Peter King On Fox And Friends: “Holder Doesn’t Deserve To Be Attorney General”

King was asked about the Obama administration’s cutting of security funding  in NYC, Holder’s incompetence, and the monster mosque being built at the 9/11 site:

I’m not sure how much more my outrage meter can take.


A Study In Contrasts: Atty Gen. Eric Holder vs Lt Col. Allen West On Radical Islam

Video: Holder Admits He hasn’t Read the AZ Immigration Law



A Study In Contrasts: Atty Gen. Eric Holder vs Lt Col. Allen West On Radical Islam

…Or obfuscation vs clarity… or  weasel words vs hard truths.

Who looks like he has command of the issue, and who looks like an evasive tool?

This is a video that had to be made:

Lt Col Allen West is currently running for the US Congress in FL. You can donate to his campaign, here.

A  cry for Holder to step down or be fired is reverberating throughout the right wing blogosphere:

Wizbang: What does it take to fire an Attorney General?

Gateway Pundit:Eric Holder Is Irresponsible & Dangerous – Eric Holder Must Step Down

Rhymes With Right: Fire Eric Holder

US Backlash: Remove The Weak & Useless Hack Eric Holder

Bluegrass Bulletin: Eric Holder Must Go

Steven’s World: Holder Must Go

IBD: Holder’s Got To Go

You can add me to the chorus. But I thought he was a worthless stooge from the get-go.

An impassioned plea to the contrary:

The Hayride: Please Don’t Get Rid Of Eric Holder, Mr. President (Updated)…

…I don’t want Holder gone.

How can I say that? Very simple. Nothing Holder does and says is at odds with the thoughts and directions of his boss. Barack Obama chose Eric Holder, and he didn’t do so out of ignorance or carelessness. Holder is an Obama Mini-Me. If Obama was Attorney General he’d be doing exactly what Holder is doing. And if and when Holder is finally made to resign in disgrace – a resignation I hope not to see any time soon – someone equally at odds with the rest of the country and equally unfit to serve will take his place. Because it takes such a person to do what Obama wants done.

So let’s leave Holder where he is. Let him be an albatross around the President’s neck. The Democrats were sorry to see Michael “Brownie” Brown go as head of FEMA; now that their Michael Brown (or at least one of their Michael Browns; Janet Napolitano, Carol Browner, Tim Geithner, Kathleen Sebelius, Ken Salazar and even Joe Biden are also just as incompetent and ridiculous as Brownie was) has shown his stripes in the AG’s chair, I want him as a symbol of the weakness, inanity and fecklessness of this administration as a whole.

Removing Holder won’t change the performance of the Justice Department. All that would do is put someone just like Holder, but who doesn’t have his disgraceful reputation and record in the job YET, in charge. And that fresh face will go on doing the terrible work Obama wants done without the public’s recognition of same.

Sounds  a lot like the argument I made some months ago when a hue and cry erupted for Janet Napolitano to step down:

Janet Napolitano Echoes Obama

We’re kidding ourselves if we think that these ludicrously incompetent stooges would be replaced with anyone better.


Congressman Peter King (R-NY): Holder ‘doesn’t deserve to be attorney general’

“An attorney general who eight and a half years after Sept. 11 does not realize our enemy is radical Islam is either so politically correct or so out of touch that he doesn’t deserve to be attorney general,” King said on Fox News.

“I mean, this is why he wants to have the terror trials of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in Lower Manhattan — he just doesn’t get it.”


Media Mutters really stuck it to the wingnuts, this time:

Right-wing media falsely claim Holder “refuse[d] to say ‘radical Islam’ is a cause of terrorism”

Right-wing media have falsely claimed that Attorney General Eric Holder “refus[ed] to say ‘radical Islam’ is a cause of terrorism.” In fact, Holder specifically mentioned “a radical version of Islam” as a possible motivation for Faisal Shahzad, a suspect in the attempted Times Square bombing.

Well, my goodness! Why, yes…If you watch the video, you can clearly hear Holder saying (after much evasiveness and dissimulation): “I certainly think it is possible that people who espouse a radical version of Islam have had an ability to impact people like Mr. Shahzad…” while looking like it was making him ill to say it.

After being hectored for 2 minutes he did finally sort of, in a round-about way, almost  say  —-well no, he really never actually did say that  radical Islam is the cause of terrorism. He was willing to entertain the idea that it may be a contributing factor, and it pained him to say it.

(I’m now picturing Media Matters hacks breathlessly fact-checking the point where Holder finally admits radical Islam may possibly have had an ability to impact terrorism…“2 minutes in” – ORLY??? How about 2 and a HALF minutes?!)


Carol from No Sheeples Here had the same idea, and  made her own video, which can be seen, here.

Linked by Hyscience, Pundit and Pundette, and Obi’s Sister, and Just A Conservative Girl,thanks!


Video: Holder Admits He hasn’t Read the AZ Immigration Law

Well, it  doesn’t get any better than this:

Good God almighty…

I mean, we all know the first instinct of a Dem Socialist is to lie and/or obfuscate when cornered…so why would he admit a truth that makes him look like such a weak, demagogic tool? Was he afraid that if  he had claimed that he had read the legislation, he would have been grilled about the details within? Heh!

Via Pundette, we find an Instapundit  less stoic than usual:

THIS IS THE QUALITY OF ANALYSIS I EXPECTED FROM HIM: Holder admits: No, I haven’t read the Arizona law I’ve been dumping on. “Here’s the money question, prompted not just by Holder’s ignorance but the fact that Hillary criticized the statute without having read it either: Are they deliberately not reading it so that they have an excuse to walk back their criticisms later if this gets too hot politically?”

UPDATE: “The Most Transparently Irresponsible Administration in American History.” “How could the Attorney General of the United States malign a state law as raising profound constitutional questions, imply that the lawmakers who drafted it are racists, and direct a Justice Department review of the law without having read the law?

ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader Michael Alexander writes: “Why does this surprise anyone? After all, this administration doesn’t seem interested in reading the laws they write and pass themselves, so why should they be expected to take the time to read someone else’s?”

I’m not through with Holder, today…Check back for more of  his brilliance, later.


Frugal Cafe: NBC News Stunned: Its Own Poll Shows Support of Arizona’s Illegal Immigration Law Now Up to 64 Percent… Mexican Constitution Forbids Non-citizens from Political Events Participation (video)

Not a winning issue for the Obami. The embarrassing demagoguery ain’t woiking.

Hat tip: Gateway Pundit.


Video: Glenn Beck On All The President’s Men

Beck’s right – We have gotten numb.

Every single day, there’s another assault on our senses from this administration. Like Obama’s  horrendous, hackneyed and hypocritical speech introducing Elena Kagan as his nominee for the Supreme Court. I would literally rather put up pictures of a kitten playing with a parrot, than deal with this crap, anymore.

Who wants to watch Obama talk about how he rescued the economy, again? Anybody? No?

I just feel like hunkering down, and posting nothing but cat videos, until reinforcements come in November.

Then I saw the Glenn Beck videos from his show, today, at YouTube, and I thought, yeah, no kidding –  – we’re so screwed – and I  almost put up another cat video. But Beck has been busy discovering the networks, connecting  dots, and lifting rocks- exposing the squirming grubs underneath.  He’s doing important work :

Part One:

Continue reading

Elena Kagan’s College Thesis Surfaces

Yeah, we already knew that Elena Kagan had mentioned Socialism in her college thesis. We knew that she was….a fan.

But until now, I didn’t know how big a  fan she was…

Erick Erickson has dug up the entire thesis.

Doug Ross has excepts up at his site:

Acknowledgements …I would like to thank my brother Marc, whose involvement in radical causes led me to explore the history of American radicalism in the hope of clarifying my own political ideas…

…most historians have looked everywhere but to the American socialist movement itself for explanations of U.S. socialism’s failure…

…the American socialists· “failure to build a movement that even resembled Sombart’s idealized notion of a class-conscious party–a failure which they shared with most of their European counterparts–did not render their party any less significant. Nor did such a failure render their party any less successful…

[To explain why the] American socialist movement of the Progressive Era suddenly fell apart… we must turn to the internal workings and problems of the socialist movement itself.

…the dissolution of the Socialist Party resulted not from the walkout of the syndicalists in 1912 but from the infinitely more disastrous departure of the communists seven years later…

…[Early on] the [American] socialists divided into two camps: those of “constructive” and “revolutionary” socialism.

…the Russian Revolution set the spark to their long-smoldering rebellion, and the Socialist Party burst into flames. In 1919, the SP split into two, and the New York City communist movement emerged… by the last 1920’s, the socialist movement in New York City was dead.

…The SP’s first priority was to prepare for revolution than to work for reforms — to bring ultimate salvation rather than immediate relief.

Conservative craft unions could not develop the unity and class consciousness that alone would lead workers to vote the socialist ticket. They could not compel a resistant capitalist class to accept an SP electoral victory. Nor could they prepare the workers for the administration of industry in the cooperative commonwealth. According to such left-wing leaders as Boudin and Slobodin, then, the socialists needed to do all in their power to set New York’s unions on a militant path. If that meant interfering with some other “arm”, so be it.

…Most historians have viewed World War I as an unqualified disaster for the American socialist movement…

You can almost picture her weeping hot, bitter, tears during this part….

Here’s  her conclusion:

In our own times, a coherent socialist movement is nowhere to be found in the United States. Americans are more likely to speak of a golden past than of a golden future, of capitalism’s glories than of socialism’s greatness… Why, in a society by no means perfect, has a radical party never attained the status of a major political force?

…[America’s] societal traits… a relatively fluid class structure, an economy which allowed at least some workers to enjoy [prosperity]… prevented the early twentieth century socialists from attracting an immediate mass following. Such conditions did not, however, completely checkmate American socialism

…Through its own internal feuding, then, the SP exhausted itself forever and further reduced labor radicalism… to the position of marginality and insignificance from which it has never recovered.The story is a sad but also a chastening one for those who, more than half a century after socialism’s decline, still wish to change America

…if the history of Local New York shows anything, it is that American radicals cannot afford to become their own worst enemies. In unity lies their only hope.


Allahpundit thinks not. Apparently everyone was a radical in college, or something. Who knew? I wasn’t—but maybe I didn’t go to the right school?

The opinion that these folks’ ideas have most likely evolved significantly since their radical college days, I think is a mistaken one. I think many of the Democrat Socialists we see in government, today,  were radicalized in college, (like Hillary), and stayed radical. In Obama’s case…he was radical before he even started college – he sought out the Marxist professors, etc, etc.

Look…I had Obama pegged back in the Spring of ’08, when I noticed his disturbing pattern of friends, associates, and supporters. Hannity did a show about Obama’s ties to radicals in the Fall of ’08, and again last Fall, another one exposing the disturbing pattern of radical appointees in Obama’s administration:

This ain’t rocket science. Kagan is a fellow traveler, and incidentally Elena Kagan was finally caught on tape saying something important…damn, Barack Obama is awesome.

Yeah, she’s a huge fan of the Bamster, too.

See also:

Verum Serum: Imagine the Reaction if Bush Nominee for Supreme Court Taught a Course on “Presidential Lawmaking”


This bit, here is particularly galling:

…[America’s] societal traits… a relatively fluid class structure, an economy which allowed at least some workers to enjoy [prosperity]… prevented the early twentieth century socialists from attracting an immediate mass following. Such conditions did not, however, completely checkmate American socialism

Too much. The fact that Capitalism was working, was almost enough to destroy the Socialist movement, darn it all. But since true Utopia doesn’t take place until complete equality of outcome has been achieved, the Statists kept on trying.

Elena Kagan must have been doing cartwheels the day Obama was elected.


Morgan at Verum Serum has found another link to the chain of evidence that Kagan is a raging Socialist::

Last night I discovered that in 2006 Kagan made a maximum contribution ($500) to the campaign of John Bonifaz, who was running for the Democratic nomination to be Secretary of the Commonwealth of MA. Bonifaz, it turns out, is about as far as left as you can get without joining the Bernie Sanders fan club. His opponent in the race actually accused him of being a closet Green Party supporter, which of course is the polite way to accuse someone of being a socialist. But forget labels, here are just a few facts which establish Bonifaz’ far left credentials:

  • Authored the 2004 book Warrior-King: The Case for Impeaching George W. Bush
  • His only national-level political endorsements in 2006 were from Dennis Kucinich, John Conyers, and Jesse Jackson, Jr.
  • Early national board member of the Progressive Democrats of America, whose platform includes ending the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, establishing single-payer health care, enacting the Employee Free Choice Act, and opposing all free-trade agreements. Current advisory board members include Maxine Waters, Raul Grijalva, Lynn Woolsey, and for good measure SDS founder Tom Hayden.

It should also be emphasized that this was the primary campaign to unseat the incumbent Democrat. Based on Bonifaz’ limited base of support within the Democratic party, and the outcome of the election where he lost 83% to 17%, he really was a fringe candidate. A far left, fringe candidate.