even though I don’t agree with a lot of them, I’d rather have a political system that doesn’t “silence” the fringes, or anything outside the mainstream, largely because I firmly believe that we HAVE to trust the people, in the firm knowledge that they are going to make mistakes (Thanks, 52%ers!) or that none of this political system means anything and we can simply officially appoint those who presume to be our betters as such, and dispense with the charade.

And how did we arrive at this point, anyway?  Really, before we entrust these responsible stewards of the public purse with the ability to spend even more money, isn’t that a question we all should be asking?  If the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, while expecting a different result, then the “compromise” they are offering doesn’t make any damn sense.

The Tea Party owes its existence to government’s reckless and irresponsible spending, and the way that government demonstrated its feeling of entitlement to not only continue spending more money than it takes in, but to continually increase this spending in order to mitigate the consequences of really poor decisions. (Too Big To Fail, anyone?)

It was a terrific thing to behold as it gathered steam, because people who had never given politics a second thought, or only considered it when filling out a ballot were now looking at the ways their elected officials had squandered their trust, and enhanced their own power and finances at the expense of our own personal sovereignty and wallet.  They had realized that government by the professional and the expert first benefits the professional and the expert, and then trickles down only to the extent that doing so will also benefit the professional and the expert.  But this newfound clarity threatens not just the chattering class, whose false narratives and very selective reporting kept the majority of the nation slumbering and dreaming dreams in which every man woman and child was a lottery winner, and never had to be asked to pay for the welfare state that continued to grow in its quest to provide for them from cradle to grave, and so the new narrative began, about these “extremists” who opposed what government hath wrought not because it stifled freedom and opportunity, and confiscated wealth on an enormous scale to redistribute it to others who did nothing to earn it , but because they were “racists who didn’t want a black President to succeed.”  They were haters, who if given an opportunity to do so, would commit unspeakable acts of violence against those who disagreed with them, even kill them if they thought it necessary. 

It was certainly a surprise to the everyday mothers, fathers, grandpas, and grandmas who came to the rallies, and participated in the peaceful protests.  It was a surprise to those who came to townhalls to confront their elected officials about the trust that they so casually abused, only to find themselves shouted down, disrespected, and questioned by their public servants, and their supporters, many of whom freely feed at the public trough.  I know many people who consider themselves part of the Tea Party, one of who graciously lets me co-blog with her when I get the urge to speak up, and the media portrayals of them couldn’t be farther from the truth.  And as irritating as that is, its ok.  One of the things that came clear during the emergence of the Tea Party and the rush of the legacy media to portray them as unhinged extremists is the fact that the self-appointed cognoscenti were defending a power base, and the shriller the denunciations, the more obvious it became to observers that the media members, and their patrons in the Democratic Party were the ones standing naked while commenting to each other about their resplendent wardrobes.  The more they condescended, complained, and projected, the more hollow their lofty pronouncements rang.

And it had a result, as the elections of 2010 proved, and the consequence was a series of election gains in the House of Representatives that completely changed the make up of that body. 

Now we find ourselves facing yet another crisis.  Another in a string of crises that miraculously can only be solved by the federal government spending more money that it does not have, to pay for consequences that it bears the responsibility for.  The only truly good comparison that I can think of is the domestic violence victim who keeps going back to her abuser, because he promises that this time, things will be different…after he tells her that it is her fault that he beats her.  We keep going back, and if we hesitate, we’re told to “get our asses back in line.”  And for all the noise about the approaching deadline, “inflexible ideologues”, and swift and certain financialgeddon, and the absolute and positive need to address this RIGHT NOW, OR ELSE!  and the only option, no matter how it is dressed up, is to increase the credit limit now, and make cuts later, or whenever they can get around to it, if they feel like it, and the moon is in the right phase, with the only real distinctions being how much, and whether or not the timing is politically beneficial to one side or the other, several key facts and follow-up questions keep getting lost.

1.  We actually hit the debt ceiling in May of this year.  In all the hysteria, hyperventilation, finger-pointing, and name-calling, that fact seems to get lost.  One might ask how this got to be a “crisis”, considering the fact that it couldn’t have been a surprise.

2.  The US’s credit rating has already been downgraded.  While I don’t expect it to be a harmless event if the other rating agencies follow, I also noted that the sky didn’t fall, and I didn’t have to take a wheelbarrow full of $100,000.00 bills to the Safeway to buy a loaf of bread after it happened. 

4.  The Democrats have not passed a budget since 2009, despite the fact that it is one of Congress’ duties.  This works to their advantage.  No budget means no parameters on spending.  Anything goes until you hit the ceiling.  Besides, they were too busy with Spendulous, Cash for Clunkers, and Obamacare to actually attend to their duties.  And who do you think you are for asking pointed questions about it anyway, peasant?

5.  Do your creditors maintain your credit score when your debt to income ratio is already too high and you decide that you can and should borrow more?   So why should we believe that a government that is characterized by an abject avoidance of restraint when it comes to spending the public’s money will not suffer the same fate when if they pass a bill that bumps out that limit, and purports to address a portion of the spending problem, somehow, some way, some time?  It would be like believing that the chronic alcoholic will be ok if the bartender doesn’t serve him the last two shots he’s used to downing nightly; the real problem is in the 5 shots he was served before.  And yet the Tea Party is now the enemy of America, and actively working for the re-election of Barack Obama for recognizing that what is being offered and discussed is a “more of the same” of what we’ve had before, and declining to go along with it.

6.  Teh Fred! and others keep crowing about a victory in shifting the conversation away from tax increases, and demanding we take that, and ignore the fact that even with the “cuts” being proposed, the leviathan that is Fedzilla still grows.   More and more people are getting clued in to the magical growth formula in government accounting based on premise that Zero = Last Year’s Budget.  Taxes weren’t negotiable because despite what Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi believe, this was NEVER a revenue problem; it is a spending problem, and taking away what never should have been on the table to begin with, and then rearrange the deck chairs on the Titanic will not prevent a really, really cold swim.

It comes down to this:  Government Spending first empowers the government.  Democrats have known this for years, and used it to their advantage to cultivate a block of constituents beholden to them for their sustenance due to the advent of multigenerational welfare, and they have carefully nurtured it until we have reached a point where nearly 50% of the citizens in this country don’t have any of the precious “skin in the game” that the Teleprompter President likes to babble on about, because they pay no taxes.   They have no intention of changing this state of affairs.  TPOTUS himself has all but admitted that his idea of “shared sacrifice” is that the people who are paying the check need to pay even more.   The real-life warnings that the failed welfare states of Europe pose do nothing to change any of this.  They will spend it, even when they don’t have it, and they will do anything for their fix.  If unchecked, this can only end one way.

Get used to scenes like these, because if we don’t address the festering sore that is Federal Spending now, we lose choices. There won’t be an option that helps Granny get the check that the Federal Government has no business paying her. The government will probably not have the ability to perform its enumerated duties, let alone pay for mohair subsidies, studies on the flow rate of catsup, or refurbishing mosques in foreign countries.   This nonsense cannot be sustained.  Enacting special welfare and calling it general welfare is a path to ruin.  Growing a federal bureaucracy that must continue to worm its tentacles further and further into all aspects life and business in order to justify itself is not conducive the maintenance of freedom and liberty.  This is what “go along to get along” has gotten us…legions of experts who prove day in and day out that there is no problem that government cannot create, and then make worse with its “solutions”.  Learned professionals without any practical experience who pass laws and regulations without a thought to the cost that it imposes on those who they would regulate, because they only choose to see what they have done as a goal that they have fulfilled.

We aren’t stupid for deciding that more of the same isn’t a serious answer.

We’re not unpatriotic for not trusting a professional political class peopled by Republicans as well as Democrats when they tell me that if we just do this for them this time, then they can get majorities in the next election and things will be different.  Tell it to Newt Gingrich.  We’ve swallowed that turd sandwich before.  Fool me once, shame on you.  Fool me twice, shame on me.

And calling me a Hobbit because I see the snare and refuse to step into it doesn’t change my mind or my heart in the Reagan tradition.  It just tells me that you know you’re more concerned with your power than you are for the future of this country, and that lacking a convincing argument, you believe that I’m as willing to compromise as you are, in the pursuit of being loved, of course.  Just ask “the maverick”.

My friends…

No thanks. The madness can’t continue if enough people just opt out.

Am I the Only One…

…who wants to choke the s*** of the people on “our side” of the political spectrum when they keep attacking the non-expert/experienced politicians who have decided to endure hostile, partisan reporters spelunking in their sphincters and uteruses, and the scorn and derision of pundits, who often have done nothing remotely risky in their lives other than ordering iffy fish at swanky restaurants or daring to buy a suit off the rack, rather than visiting their tailor for their latest Armani.

I’d like to know when so many conservatives bought into the idea that our leaders must be drawn from the pool of experts and experienced politicians.  A careful reading of the Federalist Papers and other assorted writings make it clear that the Framers certainly never envisioned a government consisting of career politicians and professional experts rich in “knowledge” largely or completely unsupported by real world experience.  But honestly, as far afield as we have strayed from so many other things that they intended, I find this gradual acquiescence less frustrating than the unrestrained contempt that so many of these so-called conservative “journalists”, talking heads, and their devoted followers have for people like Sarah Palin, Herman Cain, or even Michelle Bachmann.

Whether it’s the vacuous and groundless criticisms leveled at Sarah Palin, (She’s dumb, she’s a hillbilly, Trig isn’t hers, OMG, she didn’t give a polished and pat answer to the hostile reporter’s query, its her fault the nutbar shot Gabby Giffords, or that she’s a quitter because she decided to stop costing the taxpayers of Alaska money fighting boundless and, ultimately frivolous ethics complaints and resigned the governorship), the “he doesn’t have a policy plan for every single contingency” leveled at Herman Cain, someone who I would wager has more ideas that would actually grow the economy and jobs in his little finger than The President and all of Congress have between themselves and their legions of advisors and staff.  Besides, I’m quite sure that the only reason an “electable candidate” like Mitt Romney can cogently answer a specific foreign policy question because at least one or more paid advisor has advised him on a safe, or expected answer to such question.  Be honest, do you think at his first inauguration, George W. Bush was planning to spend the majority of time in office in charge of conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan, or that he thought that we would suffer a devastating terrorist attack on our soil that would kill thousands of American civilians, or that a cadre of career Democratic appointees going through a revolving door at Freddie and Fannie would feed an unsustainable bubble by guaranteeing bad loans and personally enriching themselves in the process, despite it being brought to his attention once in office, and his numerous warnings to Congress about their dreadful oversight after it was brought to his attention.

The fact that these criticisms come from people who haven’t decided to subject themselves to the inevitable criticism and scrutiny directed at these candidates is irritating.  These people aren’t making the decision to run because they want power.  Despite the claims to the contrary, they don’t do it for “the fame”.  I’m quite certain that Governor Palin hasn’t appreciated “the fame” that has made her daughters the focus of David Letterman’s creepy sexual innuendos, or Andy Sullivan all but petition the courts to make his own gynecological examination of her nethers.  I’m equally certain that Herman Cain didn’t decide to move into the public eye and run for office because he’d like to be President.  Representative Bachmann on the other hand, clearly enjoys driving partisan hacks like Chrissy “Tingles” Matthews insane when she purposely doesn’t play the role that he hamfistedly tries to maneuver her into.  But then, to hear some talking head with a complete lack of understanding of the tax code prattling on and pretending to know more than her would lead me to frustrate the sputtering simpleton at every opportunity as well.  No, these people made the decision to step away from their lives because they could no longer ignore the fact that decades of leadership by the experienced and the experts isn’t working.  And what thanks do they get?  A complete eclipse of consideration by self-appointed deciders obsessed with talking points, elaborate plans which may or may not survive the events of the potential candidate’s administration, ‘electablity’-otherwise known as the careful positioning that ensures that the candidate doesn’t really have a position that would evoke a strong feeling by any potential voter, and policy expertise informed by, well, more experts.  And then they lament months later the fact that the new boss is largely undistinguishable from the old boss.

I have an idea.

How about you journalists, pundits, loyal followers and other deciders who purport to be on our side try a novel strategy this time?

Shut the hell up and let us decide, m’kay?

Share

The Palin Conundrum

The question being debated in my Sarah Palin’s WTF Moment thread: Can she do it? Can Sarah Palin somehow be able to go over the heads of the MSM, (a la Reagan) and win over the fickle independents, many of whom believe the media narrative that she’s a dangerous loose cannon, and a ditz?

The answer: I don’t know. Before Mike Pence bowed out, I was hoping she would spare herself (and us) the spectacle of what will turn out to be all-out bloody warfare between herself and the left, the media (but I repeat myself), and the elites within our own party.

Commenters, trying to talk me into a Palin candidacy have been making some great points.

Saber says Palin is the woman for this epic battle:

Sarah is Sarah and Ive known her for years and my wife is friends with her in Alaska. You folks are dealing with something that America has not seen in many years, a true patriot and a woman who grew up on the frontier. She is more then a master of a pithy soundbite, she is a master of Blood sports and she tells the WHOLE truth and to those who have wallowed in the world of PC induced socialism her words sound harsh. Wake up before we do not have a country for yourselves to be nice in. Look around you, who excites the American people, who does the heartland love, who is the left afraid of most…Sarah Palin.

Quinn says:

We’ve been pointing out that any actual conservative in her shoes will get demonized to hell and back by the media. You say you already know this. Okay, great.

But the difference is, 99% of the time when the media does this – it works. And it works -completely-. The conservative in question simply disappears off the face of the earth one way or another. Remember Fred “no fire in the belly!” Thompson? He would’ve been a freaking magnificent President. And can you think of anyone with -less- “fire in the belly” than the candidate we wound up with? Doesn’t matter. The media began the meme, even conservatives fell for it, and now…. when was the last time you heard from Fred?

You think their campaign against Sarah has been too successful for her to run. I think it’s exactly the opposite – they’ve thrown EVERYTHING they have at her – really, what else could they do? – and she’s still in a very solid position, with a large base of very devoted fans. That’s remarkable. And add to that that the left’s attacks on her have now gotten so over the top (which they won’t need to be with other conservatives) that it really -is- turning a lot of people off to the left and getting her a fair amount of sympathy. That’s also invaluable. Nominate her, and the left will implode in its attacks on her by revolting everyone with their mysoginistic dripping hate. THAT’S what’ll get the independents to either vote for her or stay home.

So, in summary: You seem to think Sarah is “damaged goods”, that the damage she’s taken has been too great. I think it’s the opposite – she’s endured the left’s savagery better than anyone else I can think of possibly could. Save maybe Reagan, and when you find another one of him, we can discuss this again, but until then – she’s easily the most resilient conservative we’ve got. ANY other real conservative you can think of will be completely destroyed in the minds of everyone before they’ve suffered 10% of the venom she’s taken.

My response:

Quinn, you mentioned some of the powerful plus sides of a Palin candidacy that I fully agree with.

She has “fire in the belly”. She doesn’t shrink from a fight – in fact she seems to relish it. And yes, they have thrown everything but the kitchen sink at her, and she’s still standing. If 1/3 of the guys in congress had her guts we’d be in a much better position, today. (I had this very same conversation with Smitty, last year at CPAC).

Did you see Eric Cantor shrink when grilled about the “birther” issue last Sunday on Meet the Press? Heaven help us. Palin took an amazing amount of heat for answering the question honestly in Dec, 2009, (if you have time do click on link and read the comments – very entertaining-ed.) when it was much more un-PC to talk about it. Now, even Tingles is asking about it, and these guys still can’t find the stones to deal with it.

Pawlenty couldn’t even “stand up” to defend Palin against the vicious Tucson smears when asked about her cross-hairs map. He’s another one off my short list. Republicans need to man up and recognize when the media is engaging in pack behavior, and call them out on it. Aren’t there any strategists in DC who know how to handle the media? Total stoneless wimp submission to the BS isn’t a winning strategy.

The thing is, I’m looking at the handwriting on the wall, and thinking she’s sustained too many hits to be viable at this point.

If you can explain to me how she wins over the middle, most of whom appear to be back in Obama’s camp, I will change my mind. I understand these people are fickle. Many of them won’t make up their minds until they’re in the voters booth.

Sarah Palin said she would jump in if she thought there was a need – meaning there were no conservative fighters in the mix.

With Pence out, that just may be the case. Herman Cain is a fighter, but unfortunately he has never held elective office and that would be a negative for a lot of people.

So it may just come down to Palin. Which is why she should listen to my advice. Don’t give the Jackals scraps to feast on. (And please stop saying “lamestream media”!) That, I can guaran-damn-tee you turns a lot of people off.

The danger is the undecideds who may have some sympathy for her will grow so tired of it, they will decide to vote for Obama to avoid more drama.

Lily links to this American Thinker piece by JR Dunn.

In it, he discusses how the left has been using the same tactics they’re using against Sarah Palin for over 60 years:

When liberalism mutated into an ideology in the wake of the New Deal, it also adapted the “enemies” mindset of its model ideologies, fascism and communism. No longer was politics the grand democratic game. Opponents of liberalism were enemies of progress, of justice, and of the People, deserving no consideration or mercy. The old rules of decorum and civility went out the window, replaced with any below-the-belt move that worked.

He lists victims from Joe McCarthy to the present time. Another must read article on this theme comes from Jack Cashill at The American Thinker: Sarah Palin and the Legacy of Republican ‘Idiocy’.

Dunn suggests how Palin can rise above the attacks:

Until recently, Sarah Palin hewed closely to the Reagan method, dismissing attacks with a joke and a smile (even when such slanders were aimed at her disabled infant child, a display of personal strength that would inspire anyone not blinded by ideology). She needs to return to that method. She need not comment on attacks of this level. She has no deep personal flaws such as Nixon’s neuroticism or Gingrich’s egotism, and she will not experience any similar downfall.

Palin also has something else, something not possessed by previous targets. She has a following. All previous figures had their admirers, and Reagan led a movement. But none had or has what Palin has — a large group of people who look up to her, who view her as an example and a role model, who bleed when she bleeds and hurt when she hurts. It is those people who should be left to handle Palin’s attackers.

We conservative bloggers don’t mind getting a little dirty fighting these swine, but she really needs to remain above the fray.

The new technologies, together with the political will embodied in the Tea Parties, offer us a means of breaking this squalid liberal tactic and restoring a sense of balance to the political debate. It is never a good thing when a political party has access to non-political means to achieve its goals. The liberal Democrats have been abusing their exclusive access to media for close to sixty years. It’s past time they were pulled up short.

And I respond:

Lily, JR Dunn has his finger on the essence of the problem – the media.

Now the question is – between now and the election, can conservative activists go over the heads of the MSM and somehow reach those people who don’t pay much attention to politics..Those folks who believe what they’re spoonfed by the MSM. That’s the stumbling block…that’s the thing I don’t know how we do.

I’m trying to think within the framework of what is currently possible.

And that’s where we’re at. We have from now until election season to figure out how to undo the media narrative that has already hurt her in the eyes of too many, and to somehow win the info wars in the months to come.

And she also needs to win over elites within our own party who don’t think she has “gravitas”.

I welcome your ideas.

Matt says:

Imagine Katie Couric’s face on a billboard, with a line like ” Is she biased? ……Who does she vote for?” If we take the fight to the media figures and CAN expose them as untrustworthy conduits of information, would this be an effective strategy? What if it had a website at bottom of each billboard with excellent links to videos demonstrating their bias….this would have to be extremely professional and well documented….

You can vote for your preferred candidate in a poll this morning at AoSHQ.

RELATED:

Smitty, who I referenced above as having discussed a Palin run with me at CPAC last year, took the pro-Palin position at the time, in fact made many of the same arguments Quinn made, yesterday.

Today, over at The Other McCain, he says:

Tim Pawlenty totally merits consideration. Sarah fan though I am, the Left continues to pile up the negatives on her and poison the well. Sure, it’s intellectually dishonest, and we’ll support her as far as she decides to go, but there it is. The lying bastards who go on about ‘fairness’ are themselves the least fair of the lot. Did Shakespeare predict her coming triumph? I don’t think so, either, but maybe the Bard knew something we do not.
In contrasting Sarah to Tim, I’m deeply respectful of both people for their courageous stands in the face of dishonest opposition. Pawlenty’s book recalled the bridge collapse in Minneapolis, and the media frenzy to connect conservative policy to the tragedy. Maybe Sarah and Tim can flip a coin to see who occupies the upper portion of the ticket.

I guess Smitty can join me among the ranks of those who are no longer “true conservatives”.

As for Pawlenty, I’m willing to take another look at him. I probably shouldn’t be judging him so harshly based on his weak responses to the MSM, re Palin. But it did seem like a disturbing harbinger to me.

Linked by Doug Ross in Larwyn’s Links, thanks!

Re: Civil Discourse

Byron York is rethinking  Obama’s much lauded Tucson speech. Even conservatives have been swooning in its wake, because  the President of the United States didn’t take the moonbat bait, and blame conservative rhetoric for Jared Loughner’s shooting spree.

But as York asks, how could he?

By the time Obama spoke, there was irrefutable evidence that shooting suspect Jared Loughner was deeply mentally ill and acted out of no recognizable political agenda.  Obama simply could not have made the case that Loughner’s acts were in any way the product of political rhetoric from right or left.

He didn’t need to. The point Obama wanted to make was not that political rhetoric caused the violence but that such rhetoric — like, for example, criticism directed at Barack Obama — should be toned down.  So even as he conceded that rhetoric did not cause the violence, Obama argued that it should be muted anyway.  And he cloaked his appeal in so much emotionalism, in so many tear-jerking references to the recently departed, that some in his audience might not have noticed he was making the political point he wanted to make all along.

Read his entire piece.
-
Tammy Bruce’s first impression was the right one. As “uncivil” as she was in making her case -she was 100% correct, and she had every reason to feel appalled. We all should.

Why is it that whenever conservatism is on the ascendancy – we are chided by the left to tone it down? We saw it happen in the ’90′s when conservative talk radio was on the rise, and we’re seeing it today with the tea party movement.

“Be civil”.

When the the left is losing all the arguments, what do we hear?

“Be civil”.

As Rush Limbaugh said on his show, Friday; “civility” is the new word for “shut up”.

We are brow-beated by the most uncivil of civilians. We are told to “watch our tone” by people who look the other way when conservative leaders are threatened, or  verbally abused in the most obscene and unspeakable terms, or hung in effigy. How many leftists have been willing to defend Sarah Palin against the Tucson blood libel? Most have instead, attacked her for using the term, “blood libel”.

How many have been willing to discuss at any length, threats of violence and hate speech against her?

Be civil?

I’m with Don Surber:

For two years now, I have been called ignorant, racist, angry and violent by the left. The very foul-mouthed protesters of Bush dare to now label my words as “hate speech.”

Last week, the left quickly blamed the right for the national tragedy of a shooting spree by a madman who never watched Fox News, never listened to Rush Limbaugh and likely did not know who Sarah Palin is.

Fortunately, the American public rejected out of hand that idiotic notion that the right was responsible.

Rather than apologize, the left wants to change the tone of the political debate.

The left suddenly wants civil discourse.

Bite me.

The left wants to play games of semantics.

Bite me.

The left wants us to be civil — after being so uncivil for a decade.

Bite me.

There is grown-up work to do now. Liberals ran up the federal credit card, destroyed the American medical system and undermined the rule of law — which is the foundation of capitalism — with a bunch of unconstitutional fiats from the president and his bureaucracy.

The economy is a mess. The president “inherited” a 7.6% unemployment rate. It’s now 9.4% — after we spent a record $787 billion on a stimulus.

I was not consulted on that stimulus. I had a very good argument against it. I said the money supply was too large and printing more money would fail. I said let the economic downturn run its course.

Lefties were too busy celebrating the 2008 election to listen.

When people protested lefties made vulgar remarks about tea-bagging and giggled.

So screw you and your civil discourse.

BlackisWhiteImperialConsigliere has a similar message for the left:

Your civility, for decades, has to been to tell us that we are stupid.  To mock those who speak for our views.  To paint anyone who believes as we do as being stupid, ignorant, and hateful.  You have poured scorn, derision, and condescension upon us with the obliviousness of those who never gave a thought to what they were doing.  Any attempt at a dialogue which doesn’t require those on our side to start with a premise that you are correct on any of these characterizations has been met with a vehement ”Shut Up!”, and now, after days of engaging in savage slander and blood libel, now you wring your hands, and speak softly of civility, either as again, trying to control the speech of others, or in hopes of being treated with greater restraint than you and yours showed me and mine since Saturday morning?

Go to Hell.

Your orgy of hate and blame that started before the bodies even hit the floor of that Tucson Safeway last Saturday revealed everything important to any who still had doubts about who you really are.  And I’ll be damned if I’ll be silent and polite about the people who I think are the real danger to America.  Especially after they pantsed themselves in front of the country last week.

Here’s what I’ll do: I will continue to love my country and obey its laws as I always have. I’ll continue to not hang people in effigies, or wish death or destruction on anyone. I will continue my political dissent against the  Obama regime, and I won’t shy away from words like, “Socialist” to describe it. I will also call far left nutjobs, “moonbats” when I feel it’s warranted. And it will be warranted.

If the past week has proven anything to me at all, it’s that liberalism/leftism really is a mental disorder.

MORE:

Bloggers who are politely declining the the left’s  invitation to engage more civilly:

Zilla of the Resistance: Take Your “Civil Discourse” and SHOVE IT!

Wolf Howling: Civility & Other BS

Matthew Vadum, Newsreal Blog: This Is What You Can Do With Your ‘Civility’!

Linked by Michelle Malkin, and Doug Ross, thanks!

Share

The Reason

For all the sound and fury about America not being a Christian nation, once again, we have come to that time of year when the government, and the retail temples for which little is sacred will close early, and then remain closed for a whole day to observe the holiday of Christmas…a day which bears the name of Christ.

While some outlets of government, such as public schools have chosen to remove his name from break which they take, his name is still attached to the holiday that the schools dare not name as it tumbles from the lips of excited children, who cannot be blamed for their jubilation and exuberance about all that the celebration brings, even if it does tend to detract from the reason we observe the celebration with his name.

This is a singular phenomenon. Government does not observe other religions in this fashion. It does not shut down for Muslim holy days. The birthdays of Buddha or Confucius are not marked with empty offices and closed stores. The radio is not filed with Zoroastrian carols at any time of year.

And while those who stridently believe in “a wall of separation between church and state” that the architects of our government never envisioned, and that would have indeed shocked and dismayed them attempt to erase these links in the name of preserving the wall that did not exist until 1949, we continue as if there is nothing at all arrogant in presuming that people more than one hundred and fifty years removed better understood what was intended than the people who wrote the blueprint. It is a fiction laid bare by what occurs this time of year, when we celebrate the birth, life, and death of a man who was God in the flesh, who came to freely give the ultimate gift, knowing that there would be too many who would reject what he gave, and would condemn themselves to a life of bondage, and an eternity of suffering before they would accept that which was freely given.

And during this time of year, when things fall still and silent, in his name, it is an occasion to reflect of the real harbinger of hope and change, humbly born, exalted and abandoned, and resurrected in real transformation. I know that people can still be sobered by the account of this life which came to save all others. I first heard this song a few years ago, and I still feel the gravity of it every single time I hear it.

Merry Christmas to all, even those who doubt or reject the gift…it is freely offered just the same.

The Case Against Cleaver, Part 3: Democratic Socialists Of America

I should have mentioned this in part one, but it totally slipped my mind.

Emanuel Cleaver is one of 70 House members who caucus with Democratic Socialists of America. They proudly made the announcement in their October 2009 newsletter (but it’s been conveniently scrubbed for the election season).  The list is also posted on Scribd.com. This shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone in light of the fact that on his return from Cuba,  he had nothing but praise for Castro’s island paradise.

Here, via Gateway Pundit, is the list:

Co-Chairs
Hon. Raúl M. Grijalva (AZ-07)
Hon. Lynn Woolsey (CA-06)

Vice Chairs
Hon. Diane Watson (CA-33)
Hon. Sheila Jackson-Lee (TX-18)
Hon. Mazie Hirono (HI-02)
Hon. Dennis Kucinich (OH-10)

Senate Members
Hon. Bernie Sanders (VT)

House Members
Hon. Neil Abercrombie (HI-01)
Hon. Tammy Baldwin (WI-02)
Hon. Xavier Becerra (CA-31)
Hon. Madeleine Bordallo (GU-AL)
Hon. Robert Brady (PA-01)
Hon. Corrine Brown (FL-03)
Hon. Michael Capuano (MA-08)
Hon. André Carson (IN-07)
Hon. Donna Christensen (VI-AL)
Hon. Yvette Clarke (NY-11)
Hon. William “Lacy” Clay (MO-01)
Hon. Emanuel Cleaver (MO-05)
Hon. Steve Cohen (TN-09)
Hon. John Conyers (MI-14)
Hon. Elijah Cummings (MD-07)
Hon. Danny Davis (IL-07)
Hon. Peter DeFazio (OR-04)
Hon. Rosa DeLauro (CT-03)
Rep. Donna F. Edwards (MD-04)
Hon. Keith Ellison (MN-05)
Hon. Sam Farr (CA-17)
Hon. Chaka Fattah (PA-02)
Hon. Bob Filner (CA-51)
Hon. Barney Frank (MA-04)
Hon. Marcia L. Fudge (OH-11)
Hon. Alan Grayson (FL-08)
Hon. Luis Gutierrez (IL-04)
Hon. John Hall (NY-19)
Hon. Phil Hare (IL-17)
Hon. Maurice Hinchey (NY-22)
Hon. Michael Honda (CA-15)
Hon. Jesse Jackson, Jr. (IL-02)
Hon. Eddie Bernice Johnson (TX-30)
Hon. Hank Johnson (GA-04)
Hon. Marcy Kaptur (OH-09)
Hon. Carolyn Kilpatrick (MI-13)
Hon. Barbara Lee (CA-09)
Hon. John Lewis (GA-05)
Hon. David Loebsack (IA-02)
Hon. Ben R. Lujan (NM-3)
Hon. Carolyn Maloney (NY-14)
Hon. Ed Markey (MA-07)
Hon. Jim McDermott (WA-07)
Hon. James McGovern (MA-03)
Hon. George Miller (CA-07)
Hon. Gwen Moore (WI-04)
Hon. Jerrold Nadler (NY-08)
Hon. Eleanor Holmes-Norton (DC-AL)
Hon. John Olver (MA-01)
Hon. Ed Pastor (AZ-04)
Hon. Donald Payne (NJ-10)
Hon. Chellie Pingree (ME-01)
Hon. Charles Rangel (NY-15)
Hon. Laura Richardson (CA-37)
Hon. Lucille Roybal-Allard (CA-34)
Hon. Bobby Rush (IL-01)
Hon. Linda Sánchez (CA-47)
Hon. Jan Schakowsky (IL-09)
Hon. José Serrano (NY-16)
Hon. Louise Slaughter (NY-28)
Hon. Pete Stark (CA-13)
Hon. Bennie Thompson (MS-02)
Hon. John Tierney (MA-06)
Hon. Nydia Velazquez (NY-12)
Hon. Maxine Waters (CA-35)
Hon. Mel Watt (NC-12)
Hon. Henry Waxman (CA-30)
Hon. Peter Welch (VT-AL)
Hon. Robert Wexler (FL-19)

Hello, Missouri district 5 voters?…..Please pass this around, and VOTE on November 2nd.

See also:

Right Side News: Naming the Enemies Within Our US Congress

NRO: Just How Many Avowed Socialists are Ohio & Illinois Congressmen?

Key Wiki:  Congressional Progressive Caucus

RELATED:

New Zeal: DSA Celebrates new book on “ACORN’s Kick-Ass Activism”

No Sheeples Here: Democratic Socialists Of America: The Special Interests Behind Congressional Policies

PREVIOUSLY:

Midwest Voices: Watch out, Cleaver, here comes Jacob Turk

The Case Against Cleaver, Part 2: Spittlegate

The Case Against Cleaver: Part One

Can We Call Them Democrat Socialists, Now?

North Attleboro Republican Committee Member Asks Suspected Fake R Candidate, Marty Lamb (MA-3) To Step Down

A couple of weeks ago, I alerted readers to a suspected fake ” tea-party” candidate, Marty Lamb  in MA-3.

This devastating audio from his appearance on The Howie Carr Show gave Massachusetts tea partiers good reason to doubt  his conservative bonafides:

Sunday, North Attleboro Republican Town Committee member, James Lang, wrote an oped in The Sun Chronicle, asking Lamb to step down for the good of the party:

Ex-Democrat poor choice for Congress A Republican is a Republican is a Republican, not a duck that quacks, not a wolf in sheep skin, but a Republican! And some of us have been for a very, very long time with pride.

It seems that Martin Lamb, Republican candidate for Congress in the third district, switched from the Democrat to the Republican Party only last fall and has contributed in the recent past to the campaign of Rep. Ed Markey (in 2004) among three other very liberal Democrats.

It is difficult to see how Mr. Lamb can maintain credibility as a conservative at this point.

A look at Lamb’s speeches and writings provides no evidence showing his actual thought process to support Mr. Lamb’s claim of having “seen the light,” as he now claims. His bulging learning curve is rather thin on specifics. This does not necessarily mean Mr. Lamb has not undergone a “conversion” to conservatism as he claims. Conservative voters searching desperately for an alternative to Rep. James McGovern this fall have little reason to risk that Mr. Lamb’s philosophical conversion isn’t, in fact, merely an opportunistic career conversion. As a dyed in the wool Republican, I appreciate Marty’s effort; however, Mr. Lamb would best serve the conservative movement, to which he claims to belong, by withdrawing immediately from the race.

James Lang, North Attleboro

Let’s hope he takes Mr. Lang’s advice. There are better candidates out there, with longer Republican resumes, including, true blue conservative, Mike Stopa.

Stopa’s views on the ground zero mosque, here.

PREVIOUSLY:

RINO Alert: MA Republican Candidate Marty Lamb Donated To Liberal Dems???

Saturday Political Matinee

Introducing Mike Stopa (R-MA) For Congress




Share

On It…From Day One!

From First Things:

Sixteen barges sat stationary today, although they were sucking up thousands of gallons of BP’s oil as recently as Tuesday. Workers in hazmat suits and gas masks pumped the oil out of the Louisiana waters and into steel tanks. It was a homegrown idea that seemed to be effective at collecting the thick gunk.

“These barges work. You’ve seen them work. You’ve seen them suck oil out of the water,” said Jindal.

So why stop now?

But the Coast Guard ordered the stoppage because of reasons that Jindal found frustrating. The Coast Guard needed to confirm that there were fire extinguishers and life vests on board, and then it had trouble contacting the people who built the barges.

I’m glad they got their priorities straight.

H/T : EddieBear the Magnificent

  • Blog Stats

    • 4,469,785 hits
  • free counters
  • Is your cat plotting to kill you?
  • Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

    Join 463 other followers

    %d bloggers like this: