Muddling Toward Maturity Blog

JOURNALISTIC LIES ABOUT THE FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL

The accusation: that FRC supports the death penalty for homosexuals in Uganda.  Totally false.  It doesn't.  But liberals spread their lies fervently.  And that produces hate.  And hate produces killers.  One man recently tried to kill all the members of the FRC office staff.

PLease read the following statement by the Family Research Council:  (The bolding is my own)

It used to be that the media reported the story. Now they are the story. With fewer journalists able to separate the news from their personal politics, groups like FRC are no longer fighting bias--but outright deception. If you read Monday's Update or follow me on Twitter, then you know that FRC was highly complimentary of Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni, who took the bold step of leading his country in a public prayer of confession for a multitude of sins Uganda committed over the last 50 years, including the genocide of Idi Amin. "We want Uganda to be known as a nation that fears God and as a nation whose foundations are firmly rooted in righteousness and justice..."

Not surprisingly, the U.S. media wasn't nearly as impressed by this gesture as FRC--a fact I alluded to in a tweet that same day. "American liberals are upset that Ugandan Pres is leading his nation in repentance--afraid of a modern example of a nation prospered by God?"

Well, as we learned two years ago, if you want to get the press's attention, just say the word "Uganda" and wait for the firestorm. For years, the African nation has been condemned for its severe laws criminalizing homosexuality. Despite allegations to the contrary, FRC has never supported that policy--or any policy that imposes the death penalty on homosexuals. What we do oppose is the suggestion that gay and lesbian acts are universal human rights. So when Congress introduced a resolution in 2010 denouncing Uganda's punishment for homosexuality, FRC fought--at the request of some Members--to strike the pro-homosexual "human rights" language from the final measure.

Several liberals, including David Weigel at the Washington Post, chose to misrepresent our involvement as an indication that we opposed the entire bill! "Family Research Council Lobbied against Resolution Condemning Uganda Anti-Homosexuality Law," Weigel's headline read. It was a convenient storyline for extremists like the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) who resort to demonizing FRC when they can't compete with us ideologically. Although Weigel later posted a retraction, the damage had already been done.

Now, more than two years later, the lies about FRC's position have resurfaced. After Monday's story, HRC had the audacity to post that by applauding President Museveni, FRC was "praising the 'kill the gays' bill." I challenge anyone with a half a brain to read my tweet or Update story and conclude that FRC is any way supporting the death penalty of homosexuals. But gay activists have their hooks so deeply in the mainstream media that reporters no longer bother to check their facts. Once the blogs start spreading the lies of organizations like HRC and SPLC, they percolate up to reporters like Carolyn Lochhead at the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, who regurgitate HRC's garbage without so much as a courtesy call to our office. And these aren't harmless little lies either. They're the same intentional misrepresentations that led to the controversy over FRC's alleged ties to Chick-fil-A--culminating, as you may remember, in the violent shooting of one of our own employees!

Americans need to understand that this cozy relationship between the liberal media and unreliable sources like HRC is fostering a culture of hatred and violence--that same culture that led to the attempted mass murder of the entire FRC office. While it's troubling that any organization would deliberately spread untruths, it's more disturbing that someone who claims the title of journalist would report these lies as fact. Is it any wonder that distrust of the media is at an all-time high?

Update 11/30/12 - Current news is that Uganda's anti-homosexuality bill will not contain the death penalty.

DENNIS PRAGER - THE LEFT SUCCEEDS USING RIDICULE, DEMONIZATION, AND CHARACTER ASSASINATION

Forget honest arguments.  Destroy your opponent, that's the modus operandi of the Left.  

The left's demonization, personal vilification, and mockery of its opponents have been the most powerful tools in the left-wing arsenal for a century.

Prager explains and elaborates.

Quick Takes

George Will - Democrats have no respect for the Bill of Rights. 

South Korean customs officials discover thousands of pills filled with powdered human baby flesh

Southern Poverty Law Center refuses to investigate the Left

Eric Metaxas - Christian outreach to  Elites can change history

DENNIS PRAGER - "NOVEMBER IS A PLEBISCITE ON THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION"

I urge you to click through to read Prager's entire article.  He lays out the crucial issue that Americans need to understand: this election is a vote for or against the American revolution.  Prager writes:

Election Day 2012 will not be a presidential election. It will be a plebiscite.

Americans will not only be voting for a president (and a House and a third of the Senate). They will be participating in a plebiscite on the definition of America.

If Americans reelect the Democrat, Barack Obama, they will have announced that America should be like Western European countries — governed by left-wing values. Americans will have decided that America’s value system — “Liberty,” “In God We Trust,” “E Pluribus Unum” — should be replaced.

The election in November is therefore a plebiscite on the American Revolution. The usual description of presidential elections — “the most important in our lifetime” — is true this time. In fact, it may be the most important election since the Civil War, and possibly since America’s founding.

SO MUCH FOR FREE SPEECH

Leftists can be relied on to try to silence opponents.  They're not interested in dialog or debate.  Kevin Holtsberry says:

I have worked in or around the Ohio Statehouse for a decade or more.  I have seen a great many protests, counter-protests and events involving all kinds of issues and groups.  But when I stopped by the Statehouse today to check out the Values Bus Tour event put on by Heritage Foundation and Family Research Council I experienced something I don’t believe I had ever witnessed.  A counter-protest effectively shutting down an event.

Holtsberry continues:

As you can see in the video above, a small group of what appeared to be pro-abortion and gay/lesbian protestors had gathered with signs to protest the values groups.  And this is to be expected, and would have been largely uneventful, except for one thing: a couple of the protesters had bullhorns equipped with sirens.  They used these to emit an earsplitting noise that made hearing the speakers nearly impossible and mere rational thought challenging. In person it was much louder and headache inducing than in the video if you can believe it

The video does capture the anger and vitriol of the left quite well in my opinion. But it also points out the hypocrisy of the left. They so often pretend to defend free speech, dialog, tolerance, elevated discourse and a host of other virtues and freedoms. But here is a group hosting an event focused on getting people registered to vote, educating them on the issues and getting them engaged in the political process. Whether you agree with their policies or politics this is democracy, right? This is about free speech and public engagement on the issues that matter to our country.

So what does this group of angry leftists do? Instead of providing an alternative point of view for those attending the event, or even protesting the event from the sidewalk, they basically use sirens and shouts to prevent the speakers from being heard. They were clearly attempting to silence an opposing viewpoint. They were not interested in debate or discussion but loudly and angrily demanding that these peaceful folks leave the state; screeching that these views were not to be tolerated but shouted down and silenced.

We have entered an Orwellian world where views on issues from spending and deficits to abortion and marriage – views held by large swaths of the American electorate – are not opposing viewpoints or different perspectives to be debated and/or refuted but “hate speech” that must be silenced and kept from even having an audience.

Keep this in mind next time the left tries to claim the moral high ground on free speech and tolerance.

JOHN VENNARI - "WHAT OBAMA LEARNED FROM ALINSKY"

I'm grateful to a friend for passing along Vennari's important article.  (HT: bs)  I haven't read Saul D. Alinsky's "Rules for Radicals," but see the need to do so.  If Alinsky advocated a radical relativism and amorality in furthering political goals as stated below, we have all the more reason to fear the current occupant of the White House since he is regarded as Alinsky's disciple.  Vennari writes:

Obama was a student of the ruthless tactics of Saul Alinsky, the left-wing agitator whose landmark Rules for Radicals was dedicated to the devil.[9] Mike Kruglik, Obama’s Chicago instructor in Alinsky methods, said Obama was the best student of Alinsky tactics he ever had.[10]

David Alinsky, Saul Alinsky’s son, applauded Obama’s successful implementation of Alinsky methods. Immediately after Obama’s acceptance speech at the 2008 Democratic National Convention, David Alinsky wrote a letter to the Boston Globe in full praise of Obama as one who learned well his father’s methods.[11]

Even Obama zealot Chris Matthews, in a December 2010 broadcast of “Hardball”, referred to Obama as “the guy who comes from Saul Alinsky”.[12]

As is stated in his Rules for Radicals, Alinsky’s foundational principles are:

1) There is no such thing as dogma, all truth is relative: “For the organizer, everything is relative and changing,” said Alinsky. The organizer “does not have any fixed truth.” This places the organizer in a superior position, Alinsky insisted, because he is “free from the shackles of dogma.”[13]

2) There is no such thing as a fixed rule of ethics. For Alinksy, the end justifies the means, and all ethics are elastic according to the situation you are in or the strategy you need to employ. Alinsky taught, “Ethical standards must be elastic to stretch with the times.”[14] If you need to lie, you lie. If you need to make promises you know you won’t keep, you do it anyway.

3) Corruption in the leader is a kind of virtue: “To say that a corrupt means corrupts the ends is to believe in the Immaculate Conception of ends and principle”, Alinksy blasphemously asserted. “The real arena is corrupt and bloody. Life is a corrupting process. He who fears corruption, fears life.” Alinsky castigates the leader who places his personal conscience and personal salvation above the needs of the people, claiming that such a leader “does not care enough for the people to be corrupted for them”.[15]

This is the school in which Barack Obama was formed: no dogma; no objective truth; no fixed standards of ethics; the end justifies the means; and corruption in the leader is raised to the level of virtue.

How can anyone believe anything Obama says? There is no fixed standard of ethics preventing him from lying to achieve whatever aims he deems fit.

As a student of Alinksy (as is Hillary Clinton), [16] Obama will think nothing of stamping out those who stand in the way of his Party’s agenda. In his 1946 Reveille for Radicals: Alinsky wrote that if the radicals become stronger than the opposition, they must “crush the opposition”.[17]

Congressman Chris Smith and Tulsa’s Bishop Slattery appear aware of Obama’s aim to “crush the opposition”. As noted, Smith warned that Obama’s pro-abortion directives are designed so that “religious hospitals will be squeezed out.” Bishop Slattery observed the new mandate may end up “closing down every Catholic school, hospital and the other public ministries of the Church, which is perhaps their underlying intention.”

It is futile appealing the Constitution to Obama, since he publicly expresses support for its effective revision.

In a 2001 radio interview, Obama argued that the Warren Court, which started a long line of activist decisions in a number of areas, did not go far enough:

1) it failed to bring about “redistributive change” and a “redistribution of wealth”;

2) it failed to, in Obama’s words, “break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the Founding Fathers in the Constitution”[18]

In his book, The Audacity of Hope, Obama had this to say:

“Ultimately, I have to side with Justice Breyer’s view of the Constitution – that it is not a static but rather a living document, and must be read in the context of the ever-changing world.”[19]

Obama belongs to the clique of doctrinal liberals whose basic tenet is, “the only law of the land should be what we say it is at the moment,” which is a formula for State Absolutism. . . .

Read the whole thing.  These facts should raise the fear factor of every freedom-loving America.

LEFTISTS WAR ON CONSERVATIVE WOMEN

Michelle Malkin lists some of the disgusting epithets thrown at her and other conservative women.  Plus, ShePAC strikes back at misogynist Bill Maher with a video.

DEMOCRAT CHAIRMAN CARL LEVIN WANTS RUSH LIMBAUGH DROPPED FROM ARMED FORCES RADIO

No surprise there.  The Left always wants to silence opposition.  What else is new?  Report is here.  (HT: HotAir)

PAT BUCHANAN BLACKLISTED FROM MSNBC

The blacklisting of Pat Buchanan from MSNBC represents another case of the uber left refusing to entertain viewpoints counter to the "orthodoxies" they espouse.  I certainly don't agree with everything Buchanan says, but on the other hand, he says a lot of things worthy of serious reflection and debate.

Naturally the gay and lesbian crowd went after him when he had the temerity to say "I believe homosexual acts to be 'unnatural and immoral.'"  The Human Rights Campaign (America's leading voice for lesbians, bisexuals, gays and transgendered people) said that Buchanan's "extremist ideas are incredibly harmful to millions of LBGT people around the world."   Buchanan's response is simple:  "That homosexual acts are unnatural and immoral has been doctrine in the Catholic Church for 2,000 years." 

In his response to being let go, "Blacklisted, But Not Beaten," Buchanan discusses the accusations hurled at him of being not only a homophobe, but a racist and an anti-semite as well.

The Family Research Council offers its own take on Buchanan's dismissal:

Fired Fighter

After 10 years of commentating on MSNBC, Pat Buchanan is out of a job. The network decided to "part ways" with the former presidential candidate after intense pressure from rabid activists, who whined that Buchanan's new book, Suicide of a Superpower: Will America Survive to 2015? hurt their feelings. His views on homosexuality and the decline of Christian America triggered the rage of the Left and resulted in a massive campaign of corporate bullying. As usual, liberals bombard the media with cries of "discrimination" and "intolerance" until the networks relent and agree to a one-sided debate. In his "Blacklisted, But Not Beaten" column, Pat exposes the strategy of the liberals who are too afraid to dialogue.

[Buchanan writes:] The modus operandi of these thought police... is to prattle about their love of dissent and devotion to the First Amendment, [while] they seek systematically to silence and censor dissent. Without a hearing, they smear and stigmatize as racist, homophobic, or anti-Semitic any who contradict what George Orwell once called their 'smelly little orthodoxies.' They then demand that the heretic recant, grovel, apologize, and pledge to go forth and sin no more. Defy them, and they will go after the network where you work, the newspapers that carry your column, the conventions that invite you to speak. If all else fails, they go after the advertisers. I know these blacklisters. They operate behind closed doors, with phone calls, mailed threats, and off-the-record meetings. They work in the dark because, as Al Smith said, nothing un-American can live in the sunlight.

"Let error be tolerated," Pat quoted Thomas Jefferson, "so long as reason is free to combat it." The media, and in fact our entire society, was built on a foundation of civil debate. Like Pat, radical liberals work hard to keep FRC off TV and radio. I'm thankful that MSNBC and other networks have allowed several of my FRC teammates and me to represent your values in many recent debates.

Me:  In his article defending himself, Buchanan wrote:

Documented in the 488 pages and 1,500 footnotes of Suicide of a Superpower is my thesis that America is Balkanizing, breaking down along the lines of religion, race, ethnicity, culture, and ideology and that Western peoples are facing demographic death by century’s end. Are such subjects taboo? Are they unfit for national debate?

So it would seem. MSNBC President Phil Griffin told reporters, “I don’t think the ideas that [Buchanan] put forth [in his book] are appropriate for the national dialogue, much less on MSNBC.”

I think such subjects are eminently worthy of serious discussion.  That a TV station thinks differently illustrates the mentality that is fueling the "suicide of a superpower."

TOTALITARIANISM IN THE SCHOOL LUNCH ROOM: NORTH CAROLINA MOM'S LUNCH FOR PRE-SCHOOLER REJECTED BY GOVERNMENT INSPECTOR

I'd say the child's mom packed quite a good lunch!  The story sounds wacky, except it really happened.  Welcome to the world of totalitarian governmental intrusion.  It should make us very, very angry.  From FRC:

There may be no such thing as a free lunch--but there should be freedom in packing one! Unfortunately for a four-year-old in North Carolina, freedom isn't on this administration's menu. After an inspector rummaged around her lunch, they decided it was too "unhealthy" and seized it! The agent insisted that the "turkey and cheese sandwich, banana, apple juice, and potato chips" her mom had packed didn't meet USDA guidelines because it was missing milk and a vegetable. So what wholesome meal did they replace it with? Chicken nuggets! Not only did the little girl barely touch them, but the school sent a note home billing the family for the meal.

Where does the federal government get the power to charge this family because it doesn't like what it's eating? I suppose if the government can force you to buy health insurance, and it can force you to pay for contraception, then a vegetable mandate is small potatoes. According to a spokesman for West Hoke Elementary, the regulations were put in place by the Division of Child Development and Early Education at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (naturally!). The rule states, "When [preschoolers] bring their own food for meals and snacks to the center, if the food does not meet the specified nutritional requirements, the center must provide additional food necessary to meet those requirements." Notice that it doesn't say to confiscate the food and fine the family. It says to supplement the meal. (And I doubt fried chicken was the replacement the USDA had in mind!)

The mom was so irate about the government's brown bag check that she contacted the local newspaper and her congressman. "What got me so mad is, number one, don't tell my kid I'm not packing her lunch box properly," she told the Carolina Journal. "I pack her lunchbox according to what she eats. It always consists of a fruit. It never consists of vegetables. She eats vegetables at home because I have to watch her because she doesn't really care for vegetables," she said. The inspector wouldn't know that. Nor would he know about the little girl's allergies or health issues. But, like a true government bureaucrat, he still insisted that he knew better. "We as a nation are ceding our responsibilities to care for our children every day," writes Julie Gunlock. "Even the most basic tasks--like packing simple lunches--are being turned over to our government overlords..."

This is exactly what Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) meant in November when she said that she looks forward to "doing for child care what we did for health care." The Left's goal is not just to control you. The goal is to control your children. And the more authority it can siphon away from parents, the better its chances are. As it stands, more power is being centralized in HHS than almost every other agency combined. Under ObamaCare, it can dictate the doctors you see, what treatments you can afford, what values you violate, and now, what lunches you pack. What's next? Will inspectors patrol the gyms to see who's exercising or chaperone date night to make sure you order low-cal? If anything, this incident at West Hoke Elementary should show Americans exactly what's at stake this November. This isn't about lunches--it's about liberty. And if Americans aren't careful, they'll lose the battle for both.

MEDIA SILENCE ON MARCH FOR LIFE

Tina Korbe writes:

My hopes for a Time magazine spread about the March for Life protesters are fading fast. For the fifth year in a row, The New York Times ignored the March for Life, which drew at least a hundred thousand participants in D.C. alone.

She quotes NewBusters:

For the fifth year in a row, there was no story in the Times print edition on the annual March for Life against abortion in Washington, D.C., which every year draws massive crowds in unpromising weather on the anniversary of Roe v. Wade, the Supreme Court’s decision legalizing abortion. …

As Times Watch reported last January, the 2011 print edition of the Times did not feature an actual news story of the thousands who marched in frigid weather, just two photos with the caption “Abortion Opponents Rally On the National Mall,” above a three- sentence description that led to a link to photographs online. That was actually a vast improvement; the Times in print absolutely ignored the March for Life in 2010, 2009, and 2008 (a 300-word story marked the 2007 March for Life on January 23 of that year).

The Times is far more eager to publicize protests in support of liberal causes, no matter how puny. When four protesters marched in support of the doomed Dream Act to grant amnesty to illegal immigrant students, the Times marked the occasion with a 780-word story.

Korbe comments further:

Believe it or not, it gets worse. The NYT has a special standing feature on its blog, The Caucus, to document “Happenings in Washington” and not even that included a reference to the March. It did, however, mention that the N.H.L. Stanley Cup Champions, the Boston Bruins, would be honored by the president at the White House. Important stuff.

Meanwhile, about 50,000 people participated in the West Coast March for Life and, according to a tweet from Michelle Malkin, not even the local media turned out to cover it.

As a reminder to journalists who’ve forgotten, in general, the bigger the size and scope of the event, the more newsworthy it is. That means a protest of 100,000 is generally more newsworthy than a protest of 10. . . . 

Me:  I think it shameful and embarrassing that the New York Times is such an ideological organ that it fails to cover major events such as a pro-life rally.  Shame and double shame.  

Photo credits: St. Blogostine blog

Further note:  Record Turnout for Paris March for Life.

LEFTIST HYPOCRISY EXPOSED IN PETER SCHWEIZER'S BOOK, "DO AS I SAY NOT AS I DO"

Wintery Knight posts, "Hypocrisy on the left: do the action of liberals match their words?"  WK discusses Peter Schweizer’s 2004 book “Do As I Say Not As I Do, and includes a 32 minute 2011 video lecture of Schweizer talking about his book.  WK also excerpts a Front Page interview with Schweizer, and concludes stating:

I would really recommend taking a look at this book. It’s similar to Paul Johnson’s “Intellectuals” if you’ve ever read that, but it’s better.

Me:  I've read Johnson's book, and if Schweizer's is better, that is high praise indeed.

TWO DISTINCT WORLDVIEWS: THE COMPETING WORLDVIEWS OF THE TEA PARTY AND OWS

HT: Tina Korbe

The above focuses on economics.  Unexplored are the consequences of Big Government on freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and a host of other issues.

PHOTOS: MICHAEL MOORE'S MASSIVE MICHIGAN VACATION MANSION BEYOND 99 PERCENT'S WILDEST DREAMS

Andrew Breitbart:

Left-wing filmmaker Michael Moore has been touring Occupy Wall Street demonstrations across the country–including some of the most violent, such as Occupy Oakland–urging activists to continue their fight against the wealthy “one percent” of Americans.

Initially, Moore tried to deny that his massive wealth made him a member of that one percent. Even when forced to admit the obvious, Moore suggested that he was not always among the one percent, based on his income: “Other years, like last year, I don’t have a job (no movie, no book) and so I make a lot less.”

The fact is that Moore is so wealthy that he does not need to worry about his income. According to public tax records, Moore owns a massive vacation home on Torch Lake, Michigan–one of the most elite communities in the United States–in addition to his posh Manhattan residence.

Through an independent source, Big Hollywood has obtained exclusive photographs of the house matching the address of Moore’s waterfront mansion. It is the kind of luxurious summer home that 99 percent of Americans can only dream of owning.  

           Click here for more photos and commentary

MICHAEL GERSON - OCCUPY WALL STREET MOVEMENT NO LONGER CREDIBLE

Gerson titles his Washington Post article, "As radicalism creeps in, credibility retreats from OWS."  Gerson's  measured observations summarize well the state of things.   He writes:  (my bolding)

At what point does a protest movement become an excuse for camping? At what point is utopianism discredited by the seedy, dangerous, derelict fun fair it creates? At what point do the excesses of a movement become so prevalent that they can reasonably be called its essence? At what point do Democratic politicians need to repudiate a form of idealism that makes use of Molotov cocktails?

MARK STEYN - "CRISIS OF DECADENCE" IN THE UNITED STATES

Mark Steyn cannot be accused of optimistic euphoria.  He writes:  (my emphases)

Middle-class America is dying before our eyes: The job market is flatlined, the college fees soar ever upward, the property market is underwater, and Obamacare is already making medical provision both more expensive and more restrictive. That doesn’t leave much else — although no doubt, as soon as they find something else, the statists will fix that, too. As more and more middle Americans are beginning to notice, they lead more precarious and vulnerable lives than did their blue-collar parents and grandparents without the benefit of college “education” and health “benefits.” For poorer Americans, the prospects are even glummer, augmented by ever grimmer statistics on obesity, childhood diabetes, and much else. Potentially, this is not decline, but a swift devastating downward slide, far beyond what post-war Britain and Europe saw and closer to Peronist Argentina on a Roman scale.

Steyn on the "occupy" movement:

... The “Occupy” movement has no real solutions, except more government, more spending, more regulation, more bureaucracy, more unsustainable lethargic pseudo-university with no return on investment, more more more of what got us into this hole.

Add to Steyn's obesrvations that of Henry Payne, who stands amazed that the Occupy movement has even spread to Detroit, of all places.  His comments constitute a MUST READ:

Detroit would seem an odd place for the Occupy movement. After, all, it has already received everything the 99 Percenters are demanding.

Want redistribution of wealth? For 40-odd years, Detroit has gotten tens of billions of dollars in welfare assistance, from the Great Society of Lyndon Johnson’s administration to Barack Obama’s Strong Cities Initiative.

Want good-paying jobs? Michigan is the notorious home of the Big Three automakers, who paid their workers a best-in-the-U.S. wage of $40 an hour — far above the average U.S. manufacturing wage of $15 an hour, resulting in blue-collar workers who often earned six-figure incomes.

Want socialized medicine? Canada is right across the river from Detroit, offering a single-payer, government-run health system.

And yet on Friday, some 500 demonstrators from across Michigan descended on downtown Detroit to protest conditions here. They gathered at the Spirit of Detroit statue at the base of Woodward Avenue. They marched up Detroit’s main street past the gleaming new corporate headquarters of Quicken Loans and Compuware, past a sea of empty storefronts, past the corporate-sponsored sports complexes, to their destination: Grand Circus Park. They held signs reading “Make capitalism extinct” and “The People are too big to fail” and “Eat the rich” while chanting “Good jobs now!” and “Tax the rich!” and “F— the GOP!”

Unwittingly, however, they were protesting a Democratic-run city that represents the failure of their agenda.

The distribution of wealth? In addition to massive federal welfare payments, Detroit also levies the state’s highest property tax as well as its own income tax. Yet that hasn’t helped the poor. In fact, it has done the opposite — creating a fatherless city that leads the nation in crime, sports a nearly 50 percent adult illiteracy rate, and graduates just 24 percent of its students from high school.

The good-paying jobs? The gravity-defying wages of the UAW crippled GM and Chrysler, forcing them into the very federal bailouts that the Occupy movement decries — $60 billion in federal loans that they, unlike Wall Street banks, have yet to fully pay back.

And the socialized medicine? The waiting lists created by Canada’s single-payer system drive thousands of Canadians across the border to Michigan hospitals every year to get the treatment they are denied at home. There is little traffic the other way. Were it not for the safety valve of America’s superior, more market-oriented system, many more Canadians would, literally, die.

For the next 60 days, Occupy Detroiters will squat in Grand Circus Park. They are in the wrong place. They should be protesting a president in Washington, D.C., who wants to expand the polices that have destroyed Detroit to the rest of the country.

To which B-ver responded:

But that's not how these people think. They think government is a kind of god, that it can simply pass a law or a regulation or start a program to make everything just and right and true. To a true believer (in any religion), the problem can't be with the god they worship, but with the evil sinners who reject that god.

When one rejects the true God, one is left with only two alternatives - a false god, or one's self. For obvious reasons, the latter is not all that appealing to these protestors, so they make a god out of government.

These protests are, therefore, a kind of prayer meeting. They are gathering to pray to their god (government) to slay the wicked (rich people and republicans) and establish justice and righteousness.

DAVID HOROWITZ ON "THE DESTROYERS"

Horowitz writes briefly on the "Occupy Wall Street" crowd:

A friend of mine sagely observed that the difference between conservatives and leftists is that we are creators and they are destroyers. You couldn’t have a better picture of that than the contrast between the peaceful Tea Party demonstrators and the mobs defacing cities and causing millions of dollars in damage all over America and now the world. That’s because the Tea Partiers love their country and respect their communities, even those they disagree with. Whereas the destroyers respect nothing and are driven by their primary emotions which are envy, resentment and hate.

Make no mistake about who these people are. This is the same global communist movement that attacked the World Trade Organization and “evil corporations” in 2001, and that took to the streets to defend Saddam Hussein and call Bush Hitler in 2002. The forces behind this movement are identical: Soros, the Shadow Party, gangster socialist unions and a “progressive” intelligentsia whose hatred of the capitalist West has caused it to lose its collective mind.

About David Horowitz

David Horowitz was one of the founders of the New Left in the 1960s and an editor of its largest magazine,Ramparts.  Looking back in anger at their days in the New Left, he and Peter Collier wrote Destructive Generation (1989), a chronicle of their second thoughts about the 60s that has been compared to Whittaker Chambers’ Witness and other classic works documenting a break from totalitarianism. Horowitz examined this subject more closely in Radical Son (1996), a memoir tracing his odyssey from “red-diaper baby” to conservative activist that George Gilder described as “the first great autobiography of his generation.”

I'm surprised that the blurb about Horowitz above failed to mention his and Richard Poe's 2007 book, The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Sixties Radicals Seized Control of the Democratic Party  It's important to note the "forces" behind the movement as Horowitz lists them above.  I totally agree. 

In addition:  Jim Loft reports "Nazis and Communists throw their support behind occupy wall street movements."

PARENTS: BEWARE THE LEFTIST ASSAULT ON YOUR CHILDREN

Marybeth Hicks has written a book that seems "Must-reading" for parents.  It's titled, Don't Let the Kids Drink the Kool Aid:  Confronting the Left's Assault on Our Families, Faith, and Freedom.  I saw her interviewed on the 700 club yesterday.  

 

Her book receives praise from people I highly respect:

“Fellow moms and dads: It’s time to unite and reclaim the hearts, minds, and souls of our children from socialist indoctrinators! In shocking detail and with investigative zeal, Marybeth Hicks exposes the Left’s cradle-to-grave campaign to undermine religion, the traditional family, and free market capitalism. The best defense against this corrosive culture of entitlement and grievance is a good offense. Don’t Let the Kids Drink the Kool-Aid provides an invaluable playbook for parents who reject the Nanny State.”
—MICHELLE MALKIN, nationally syndicated columnist and author of the New York Times bestseller Culture of Corruption

“This is a tremendously important and timely book about the greatest disaster that could befall our country. No, it’s not economic—as bad as the economy is—it’s cultural, with a generation growing up utterly divorced from traditional American ideals. As Marybeth says, if we want to perpetuate America we need Americans, but our culture is rapidly undermining our children’s commitment to faith and freedom. Reading Marybeth Hicks’s Don’t Let the Kids Drink the Kool-Aid might be the most patriotic thing you do this year. If you care you about this country, please buy it, please read it, and please spread the word.”
—ERIC METAXAS, the New York Times bestselling author of Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy and Amazing Grace: William Wilberforce and the Heroic Campaign to End Slavery

“As important as it is to win the political battles, as Marybeth Hicks shows in her stunning new book Don’t Let the Kids Drink the Kool-Aid, if we don’t win the cultural battle for our children’s minds and hearts, we’ll have no future at all. Too many of us dismiss the propaganda of the liberal media, the public schools, and popular culture as harmless, but as Marybeth shows, it has demonstrably changed the way the next generation of Americans is thinking. Buy this book, be warned, and better yet—follow my friend Marybeth’s advice and take action.”
—DAVID LIMBAUGH, nationally syndicated columnist and author of the New York Times bestseller Crimes Against Liberty

Her columns for the Washington Times can be found here.  Previous books include Bringing Up Geeks: How to Protect Your Kid's Childhood in a Grow-Up-Too-Fast World and The Perfect World Inside My Minivan -- One mom's journey through the streets of suburbia.

RIOTS IN BRITAIN NO SURPRISE TO CONSERVATIVES

UK Riots: Before-and-after images of the devastation

The British writer Melanie Phillips saw it all coming.  She wrote one of the best- formulated, comprehensive indictments I have yet read: 

I have written for more than two decades on the various elements that have contributed to this collapse of order: family breakdown and mass fatherlessness; the toleration and even encouragement of grossly inadequate parenting; educational collapse which damages most those at the bottom of the social heap; welfare dependency; political correctness and the vicious injustices and moral inversion of victim culture; the grossly irresponsible toleration of soft drug-taking; the shuddering distaste at the notion of punishment and the consequent collapse of authority in the entire criminal justice system; the implosion of the policing ethic and the police retreat from the streets; the increasing organisation and boldness of anarchist and left-wing subversive activity; and the growth of irrationality, narcissistic self-centredness and mob rule and the near-certainty of a fundamental breakdown of morality and order.

To every one of these arguments that I have made over the years, the left has responded with jeers and smears. . . .

In a separate post, Phillips blames fatherlessness and the political left that encourages it:  (my bolding)

The single most crucial factor behind all this mayhem, behind the total breakdown of any control or self-control amongst the rampaging gangs of children and teenagers who are rioting, burning, robbing, stealing, attacking and murdering, is the willed removal of the most important thing that socialises children and turns them from feral savages into civilised citizens: a fully committed, hands-on, there-every-day father.

As I have been writing for more than twenty years, a society that embraces mass fatherlessness is a society that is going off the edge of a cliff. There are whole areas of Britain (white as well as black) where committed fathers are a wholly unknown phenomenon; where serial generations are being brought up only by mothers, through whose houses pass transitory males by whom these girls and women have yet more children, and whose own daughters inevitably repeat the pattern of lone and utterly dysfunctional parenting.

The result is fatherless boys who are suffused by an existential rage and desperate psychic need, who take out the damage done to them by lashing out from infancy at the world around them. And all this is effectively condoned, rewarded and encouraged by the welfare state which conceives of need solely in terms of absence of money, and which accordingly subsidises lone parenthood and the destructive behaviour that welfare fatherlessness brings in its train.

And the unutterably wicked thing is that this catastrophe has been deliberately willed upon Britain by left-wing politicians, well-heeled media feminists and other middle-class ideologues who wrap their utter contempt for the poor in the mantle of ‘progressive’ non-judgmentalism, witlessly prattling about poverty and social justice and hurling execrations at anyone who suggests that lone parenthood is in general a catastrophe for children (and a disaster for women) and that the state should stop subsidising family and social breakdown and start encouraging married parenthood instead. 

She says much more and concludes: 

. . . what the British riots actually signify: a society whose intelligentsia has been bent for three decades on social suicide -- and which, having been the first into the Enlightenment, is now, as we can see from the ‘armies of ants’ torching and looting British cities, leading the way out.

Me: I have often used the same term, "social-suicide," when I gaze on the situation in America as well.  Is there a way out?  Not without an historic religious revival that affects human motivation and behavior at the deepest level, and which produces a revolution in the theory and thinking taking place within university classrooms.  Right now, universities play a major role in the destruction of America because of pernicious social, economic and relativistic theory permeating the courses taught therein. 

 Other British writers opine:

Theodore Dalrymple -"The Barbarians Inside Britain's Gates"

Peter Hitchens:  "The British riots: We all knew they were coming"

         Max Hastings - "Years of liberal dogma have spawned a generation of amoral, uneducated, welfare dependent, brutalised youngsters."   (HT:  "Breakpoint")

American writer, Cal Thomas, weighs in - "Like U.S., Britain's problem is spiritual bankruptcy"  He writes:

The problem in Britain, and increasingly in America, is moral and spiritual, not economic and political. British history and values are no longer being adequately taught in the UK for fear a sense of super-nationalism might be conveyed. This at a time when no nation is to be considered superior to any other, a view expressed by President Obama. . . .

If civility, right and wrong, personal responsibility and accountability and the right to life, liberty and personal property are not values worthy of being passed on to the next generation, then their opposites will be taught by default. Children don't “catch” goodness and right behavior as they do a cold. Their natural tendency is to do wrong. The goal of discipline is to teach them to do right. The London riots are the extreme outcome when “right” is no longer defined.  [more...]

Jonah Goldberg About    |    Archive    |    Latest    |    Follow    |    E-mail    |    Log In August 12, 2011 12:00 A.M. Riot Rationalization Misses the Mark The people tearing apart English society are simply criminals. Riots are fascinating things. How lawless greed, cruelty, and violence suddenly set fire to the minds of men is one of the most mysterious, almost magical (though not in the positive sense) manifestations of human behavior.  And because they are a manifestation of human behavior, riots are as old as human nature. They were a common affair in cities before ancient Rome was new. This should invite humility in anyone purporting to know why riots happen. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ADVERTISEMENT - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Already, on both sides of the Atlantic, lots of people are sure they know why England is burning.  “The economic stagnation and cuts being imposed by the Tory government inevitably create social division,” explained former London mayor “Red” Ken Livingstone. Livingstone is joined by an intellectual mob of liberal members of Parliament — particularly members of the Labour party, which ran the country for more than a decade (the social incubation period of most of the rioters) — and left-wing pundits both there and here who insist that the new Tory government’s budget cuts have led to widespread violence, even though most of the relevant cuts haven’t even gone into effect. Of course, they always manage to say “there’s no excuse” for violence. But there’s always a “but” that leads a long parade of excuses. Invariably, these rationalizations amount to a license to spend ever more on the social programs that have, at the least, helped to produce the sort of “youths” who will burn homes and cars and beat people to death should the programs be even moderately curtailed. Indeed, according to liberal logic, the mere threat of reforming such programs is enough to cause wholesale violence. In other words, the cuts don’t justify the violence, but the threat of violence justifies avoiding cuts. It’s a clever rhetorical trick, but policy-wise it’s both appeasement of and appealing to thuggery, pure and simple. This helps to clarify how economic inequality has come to replace poverty as the most cited “root cause” of social unrest. Poverty, while a more slippery concept than you might think, is still a definable thing. If you lack adequate housing, food, and clothing, you’re very poor. Western democracies don’t have much of a problem, comparatively speaking, with that kind of poverty. But we do have income inequality. Inequality is a statistical artifact, an aesthetic offense. Its chief advantage as a bogeyman is that it will always exist and thus always justify programs to reduce it. On the right, there are a host of explanations that hinge on theories of cultural decay, lapsed or nonexistent parenting, and the corrosive effects of a government that saps the vitality from civil society. I’m much more sympathetic to this suite of theories. The last time I was in London, the tabloids were making a huge fuss over some lower-class parents’ staging quasi-gladiatorial fights with their toddlers so they could put the videos on YouTube. That’s not a good sign, I thought at the time.  The problem, of course, is that even if conservatives are right, there’s precious little government can do to fill the holes in such souls. Moreover, I think we put way too much effort into intellectualizing or romanticizing mob violence. Whatever the root causes of such behavior, the simple and unavoidable truth is that looters loot because they can. As one looter explained on a British radio show: “The government aren’t in control — because if they was, we wouldn’t be able to do it, could we?” This is the shame of Britain right now. Four days of murder and mayhem demonstrated that the police have become an incompetent social-worker program. As goons of all ethnicities destroyed the livelihoods of hardworking storeowners of all ethnicities (sorely in need of gun rights), as they targeted shops not for their political symbolism but for their inventory of the latest sneakers and video games, police held a delicate seminar on the propriety of water cannons. Meanwhile, as the mobs’ useful idiots organized conferences trying to imbue the wanton bloodshed and avarice with political nobility, the savages were announcing on their BlackBerrys which shopping district to swarm for “pure terror and havoc & free stuff.”    Mustn’t forget the free stuff. There’s an adage that the “plural of anecdote is data.” Maybe so. But what we know for sure is that the plural of criminal is criminals. And the people tearing apart English society are simply criminals, whose villainy is not diluted by their numbers, but magnified by them. If Britain lacks prisons to hold them, build more prisons. Call it a jobs program if it helps. —Jonah Goldberg is editor-at-large of National Review Online and a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. You can write to him by e-mail at JonahsColumn@aol.com, or via Twitter @JonahNRO. © 2011 Tribune Media Services, Inc. Log In to Post a Comment COMMENTS   24 EXPAND    SORT   Newest FirstOldest First   mjfin 08/12/11 18:26 Link Report Abuse bobalouie: Whatever else they are, my comments are certainly not a "sociological apologia" for mob violence. Rather they are a fair description of the biological origins of mob violence, and a reason why the behavior persists and is difficult to eradicate. To put it another way, "man was born with the mark of Cain". Put it into the class of comments of "know your enemy". Behaviors which in the long prehistoric obviously conferred some useful survival benefit on local, isolated, and threatened aboriginals can, and often do misfire when these biological impulses are loosed upon us by rootless street thugs in London. Knowing the origins makes it is easier to understand the cure. The exact wrong thing to do to eliminate mob violence, is for the state to generate an empty sense of entitlement by encouraging the rootless detachment from the community that comes from simply handing people money and welfare benefits. Reply to this comment bobbalouie 08/12/11 17:58 Link Report Abuse Point of clarification -- my comment, posted a little while ago, was in response to an earlier comment by Mjfin. But it popped up as a comment on Jonah's piece, which ii is not. Jonah, I love the piece and agree with you. I don't agree with reducing the London riots to some sort of "sociological event." Anyway. Reply to this comment bobbalouie 08/12/11 17:03 Link Report Abuse I didn't follow all that, but I understood enough to identify it as a sociological apologia for mob violence. All you've really shown me is that when any social group descends to the level of mere animalism, bad things happen. Tell me something I don't know. This is why the decline of Judeo-Christian morality matters. We all know man is an animal and thus capable of animalistic violence. But to the Judeo-Christian, man is not merely that. As obvious as is the similarity between man and mere animal, it's the dissimilarities between man and animal that truly astound. Your bloodless "analysis" misses all that. The cleverest ape that ever lived never authored the simplest radio jingle. We are NOT mere animals. There IS a thing called "morality." And rioting is wrong. Reply to this comment Chris Behrens 08/12/11 17:01 Link Report Abuse I've always heard the expression "the plural of anecdote is NOT data", meaning data if you want to draw an inference, you need to be more careful in gathering your information than merely chatting at a party. Reply to this comment ctruppi 08/12/11 16:26 Link Report Abuse Jonah, usually love your stuff but I have to disagree with one of your points. A criminal is most certainly not always a criminal. In certain countries today it is a crime for a woman to drive. In colonial times it was a crime to work on the sabbath. Today in the West, these seem ridiculous. Why? Because our societal norms allow that women can drive and that working on Sundays is perfectly legit. There are laws on the books that can be broken with inpunity and no one gives a hoot. In the late 70's-early 80's smoking pot was illegal in Manhattan, yet you could light up a joint at any concert in MSG right in front of New York's finest and he wouldn't give you a second look. Everyone knew this and didn't care. This is kind of what we're seeing in the UK - a sort of, "we know we can do this and you won't stop us mentality". When that happens, the line between a "real crime" and "something we'll look the other way" becomes blurred, when going 65 in a 55 area is acceptable. The Daily Mail this morning published profiles of many looters. Among them, a law student, an aspiring ballerina, a social worker and the suburban millionaire's daughter who is a college student. These people, who probably would never think about breaking a "real" law are like their 70's counterparts in NYC, toking up at the Pink Floyd concert because the local society had decided that while they officially made pot illegal, they unofficially didn't care. In the UK, these kids made the same value judgement - the authorities (ie, liberal folks who will give us anything we like) don't think it's legal to break into stores, steal stuff and burn down communities, but they'll forgive us and look the other way. The UK needs to really criminalize the rioting if they expect it to stop. Reply to this comment Randy M 08/12/11 15:32 Link Report Abuse Living a life with on welfare does little to breed long term thinking, and much the stifle the need for it. What will these youths do when the neighborhoods aren't repaired, when the shops close, when the companies that can move? Consequences that will surely happen, if not after this riot than the next. It doesn't get asked. They've never had to think of cause and effect before. Reply to this comment kartiste 08/12/11 15:17 Link Report Abuse Passed on to me, via a liberal friend, the view of a no-doubt-Labourite friend of his in Edinburgh: "In my view the seeds of the current trouble were sown during the years of the Thatcher/Reagan administration which extolled the virtues of greed and selfishness which were further propagated by the Blair/Bush combo which continued to encouraged their live now pay later policies." Oh, where to begin.... Reply to this comment  Lawrence 08/12/11 15:04 Link Report Abuse Very good article, and a peripheral observation leads me back to the saying about spreading around misery, and to my own conclusion: Push comes to shove, the Left opposes inequality more than poverty. Reply to this comment E.K. Fox 08/12/11 14:43 Link Report Abuse I think that Mob "group think" is just plain Demonic and evil. This "Group think" deceives people into thinking that its OK to assault, beat, steal from, rob, or murder one's neighbor; and ensues a feeding frenzy of such evil acts. What compels people to be so deceived by such "group think"? It is a spiritual and moral deception. IF God does not judge us, but only our peers, then if ones peers are looting and killing, who is to Judge any one of us from doing the same?? I think possilbly England has replaced the Church of England, with the Maxist/materialist church of the welfare state. The Ten Commandments (10 Truths) hold no sway with people so deceived. My variation of what I heard Coultour say about her new book Demonic. Reply to this comment mjfin 08/12/11 14:39 Link Report Abuse In evolutionary terms, mob violence is an adaptive response of members of a tribe. The term "adaptive" in prehistorical biological terms means that those who are capable of engaging in this behavior have statically improved chances of having offspring, i.e., of passing their genes into the next generation, so their descendents will also display the behavior. Thus it is a survival trait. Mob behavior (in the evolutionary past) has resulted in: 1) protecting the tribe and its members from external threats (from other tribes and from packs of dangerous animals), by exposing these external threats to concerted, frenzied attack by large numbers of tribal members unconcerned with their personal safety 2) provides tribes with resources (food) by encouraging tribal members to neglect their personal safety to herd large, dangerous animals into a trap or off a cliff. 3) resolving political disputes within the tribe, where groups of friends (invariably extended family members) impose their will on other tribal members through physical mob (i.e., gang)threats. In each case mob violence works by allowing individual tribal members to momentarily experience energized euphoria, accompanied by much reduced concern for personal safety. These adaptive psychological benefits are ONLY triggered by the presence of nearby tribal members acting similarly; i.e., the behavior is self reinforcing. The behavior is also instinctive. We all have it as part of the physical (i.e., structural neurological) expression of our genetic makeup. It rests within our genetic makeup, ready to be triggered by the correct circumstances. Knowledge of the nature of tribal violence allows government authorities (or communities) to create methods to raise the threshold for triggering this innate reaction in ordinary crowds, or to stop the behavior quickly when it begins. In very general terms the proper response requires recognition that: A) Crowds are not tribes. Members of a crowd have much weaker bonds of friendship than members of tribes. Obviously the bonds of a mob can vary depending on how homogeneous it is and how related its member are. B) Members of a mob will be more likely to destroy and seize local community property if they do not have a stake in in the community; if they do not know the people there, and if they have do not have jobs and earn their livelihood working there: i.e., if they have no tribal ties to it. C) Once mob violence begins, it is critical that police response be seen as overwhelming, and that action be taken to isolate and split apart individuals from the crowd. Reply to this comment Dan Volkman 08/12/11 14:13 Link Report Abuse The riots in England were nothing more than young people with little or no regard for anything but themselves doing a smash and grab on the 'rich' business owners. People can try to spin it any way they want but it was, as David Cameron said, 'pure criminality'. The kids that went around looting don't care if they get arrested because they know there will be no consequences for their actions. What are they going to do - lock up the hundreds of people they have arrested? No, because the prisons are already full and there's no money left, thanks to 13 years of Labour rule. Perhaps they'll give them a fine? Great! They'll simply flight the spoils from their looting and pay it. If not, they'll simply rob someone else - problem solved. This is a difficult issue to address, but trying to rationalise it won't work - there is no other explanation other than pure opportunism. And as that great Liberal thinker Rahm Emmanuel once said 'Never let a crisis go to waste'. Reply to this comment Page89 08/12/11 13:24 Link Report Abuse Sounds like the spirit of Neville Chamberlain is alive and well in the UK. In the short run appeasement is the easy way out. But oh the cost of appeasement in the long term. Reply to this comment Miles 08/12/11 13:09 Link Report Abuse I'd like to see these punks try the same sh@# here in the USA, like in rural Nevada or Wyoming.... Reply to this comment  Jeff Perren 08/12/11 12:46 Link Report Abuse Forget the prisons. Shoot them. The problem will be solved two ways; those specific rioters will not do it again, and it will discourage others. Reply to this comment ral001 08/12/11 12:00 Link Report Abuse "In other words, the cuts don’t justify the violence, but the threat of violence justifies avoiding cuts." There is a term for this: 'Protection Money' Reply to this comment panic 08/12/11 11:43 Link Report Abuse The photo coverage of the riots is so funny!! How many hours of tape were thrown away when they revealed naught but a sea of sulky dark faces assaulting whites and asians. "Quick - get back out there and find some white yobbos!!!". Just like the "cops" TV shows - one has to wonder why they would go to the trouble of filming in Washington State. Answer: so that less than 90% of the criminals are black. So difficult to film prisons - almost every convict is "of color", and the dress code is obviously "be proud of your gang membership". In the metro areas, you also see why prisons have a contraband problem: the entire staff is black - recruited from the same cultural environment as the inmates (with 500 lb. women sporting door-knocker earrings and Sheila Jackson-Lee style 3 foot tall wigs heavily represented). England is already toast. This entire generation of entitlement rioters cannot be imprisoned or deported, and now that they know the police will do nothing the fences are down. Next up: shari'ia law officially adopted for "certain neighborhoods". Reply to this comment SocraticMeathead 08/12/11 10:26 Link Report Abuse Great contribution Mr. Goldberg! I find it telling that the "social justice" crowd is so supportive of mobs running amok over the rule of law. Reply to this comment edd91 08/12/11 10:09 Link Report Abuse 1. These acts of violence are unacceptable: I agree 2. It is wrong to blame one side of the politcal spectrum for this mayhem: I agree 3. There has been a consistent breakdown of "society" in poor and working-class Britain: I agree 4. This breakdown can possibly, but not completely be assigned to poor parenting, lack of education, unemployment, poor cultural values, and a collective sense of being disenfranchised: I agree 5. More harsh, draconian police tactics will NOT stop this from happening again: I agree 6. There is no easy solution: I agree Reply to this comment  Joseph Yeager 08/12/11 10:08 Link Report Abuse Well Jonah, Derb would disagree with your bland, obfuscatory statement that people of all ethnicities are responsible for the riots. While technically true, that statement papers over some very uncomfortable, and perforce telling, sociocultural truths. External Link  Reply to this comment  RobL 08/12/11 10:01 Link Report Abuse Excellent Mr. Goldberg, here’s some more proof that to call British Socialism insane is an insult to crazy people. I was fortunate to hear Mark Steyn on WIND Chicago this morning driving in to work. He told the story of how Britain has cooked the books. To reduce the number of people on Welfare, a few years back many welfare recipients were simply reclassified as disabled. It gets better (actually worse). Seems that Se*ual Intercourse is an entitlement in Britain. So the British government pays for disabled men to travel to Holland to fulfill their needs with prostitutes, the doxy’s fee is on the government dime too. Here are two (unabashedly cynical) ideas to help save Britain and ourselves. 1. Britain should employ its own lady’s (i.e. the unemployed ones running rampant in Tottingham to fulfill the needs of the disabled). This way they don’t have to spend $’s on travel to Holland, and they keep the money within the British economy. Now that’s stimulation...uhh economic stimulus I mean. 2. If the US goes bonkers like Britain and collapses to that level of liberal folly (entirely feasible). We can do the same for our disabled but throw in the caveat that all services must be provided on the Northwestern Campus (or other liberal institution of your choice) so that the ever popular campus s*x ed courses/peep shows will not have to pay for the services of the performers. This will help reduce our ever rising college tuition costs. Reply to this comment Mike C. 08/12/11 09:47 Link Report Abuse Why should it be any surprise that the Left would romanticize thuggery when it has romanticized thugs for decades? Stalin, Mao, Castro, Che, Chavez: all thugs wrapping themselves in the cloak of revolutionaries striving to free the masses from the oppression of a corrupt government. And all past or present heroes to the Left and its insipid followers. Reply to this comment  Allesnarf 08/12/11 09:34 Link Report Abuse "The problem, of course, is that even if conservatives are right, there’s precious little government can do to fill the holes in such souls." Perhaps not in the immediate term. But in the longer term, eliminating the welfare system that allows people to live comfortable lives without working or marrying, showing zero tolerance for infringement, and allowing the law-abiding majority to defend themselves would force families back together, and force "yoofs" into the workforce, for survival. And if people are forced to accept responsibility and self-reliance if they want to have a tolerable life, they'll develop the character traits that prevent this type of amoral outburst. Reply to this comment Singularity 08/12/11 09:13 Link Report Abuse Superb, Mr. Goldberg. A criminal is a criminal..and placing a political spin on it to justify expanding Leftist policies will only provide more criminals. At what point do those being bludgeoned and robbed (both legally and illegally), stop reaching into their pockets to fortify the idle hooligans who bludgeon and rob them. As Mr. Goldberg points out economic inequality is not synonymous with poverty. The Left would have you believe otherwise. The calls for 'social justice' have become the new mantra for many Leftist organizations. And by 'social justice' they mean 'economic equality'. Wealth redistribution based on nothing more than envy, lies and a complete indifference to the facts of human nature. Just as there will always be some workers who work harder and longer and smarter than others, there will always be those who earn more. Those who risk more and in turn gain more. There is no such thing as a level playing field, not when it comes to human attributes or attitudes. It's all a lie, created by those who want something without working for it. Just like the criminals rioting and stealing from the very people whose labors feed, clothe and house them. Reply to this comment Ron Carnine 08/12/11 08:00 Link Report Abuse I was a LEO for a lot of years and I am amazed how many times I heard this little excuse, "well everybody else was doing it and I wanted to get some stuff before it was over." One of the things I have seen work is when something like this starts you hit them fast and you hit them hard. You arrest and handcuff each and every one and publish the names (public record except for juveniles) of those who are arrested. Then you hold them for the allotted time. You make the experience as unpleasant as you can. It does get harder though in a society in which parents and peers think its "cool". The sentences handed down should be as severe as possible including restitution for those who were the victims of this kind of nonsense. Reply to this comment Add a Comment Already Registered? Log In Here. Your Name * Your E-mail * The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly. Your Answer  Your Comment * * Designates a required field.

NEWSWEEK KEEPING IT CLASSY IN PRESIDENTIAL COVERAGE

Ed Morrissey says it well:

Memo to conservative women: When approached by Newsweek or Time for a cover story, always bring your own photographer. . . .  Newsweek perches a blank-looking Bachmann over block letters calling her “THE QUEEN OF RAGE”: 

Morrissey again:

Rage?  I’ve certainly heard Bachmann talk tough about encroaching government and the avalanche of spending and debt, but in all the years I’ve known and covered Bachmann, I’ve never heard her rage at anyone.  It seems as though Newsweek has a double standard in effect for conservatives, women, and especially conservative women.  When Barack Obama told an audience in June 2008 that “if they bring a knife to a fight, we bring a gun,” did Newsweek crown him the King of Rage — or at any time in his class-warfare-based presidential campaign?  For that matter, when Debbie Wasserman-Schultz stated that Republicans wanted to reinstate Jim Crow laws, did anyone accuse her of being filled with rage?  Not exactly. . . .

Conservative candidates have to learn that Newsweek, Time, and other mainstream publications won’t be their friends, or even be objective.  They plan on making news, not reporting it.  This is just one of the least subtle examples we’ll see in the next fifteen months.

Me:  It's important to click through to Michelle Malkin's post which shows the vicious distortions the Left has done to other conservative figures, including Malkin herself. 

Here is how Michele Bachmann looks in a fair photo:

LEFTIST 'INCIVILITY" ON PARADE

Peter Berkowitz on Leftist incivility -

They [progressives] have ferociously attacked congressional Republicans, particularly those closely associated with the tea party movement, with something approaching hysteria.

Consider the unabashed incivility of progressive criticism, its tone dictated from the top. During and after the budget negotiations, we heard that tea party representatives were content with "blowing up our government" (Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne). Then came accusations that "Tea Party Republicans have waged jihad on the American people" (New York Times columnist Joe Nocera), while acting like "a maniacal gang with knives held high" (New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd). At the height of negotiations, Vice President Biden either said, or agreed with House Democrats with whom he was meeting who said, that Congressional Republicans "have acted like terrorists." . . .

The progressive mind is on a collision course with itself. The clash between its democratic pretensions and its authoritarian predilections has generated within its ranks seething resentment for, and rage at, conservatives. Unless progressives cultivate the enlightened virtues they publicly profess and free themselves from the dogmatic beliefs that undergird their political ambitions, we can expect even more harrowing outbursts to come.

Also worth noting is Froma Harrop's incendiary language:

“Make no mistake: The tea party Republicans have engaged in economic terrorism against the United States–threatening to blow up the economy if they don’t get what they want. And like the al-Qaida bombers, what they want is delusional: the dream of restoring some fantasy caliphate. . . . Americans are not supposed to negotiate with terrorists, but that’s what Obama has been doing. . . . That the Republican leadership couldn’t control a small group of ignoramuses in its ranks has brought disgrace on their party. But oddly, Obama’s passivity made it hard for responsible Republicans to control their destructive children. The GOP extremists would ask Obama for his firstborn, and he’d say, ‘OK.’ So they think, why not ask for his second-born, to which he responds, ‘Let’s talk.’ ”

Harrop she has been named president of the National Conference of Editorial Writers.  One of its new missions, the Civility Project, "endeavors to improve the quality of political discourse."  Hypocrisy on parade!

THE LIBERAL MEDIA DETERMINED TO DESTROY MICHELE BACHMANN

Will they be able to do it?  Not sure.  But they'll try.  Look how they went after Sarah Palin.  By the way, how hard has the mainstream media tried to track down Obama's senior college thesis?  Have they tried to find out ANYTHING about him?  No.

But now the media plans to go after the 23 foster children that were in Michele Bachmann's home.  I predicted this to friends a few weeks ago.  Many, if not most of these kids were really troubled.  Eating disorders, etc. etc.  Dare anyone conceive that a little extra spending money might -- just might - be offered to give some false testimony?  Pardon my suspicions. 

The liberal media is conducting warfare without the shooting.  One might as well recognize (and deplore) "it is what it is," and fight back.  Andrew Breitbart is doing so.   So are others.   The battle must be joined.

Jim Loft of Gateway Pundit reports:   

ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos warned Michele Bachmann that the media plans on investigating all 23 of her foster children.

Stephanopoulos: Finally one—one final question. I think one of the most impressive things that people find in your background is the fact that you and your husband have helped raise 23 foster children and I know you want to shield them but are they prepared and are you prepared for the loss of privacy that comes with the president campaign? And is that something you are concerned about for them?

Bachmann: Well when we were making this momentous decision we sat down for a long time as a family and contemplated what this was meaning and yes, we are ready. We have five wonderful biological children. Our last one is off to college our oldest one is a doctor. And then we had great – a great 23 foster children in our home as well. And as you can imagine and appreciate we’ve tried to keep a good handle on their privacy and we will do that, we will respect their privacy. We are thankful that we had them but we also want to observe their privacy and that of their families.

Added: 4/28/11 - I strongly urge you to click through and listen to Mark Levin unloading on Chris Wallace for his awful attack on Michele Bachmann.   Levin offers extraordinary commentary.

THE MORAL DEGRADATION OF THE AMERICAN LEFT

John Walsh describes Anthony Weiner as "The Face of the Modern Left":

In his combination of unctuousness, mendacity, mock-reasonableness, petulance, bullying, hypocrisy, overweening arrogance, brazen aggression, self-pity, victimhood, and bogus moral preening, it’s hard to beat Congressman Anthony Weiner. He’s the perfect face of the modern American Left in all its glorious pathology; why anyone takes these people seriously is utterly beyond me. . .  (my emphases)

Here he is with ABC’s Jonathan Karl, doing what lefties do best: lie, equivocate, lecture, browbeat, and implicitly threaten, even when they’re caught red-handed: 

 Me:  The chutzpah exhibited on the video (with text) linked above takes one's breath away.  Go see it!

Walsh again:

As I said back on Election Night 2008:  ”This is an unlovely party filled with unlovely people, as America’s about to find out once the Obama pixie dust wears off.”

Me:  Extraordinary and repulsive is the fact that Democrats, caught in shameful situations, don't resign!  Jim Loft over at Gateway Pundit [a daily must read] expects Weiner to follow the standard Democrat precedent.   Loft writes:

Weiner may have bared all, but he will likely survive the disgusting scandal. After all, he’s a democrat.
And, Democrats don’t resign– Ever.

Whether they’re impeached in office for perjury or caught sleeping with drunk underage pages…
Democrats don’t resign.

KKK-Murder-Slandering Troops-Prostitution rings- In scandal after scandal…
Democrats don’t resign.

Did you hear about the guy busted with $90,000 in his freezer?… Yeah, he stayed in office.
Democrats don’t resign.

Drunken manslaughter?

Senator Kennedy’s car is dragged by a wrecker out of Poucha Pond. (Ytedk)

** Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) answered an ad placed in a Washington, D.C. homosexual paper, the Washington Blade, by Stephen Gobie, a male prostitute. Gobie became Barney Frank’s live-in sexual companion, and was soon running a male prostitution ring from Barney Frank’s condo. Last year Frank was chairing the Financial Services Committee.

** Rep. Gerry Studds (D-MA) has sex with underage male House page. Studds turns his back on the House when he is censured. He continued to serve in House for six more terms.

** Senate Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) plagued by scandals: Abramoff Scandal, Sons who are lobbyists, boxing tickets and other perks, land deal that made him $1 million, etc.- Serves as democratic Senate Majority Leader.

** Rep. Mel Reynolds (D-IL) was indicted for sexual assault and criminal sexual abuse for engaging in a sexual relationship with a 16-year-old campaign volunteer that began during the 1992 campaign. Despite the charges, he continued his campaign and was re-elected that November. Reynolds initially denied the charges, which he claimed were racially motivated. He was convicted on 12 counts of sexual assault, obstruction of justice and solicitation of child pornography.

** Hillary Clinton (D-NY) Her husband is impeached and involved in a record number of scandals and convictions during his term in office. She herself takes money from FBI fugitive. Today she is Secretary of State.

** Senator Ted Kennedy (D-MA) kills girl . Leaves her in pond to drown. Until his death he was the second longest serving member (next to the former kleagle) in the Senate.

** Senator Robert Byrd (D-WV) former Ku Klux Klan Kleagle (recruiter). Democrat Byrd was the longest serving member in the US Senate.

** Democratic Senator Patrick Leahy (D-Vt)- in a 1985 television appearance Leahy disclosed classified information that one of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak’s telephone conversations had been intercepted. The information that Leahy revealed had been used in the operation to capture the Arab terrorists who had hijacked the Achille Lauro cruise ship and killed American citizens, and the Union-Tribune claimed that Leahy’s indiscretion may have cost the life of at least one of the Egyptian operatives involved in that operation. Because of his several leaks he was forced to step down from his seat on the Senate Intelligence Committee. Today he is Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

** Democratic Iowan Senator Tom Harkin (and John Kerry D-MA) traveled to Managua, Nicaragua to assure Fidel Castro’s proxy Daniel Ortega that Senate Democrats were working overtime to thwart President Reagan’s efforts to bring Democracy to the region. Today he is head of Senate agriculture committee.

Are we starting to see the pattern???
Democrats don’t resign.

THE FRENCH WINK AT SEXUAL LICENSE; SO DO LIBERAL AMERICANS

Jonah Goldberg makes the point in his article, "French Should Feel Shame, But We're No Puritans."

WHY THE NEWS MEDIA IS SO LIBERAL -- MULTIPLE TIES TO GEORGE SOROS!

Dan Gainor reports that Soros has ties to over 30 major news organizatins.  (HT: Drudge)  Gainor writes:

When liberal investor George Soros gave $1.8 million to National Public Radio , it became part of the firestorm of controversy that jeopardized NPR’s federal funding. But that gift only hints at the widespread influence the controversial billionaire has on the mainstream media. Soros, who spent $27 million trying to defeat President Bush in 2004, has ties to more than 30 mainstream news outlets – including The New York Times, Washington Post, the Associated Press, NBC and ABC.

Prominent journalists like ABC’s Christiane Amanpour and former Washington Post editor and now Vice President Len Downie serve on boards of operations that take Soros cash. This despite the Society of Professional Journalists' ethical code stating: “avoid all conflicts real or perceived.”

This information is part of an upcoming report by the Media Research Centers Business & Media Institute which has been looking into George Soros and his influence on the media.

The investigative reporting start-up ProPublica is a prime example. ProPublica, which recently won its second Pulitzer Prize, initially was given millions of dollars from the Sandler Foundation to “strengthen the progressive infrastructure” – “progressive” being the code word for very liberal. In 2010, it also received a two-year contribution of $125,000 each year from the Open Society Foundations. In case you wonder where that money comes from, the OSF website is www.soros.org. It is a network of more than 30 international foundations, mostly funded by Soros, who has contributed more than $8 billion to those efforts.

CONDI RICE VS. LAWRENCE O'DONNELL

Several people on TV are unbearable to watch.  One such is MSNBC's Lawrence O'Donnell.  I came across a recent interview  he conducted with Condi Rice (video and transcript here)   It's worth viewing if only to witness the gauche, condescension, fact-challenged rudeness O'Donnell displays.  After seeing it you will have had your fill of O'Donnell, and never need view him again.  Condi Rice not only holds her own, but whips him good.  [Leftists and liberals disagree.  You decide}

A couple of years ago (it hardly seems that long), I posted another example of O'Donnell's ignorance of  a subject on which he was pontificating.   Hugh Hewitt produced the take down.

WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY VS. SAUL ALINSKY

I am glad to have discovered a five minute segment from an old "Firing Line" program featuring Buckley's interview with Alinsky.  A link is provided to the entire transcript of the Firing Line interview.

ANDREW BREITBART'S 2012 PRESIDENTIAL PICK: ALLEN WEST

From the Daily Beast's interview with Andrew Breitbart:

Q: Out of the current field and the people we expect to jump in for 2012, who are you most likely to support?

A: The idea of an Allen West/Herman Cain all-black conservative ticket would titillate me to the point of secretions coming out of every orifice. It would so upset the politically correct, culturally Marxist paradigm in academia and they’d have to start attacking… And I think it would cause the American people to see how unserious the left is when it comes to issues of claiming to represent the best interests of minorities. They use minorities in order to divide and conquer in this country . . .

Me:  Brillliant

Shushannah Walshe Info

Shushannah Walshe covers politics for The Daily Beast. She is the co-author of Sarah From Alaska: The Sudden Rise and Brutal Education of a New Conservative Superstar. She was a reporter and producer at the Fox News Channel from August 2001 until the end of the 2008 presidential campaign.

X Close

• - +
• Single Page
• print

 

• Twitter
• Email
• Share

Q: Out of the current field and the people we expect to jump in for 2012, who are you most likely to support?

A: The idea of an Allen West/Herman Cain all-black conservative ticket would titillate me to the point of secretions coming out of every orifice. It would so upset the politically correct, culturally Marxist paradigm in academia and they’d have to start attacking… And I think it would cause the American people to see how unserious the left is when it comes to issues of claiming to represent the best interests of minorities. They use minorities in order to divide and conquer in this country, and I would not just want an all-black ticket. I would like an all-minority, all-female; and let’s get rid of all the white eunuchs like John McCain that would craft an entire political career in the latter part of the 20th century and the first part of the 21st century trying to appease the media left.

SEN. CHUCK SHUMER (D-NY) ATTACKS FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL

Sen. Shumer attacked FRC on the floor of the U.S. Senate.  Leftists (and pro-abortionists) like Shumer need to be engaged and defeated.  I very much like FRC's response:   (my bolding)

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Family Research Council Action (FRC Action) President Tony Perkins responded today to direct attacks on the floor of the U.S. Senate by Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY).

Sen. Schumer took to the Senate floor today railing against FRC for its opposition to yesterday's vote in the U.S. House of Representatives on a three-week Continuing Resolution that sustains taxpayer funding of abortions in the District of Columbia and fails to cut federal funding for scandal-plagued Planned Parenthood. He compared FRC's efforts to a "heavy anchor bogging down the budget."

In response, FRC Action President Tony Perkins said:

"With all due respect, it is Senator Chuck Schumer and his allies on the Left that mean to not only impose their radical social and fiscal agenda on Americans, but also force Americans to pay for it. Nearly three-quarters of Americans are opposed to the government forcing them to fund abortion. How is respecting the majority's wishes and cutting spending in a budget a 'right wing' move? Removing federal funding of abortion is a centrist move, since the vast majority of Americans hold that policy position.

"Senator Schumer should come clean and tell the American people why six months into the year Congress has yet to adopt a budget for this year. Why would the last Congress which was totally controlled by Mr. Schumer and his party not pass a budget? They failed to pass a budget because they were too busy forcing their far left social agenda on America including taxpayer funding of abortion, government control of health care and open homosexuality in the military. They were busy forcing taxpayers to pick up the tab for a 'far-ranging social agenda.' What was that tab? Annual deficits in the last two years alone that total almost three trillion dollars.

"There is a time and a place to address the misguided policies and deficit spending that Mr. Schumer and his liberal colleagues have been forcing Americans to pay for. Mr. Schumer is wrong. Now is the time and this is the place.

"Of course, the Senator is right in one regard. FRC Action, Heritage Action and the Club for Growth are an 'anchor' in this process. We will do our best to ensure this country drifts no further to the Left and out into the sea of irrelevance where the irresponsible spending he and his colleagues have promoted would send us."

WISCONSIN: LEFT'S WAR ON DEMOCRACY

Michael Walsh has it right:  (my emphases)

(...) Let’s call this what it is: a campaign to nullify the 2010 election, by a sore-loser party that doesn’t like the results.

The Democrats are trying to cast themselves as the heroes — noble prisoners of conscience engaged in an act of civil disobedience by denying Walker a quorum so the vote can be held. But, like the sheriff played by Cleavon Little in “Blazing Saddles,” the gun at their heads is being held in their own hands.

But this fight is no longer simply about Walker’s attempt to balance Wisconsin’s wobbly budget, or even about whether public-employee unions ought to have the right to collective bargaining — they shouldn’t, and in fact they shouldn’t even exist, as FDR himself warned.

It’s now about whether we are to have an orderly democracy or legislative and executive anarchy, whether elections can be delegitimized and even overturned by the daily plebiscites of the polls, by the flouting of sacred oaths of office and by the trampling on the laws of the state.

What the Democrats are doing in Wisconsin is more than just a disgrace. It’s a danger to our republican form of government, a formula for permanent, no-holds-barred combat long after the polls have closed and the people have spoken.

JONAH GOLDBERG ON "MEIN KAMPF," "THE COMMUNIST MANIFESTO," LEFT-WING PRESS AND THE TUCSON KILLINGS

Since I've never read Hitler's Mein Kampf, I was happy to read Jonah Goldberg's overview with comments relevant to the Tucson killings.  He writes:

Lots of friends and foes have been emailing me to talk about Liberal Fascism in  light of the fact that Loughner liked both the Communist Manifesto and Mein Kampf. I’m taking a pass on all that largely because I think it’s entirely irrelevant. Also, I have zero interest in hawking even a single book in this context.

But about those other books. When I meet young people who brag about having read Mein Kampf, my first reaction is that they’re lying, for one reason or another. And after further conversation, I usually come away feeling my initial reaction was justified.

LEFTIST MEDIA AND POLITICIANS DISGRACE THEMSELVES

Maybe it's a coincidence, but just yesterday I put up a blog post on truth.  This weekend, in response to the shooting of  Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (and the killing of six others in Tucson),  Leftist media and politicians have launched a major offensive to lay the blame for the violence at the feet of conservatives such as Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Fox news, Glenn Beck and others. 

Andrew Klaven points out: 

The Left—which has been unable to discover any common feature uniting acts of Islamist violence worldwide—nonetheless instantly noticed a bridge between the Tucson shooting and its own political opponents. The Chicago Sun-Times ran a slavering editorial blaming “the right.” MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann and the Washington Post’s Eugene Robinson suggested that the killings were inspired by right-wing rhetoric. Politico’s Roger Simon did the same.  

ANN COULTER - THE CHARITABLE GIVING OF PROMINENT LIBERALS

They're better at spending your money than parting with their own.  Click here.

DESPOTISM ON THE LEFT

Jim Loft of Gateway Pundit posts:

- -Woah!… Soros Group Says Obama Can Use Armed Forces to Push “Progressive” Agenda

--  Dem Senator: FCC Should Take FOX News & MSNBC Off the Air (Video)

Woah!… Soros Group Says Obama Can Use Armed Forces to Push “Progressive” Agenda

Posted by Jim Hoft on Thursday, November 18, 2010, 12:15 PM

John Podesta from the Center for American Progress released a report this week that, among other things, suggested that Obama can use the US Military to push the president’s radical totalitarian agenda.
The Blaze reported:

The liberal Center for American Progress doesn’t believe significant GOP gains in the House and Senate should stop the President from implementing more of his polices. The group released a report Tuesday suggesting ways Obama can bypass Congress to accomplish a progressive agenda, and it cites the president’s power as commander-in-chief to make its point.

“I think most of the conversation since the election has been about how President Obama adjusts to the new situation on Capitol Hill,” Center for American Progress head and former Bill Clinton Chief of Staff John Podesta told the Daily Caller. “While that’s an important conversation, it simply ignores the president’s ability to use all levels of his power and authority to move the country forward.”

How does one “move the country forward”? In the center’s report, Podesta explains that Obama can use executive orders, rulemaking, and even the armed forces “to accomplish important change” and that such means “should not be underestimated.”

What exactly does Podesta think the president should use such powers to “accomplish”? Among others, the report suggests “job creation,“ ”quality affordable health care,“ ”sustainable security,“ and ”a clean energy future.”

The report cites specific goals such as mitigating the effects of the military’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy, supporting a Palestinian state, and reducing greenhouse gasses by 17 percent by 2020.

The Center for American Progress was given a 3-year $3,000,000 grant by George Soros’ Open Society Institute in 2006.

Media Matters, the communication wing of the Center for American Progress, was given a $1,000,000 grant by George Soros in October.

16 comments

ADVERTISEMENT

Dem Senator: FCC Should Take FOX News & MSNBC Off the Air (Video)

QUICK TAKES

** David Brooks argues liberal economists need to factor in human psychology (like anxiety & fear) a lot more than they do.  "It’s one thing to hatch an ideal policy in an academic lab, but in the real world, context is everything."

** Thomas Sowell tells Congress to put the kibosh on deficit-reduction commissions:  "Do you go ahead and spend the rent money and the food money — and then ask somebody else to tell you how to escape the consequences?"  More...

** Dennis Prager  - "The Liberal mind rejects sad facts."  

[...]Leftism is often predicated on avoiding pain. That is a major reason why the Left dislikes capitalism and free markets. . .   Second, the Left lives by theories and dogmas into which the facts of life must fit. That is why left-wing ideas are usually wishful thinking.

Prager illustrates and expands the two statements above brilliantly.  Don't miss his article.

"EXTREMISTS" - A FRIEND'S "LETTER TO THE EDITOR"

Here's the letter: 

A friend of mine sent me this slogan: "Fight organized crime. Re-elect no one." Wow. Too true to be funny.

Thank God for certain extremists. Those who started the USA were so extreme that they declared themselves a separate nation. So extreme they thought their Tax Masters robbed them of the rights their Creator had given them. So extreme they appealed to the Supreme Judge of the World for the rectitude of their intentions. So extreme they relied on the protection of divine Providence to throw off an absolute Despotism.

We need that kind now.

If you think we need more counterfeit 'moderates', please check your head and heart. Take just the one wicked trick of buying votes and power by enslaving us and our children's children's children to unpayable debts.

Me:  I think the letter counters the "extremist" charge brilliantly.

Here it is: 

A friend of mine sent me this slogan: "Fight organized crime. Re-elect no one." Wow. Too true to be funny.

Thank God for certain extremists. Those who started the USA were so extreme that they declared themselves a separate nation. So extreme they thought their Tax Masters robbed them of the rights their Creator had given them. So extreme they appealed to the Supreme Judge of the World for the rectitude of their intentions. So extreme they relied on the protection of divine Providence to throw off an absolute Despotism.

We need that kind now.

If you think we need more counterfeit 'moderates', please check your head and heart. Take just the one wicked trick of buying votes and power by enslaving us and our children's children's children to unpayable debts.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NPR FIRES JUAN WILLIAMS

It's all over the internet.  Here's a collection of articles from WorldNetDaily:

TROUBLESPEAK WorldNetDaily Exclusive Williams fired after complaint by 'terror co-conspirator' D.C.-based CAIR demanded action on 'anti-Muslim' remarks by NPR correspondent --WND

 

Fox talker to CAIR exec: 'Happy now?' Megyn Kelly's heated interview with Ibrahim Hooper regarding Williams firing --Fox News

 

Juan Williams: 'I said what I meant to say' 'It's not a bigoted statement ... you cannot ignore what happened on 9/11' --Real Clear Politics

 

In wake of controversy, Fox News gives Williams expanded role Analyst signed to new 3-year contract for nearly $2 million --Los Angeles Times

 

CEO Schiller: Sorry firing came during fall pledge drive 'Juan is not an employee of NPR. He's an independent contractor. He's not NPR staff' --Atlanta Journal Constitution

 

NPR CEO suggests Williams consult 'his psychiatrist' Regrets: 'I spoke hastily and I apologize to Juan and others for my thoughtless remark' --National Public Radio

 

Stations inundated with complaints about firing NPR.org 'Contact Us' page crashes, listeners demanding return of donations --WBUR-TV, Boston

 

A brief history of NPR's intolerance, imbalance From wishing AIDS on Jesse Helms to rapture of Christians leaving world a better place --Fox News

 

BLAST FROM THE PAST, JULY 21 NPR affiliate employee wishes death on Rush Limbaugh 'I never knew I had this much hate in me, but he deserves it' --National Public Radio

Huckabee calls on Congress to cut NPR funding
Slams radio network as 'purveyor of politically correct pabulum'
--CNN

RENTED AGITATORS CAN'T EXPLAIN THE SIGNS THEY ARE CARRYING

Kudos to Andrew Breitbart who waded into an anti-Glen Beck, anti Tea-party mob and challenged anyone to explain the meaning of the signs they were carrying.  No one could do it!   It turns out they were a union mob created by the DNC and Team Obama against Tea Partiers and top conservatives.  Read Jim Hoft's post and watch the video below. 

 

OBAMA, "THE CONTROL FREAK," MUST BE RESISTED

I side with "Dr. Zero" who writes (excerpt):

Political control is what’s killing us.  It is expressed in hundreds of ways: high tax rates with carefully tailored exceptions, massive bailouts, laws rigged to favor government-controlled industries, restrictions on resource development, and a vast poppy field of subsidies and penalties.  The Democrats have added thousands of pages of fabulously expensive legislation since Obama took office.  Two messages echo through those pages: Obey and be rewarded.  Resist and be punished. . . .

Here’s the deal, Democrats: you don’t get any more billions to spend.  You don’t get to pick the next group of winners and losers in the free market.  You don’t get to decide who “deserves” a tax cut.  You don’t get to hand us the invoice for this bloated government and tell us we need to figure out a way to pay for it.  You don’t get to blame deficits on the people who haven’t surrendered enough of their livelihood to you.  You do not get to insist every piece of this government’s sprawling machinery is indispensible, while every slice of our lives is negotiable. . .  [more . . .]

WHY DOES FOX EMPLOY GERALDO RIVERA?

My guess is so FOX can claim a flaming liberal on its payroll.  And flaming liberal he is, complete with the trademark bias, put-downs, unfairness, false equivalences, and nastiness we've come to associate with  his ideological compatriots.  For  the above reasons, whenever his program comes on, my TV goes off.   Except last night. 

Pamela Geller had announced on her blog she would be on his program, and so I tuned in.  Geraldo's treatment of Geller was utterly disgusting.  I searched for an e-mail address to FOX to vent my disgust but couldn't find it.   Geller describes her experience below.  As a viewer, I can vouch for the truth of everything she says:

UPDATE: Geraldo Hit-Job Interview on YouTube

THE "TOLERANCE" OF PROGRESSIVES

Pamela Gellar (depicted with the "No Mosque" blouse) provides the link to the drawing below:

Does the scene above remind you of anything?  I looked at the Pelosi figure and immediately thought of Fairy Hardcastle in C.S.Lewis's That Hideous Strength.  And then I discovered that a commenter had made the same connection:

Nancy Pelosi in this picture reminds me too much of Fairy Hardcastle in CS Lewis’s novel That Hideous Strength. The whole thing about her and all the progs just might be prophetic if Obamacare gets its way. N.I.C.E. in C.S. Lewis’s novel (the National Institute of Co-Ordinated Experiments) is eerily similar to what they want to do with health care as well as for anyone who disagrees with them and their evil and wicked worldview. In the end God always wins.

THE LEFT'S SECULAR UTOPIAN RELIGION

It hates heretics:

- Dennis Prager - Why the Left hates conservatives  -  Prager offers three answers:  First, the Left thinks the Right is evil. . .    Second, when you don’t confront real evil, you hate those who do. . .    Third, the Left’s utopian vision is prevented only by the Right.   Me:  This is a short, outstanding MUST READ article. 

It fails to read and understand history:

-- Thomas Sowell - No one is smart enough to carry out central planning.  Failure after failure after failure is the predictable result.  But brainy utopian elites don't read history.

THE CASE AGAINST CONFIRMING ELENA KAGEN TO SERVE ON THE U.S. SUPREME COURT

Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council summarizes:

It was little surprise that President Obama would nominate someone to the Supreme Court with as limited regard for the U.S. Constitution as himself. However, the radical political and liberal history of Elena Kagan should make even the most diehard Leftist take a step back.

The recent Senate hearings helped expose her disgust for traditional morality, free speech, the military, individual liberty, unborn children, constitutional fidelity, and all things religious. As a political appointee to President Clinton, she was so fixated on protecting partial-birth abortion that she masterminded an effort to substitute her own opinion for that of two medical groups. Both the American Medical Association (AMA) and American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) said there was virtually no instance in which a partial-birth abortion was necessary to save a woman's life. When that statement crossed Kagan's desk, she personally changed it to say that partial-birth abortion "may be the best or most appropriate procedure in a particular circumstance to save the life or preserve the health of the mother."

The political and unscientific opinion inserted by Ms. Kagan into what was supposed to be an authoritative medical document was then cited by several judges to strike down restrictions on the horrendous partial-birth abortion procedure.

Additionally, her pro-homosexual views led her to restrict military recruitment on Harvard Law School's campus, and, as Solicitor General, to sabotage the defense of our federal marriage law and of the current military policy on homosexuals serving openly in the U.S. military. In these instances, she favored her personal ideology and political calculations over the law. Without your help, she may spend 30 or more years doing this same thing as a member of America's most powerful court. Elena Kagan was unfit to be Solicitor General, and she definitely doesn't deserve a lifetime promotion to the U.S. Supreme Court.

Please contact your U.S. Senators today and tell them to oppose Elena Kagan.

Thank you and God bless you.

Please click here to contact your U.S. Senators to oppose President Obama's nominee to the Supreme Court, Elena Kagan

Sincerely,

Tony Perkins
President

"JOURNOLIST" - AN OPEN CONSPIRACY OF LIBERALS TO SLANT THE NEWS

Now we know what has been going on behind the scenes to kill journalism in America and convert it into propaganda instead.  Jonah Goldberg brings us up to speed: 

Just in case you’ve been living in a cave, or if you only get your news from MSNBC, here’s the story. A young blogger, Ezra Klein, formerly of the avowedly left-wing American Prospect and now with the avowedly mainstream Washington Post, founded the e-mail listserv JournoList for like-minded liberals to hash out and develop ideas. Some 400 people joined the by-invitation-only group. Most, it seems, were in the media, but many hailed from academia, think tanks, and the world of forthright liberal activism generally. They spoke freely about their political and personal biases, including their hatred of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. . .

JournoList e-mails obtained by the Daily Caller reveal what anybody with two neurons to rub together already knew: Professional liberals don’t like Republicans and do like Democrats. They can be awfully smug and condescending in their

GLEANINGS

--  It Begins. Team Obama Now Strong-Arming Outspoken Politicians & Detaining Reporters Near Oil Spill

--  Planned Parenthood Celebrates Independence Day By Pushing For Military Base Abortions

--  Byron York - Obama’s new mission for NASA: Reach out to Muslim world

--  Dennis Prager explains how “world opinion” is a creation of the Left, reported by the Left.

--  Pamela Gellar - Congressional Muslim staffers on capital hill

THE 100 AMERICANS THE LEFT HATES MOST

Townhall Magazine has the list and offers commentary on each.  Guess who makes up the first five?  Correct!  Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, George Bush, and Ann Coulter.  #6 is Michelle Malkin.  I'll let you go to the website to see the rest.

One final comment.  For those who might be interested in well-known Christians, James Dobson ranks 38th, Tony Perkins  (President of the Family Research Council) #54, Tim Tebow #74 (Tim Tebow???!!  the U. of Florida football player?!), Franklin Graham #63, Ken Blackwell of the Family Research Council #85.  Of course many other clearly identifiable Christians are also on the list.

HT: Ed Morrissey

UNDERSTANDING THE LEFTIST MINDSET

Steven den Beste helps us:

To the left, it’s an article of faith that America is too powerful. America is too influential. America is too rich. America consumes too much. Americans as a group are too independent, too rowdy, not controlled enough. Americans are too nationalistic, too unwilling to give up part or all of their sovereignty to “emerging world governance”.

America needs to be humbled. Americans need to have their confidence shattered, to become introspective, to consider (finally, at long last) “why they hate us”. America needs to bow to world opinion.

All of this is necessary in order to advance the single paramount social good: equality (of outcome). Equality is more important than anything else. In particulaar, equality is more important than freedom. Creating a state of equality, and maintaining it, will require government control and if individual liberty opposes that, then liberty shall have to give way.

With Obama, the left finally has a president who is in tune with this philosophy.

Investor’s Business Daily writes about “Losing ‘The War That Has To Be Won’“.  [more . . .]

QUICK TAKES

Daniel Pipes - "In Europe, Remorse Has Turned to Masochism"  - On the perversity of self-hatred.  Good analysis!

Dennis Prager - "Why We Hear about "White" Tea Parties."  The Left sees the world through the prism of race, gender, and class, rather than through the moral prism of right and wrong.

Thomas Sowell - "Misusing History."   Poisonous distortions in the selective filtering of facts.

MUST READ: RUSH LIMBAUGH ON DISGUSTING LIBERAL POISONOUS SLANDER

  Limbaugh's Wall Street Journal article carries the title, "Liberals and the Violence Card."  I commend the article to you.  (HT: Drudge)    I am more and more recognizing Rush Limbaugh's inestimable value to the American Republic.  Click here.