Items on this page are archived in
the order of discovery . . .
The Left, Not The Right, Owns
Political Violence
Michael
Filozof
says it took less than 24 hours for the political Left to seize upon
the attempted assassination of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, and the
murder of six people on Saturday, to blame the political Right for the
shooting.
Perhaps the most egregious example came from Paul
Krugman of the New York Times, who wrote, "We don't have proof yet that
this was political, but the odds are that it was." (The newspaper that
published plagiarized and fabricated accounts of the "D.C. sniper" by
affirmative-action hire Jayson Blair in 2003 is still publishing
unsubstantiated suppositions without "proof," eh?)
"[Giffords']
father says that 'the whole Tea Party' was her enemy...," continued
Krugman, "And yes, she was on Sarah Palin's infamous 'crosshairs'
list." As if that was not enough, Krugman went on to invoke the specter
of Tim McVeigh.
Well, we do have some proof now, and it's clear
that the shooter was in no way connected to the Tea Party, the
Republican Party, or any other movement on the political Right. Law
enforcement officials have revealed that suspect Jared Loughner was
rejected by the Army, kicked out of college, appeared to have
mental-health issues, was a reader of the "Communist Manifesto," and has
been described as a leftist since high school by his friends.
But since Krugman and the other members of the Leftist chattering
classes have brought up the subject of politically-inspired violence,
maybe we ought to remind them of the Left's protracted association with
political violence.
We could begin over a century ago when
William McKinley was shot by Leon Czolgosz. Czolgosz was inspired by
anarchist Emma Goldman (today a darling of the academic feminists).
Goldman's lover, Alexander Berkman, attempted to assassinate Henry Clay
Frick because Frick was a prominent capitalist.
But it wasn't
until the 1960s (when Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, and Ho Chi Minh became
idols of the American Left) that the Left really ramped up the
violence. Who can forget Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam? Or
Eldridge (rape is an insurrectionary act) Cleaver and his Black
Panthers? What about the bombings perpetrated by the Weathermen?
Former Weatherman bomber Bill Ayers is, of course, a close associate of
Barack Obama. Ayers managed to escape prosecution (and proclaimed
himself "Guilty as hell, free as a bird"), but his wife Bernadine Dohrn
served jail time for her part in the violence. Black radicals seized
Cornell University at gunpoint in 1969, the same year the SDS and the
Weathermen staged the "Days of Rage" riots. Race riots took place in
Watts in 1965 and nationwide in 1968; leftists rioted at the Democratic
Party Convention in Chicago in 1968. John Kennedy was murdered by a
communist, and Robert Kennedy was shot by a Palestinian -- hardly men of
the Right.
The 1970s weren't much calmer. The Army Math Center
at the University of Wisconsin-Madison was bombed by Leftist radicals in
1970. Heiress Patty Hearst was kidnapped and took part in and a series
of armed bank robberies by the left-wing Symbionese Liberation Army.
The SLA inspired Sarah Jane Moore to try to assassinate Gerald Ford --
less than three weeks after Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme, a disciple of
Charles Manson, tried to kill Ford also. And what about the shooting of
FBI agents at Wounded Knee by the American Indian Movement in 1975?
Since we're taking about violence against members of Congress, how
can we possibly fail to mention the murder of Congressman Leo Ryan and
the mass suicide of 900 people by the Leftist/Marxist Jonestown cult in
1978?
Does anyone recall that President Clinton pardoned members
of the Marxist-Leninist inspired Puerto Rican terrorist group FALN?
Clinton also pardoned left-wing radical Susan Rosenberg, who was
imprisoned for her role in the murder of two police officers and a
security guard in a robbery in 1981. She was offered a teaching job at
Hamilton College, but public outcry forced her to decline the position.
More recently, we've seen anarchist and communist riots against the
WTO in Seattle in 1999, and violent anti-Bush and anti-war protests. In
2007 Leftist playwrights in New York created a stage performance about
killing president Bush.
The politics of the contemporary Left is
absolutely intertwined with either tacit or overt support for violence.
How dare the left-wing media attempt to pin the actions of a deranged
individual in Tucson on the Right! To do so is nothing less than a
calumny, a slander, and a blatant hypocrisy.
Read It Again, John
Paul Mirengoff
says
-- I thought it was a good idea for the Constitution to be read aloud on
the floor of the House of Representatives as that body kicked off its
new session. The reading reminded those present of the contents of
our fundamental law and symbolized a commitment to adhere to that law.
But what seemed like a good idea turned out to be a great one.
For instead of good naturedly going along with the exercise, or
suffering in silence, a number of leftists publicly displayed their lack
of comfort with, if not contempt for, the Constitution. Thus, the
public received its clearest indication to date that the left regards
the words of the Constitution as an impediment to its agenda.
Today, the day of the actual reading, the left was at it again. At
least two Democratic representatives, including Jesse Jackson's son,
protested that the document read on the floor did not contain provisions
of the Constitution that have been superseded by amendments. In
particular, Jackson was unhappy that the provision counting slaves as
only three-fifths of a person for the purposes of taxation and
apportionment was "didacted" as he put it.
But if the purpose of
the reading was to remind people of the contents of our fundamental law
and to symbolize Congress' commitment to adhering to that law, then it
makes no sense to read portions of document that no longer apply.
The reading Jackson and others wanted would make sense only if this were
a history lesson. But it was not. History lessons are for
speeches by individual members, each of whom has his or her own view
about which aspects of history to emphasize. What all members of
Congress have in common is their oath to uphold the Constitution as it
stands today.
The goals of Jackson and other leftists who
supported him are plain enough -- to make America look bad and,
simultaneously, to create skepticism about the quality of the
Constitution as a whole. How sound, the thinking goes, can the
rest of the original document be if it originally contained a provision
counting slaves as three-fifths of a person for some purposes?
Again, however, this sort of argument is the stuff of speeches, not of a
reading of the document members of Congress are sworn to uphold.
But I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for speeches by members of
Congress that attack the Constitution.
That is why the reading
exercise proved to be such a stroke of genius. It gave the country
a revealing glimpse of how the left really views the Constitution.
Would monthly readings be overdoing it?
Hanoi Jane Fonda Blames All The Wrong
People
Noel Sheppard
is reporting that Jane Fonda blamed Saturday's tragic shooting spree
in Tucson, Arizona, on former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, conservative
talk show host Glenn Beck, and the Tea Party movement.
Obviously
possessing no facts about the alleged shooter, the liberal actress and
left-wing activist tweeted the following moments ago:
Mind-Crushing Hypocrisy
Zip
reminds us that on January 8th MSNBC guests Eugene Robinson and Josh Marshall,
along with host Keith Olbermann, soberly assured their viewers that
violent, political rhetoric is exclusive to the American right. Two
months earlier, on November 8th, MSNBC host Dylan Ratigan called for a
new American revolution and featured guest Ted Rall who advocates a
violent overthrow of the government.
The Politics of Blood Libel
Glen Reynolds
says that shortly after November's electoral defeat for the
Democrats, pollster Mark Penn appeared on Chris Matthews's TV show and
remarked that what Obama needed to reconnect with the American people
was another Oklahoma City bombing. To judge from the reaction to
Saturday's tragic shootings in Arizona, many on the left (and in the
press) agree, and for a while hoped that Jared Lee Loughner's killing
spree might fill the bill.
With only the barest outline of events
available, pundits and reporters seemed to agree that the massacre had
to be the fault of the TEA Party movement in general, and of Sarah Palin
in particular. Why? Because they had created, in New York Times
columnist Paul Krugman's words, a "climate of hate."
The critics
were a bit short on particulars as to what that meant. Mrs. Palin has
used some martial metaphors -- "lock and load" -- and talked about
"targeting" opponents. But as media writer Howard Kurtz noted in The
Daily Beast, such metaphors are common in politics. Palin critic Markos
Moulitsas, on his Daily Kos blog, had even included Rep. Gabrielle
Giffords's district on a list of congressional districts "bullseyed" for
primary challenges. When Democrats use language like this -- or even
harsher language like Obama's famous remark, in Philadelphia during the
2008 campaign, "If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun" --
it's just evidence of high spirits, apparently. But if Republicans do
it, it somehow creates a climate of hate.
There's a climate of
hate out there, all right, but it doesn't derive from the innocuous use
of political clichés. And former Gov. Palin and the TEA Party movement
are more the targets than the source.
American journalists know
how to be exquisitely sensitive when they want to be. As the Washington
Examiner's Byron York pointed out on Sunday, after Major Nidal Hasan
shot up Fort Hood while shouting "Allahu Akhbar!" the press was full of
cautions about not drawing premature conclusions about a connection to
Islamist terrorism. "Where," asked Mr. York, "was that caution after
the shootings in Arizona?"
Set aside as inconvenient,
apparently. There was no waiting for the facts on Saturday. Likewise,
last May New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and CBS anchor Katie Couric
speculated, without any evidence, that the Times Square bomber might be
a TEA Part member upset with the ObamaCare bill.
So as the usual
talking heads begin their "have you no decency?" routine aimed at talk
radio and Republican politicians, perhaps we should turn the question
around. Where is the decency in blood libel?
To paraphrase
Justice Cardozo ("proof of negligence in the air, so to speak, will not
do"), there is no such thing as responsibility in the air. Those who
try to connect Sarah Palin and other political figures with whom they
disagree to the shootings in Arizona use attacks on "rhetoric" and a
"climate of hate" to obscure their own dishonesty in trying to imply
responsibility where none exists. But the dishonesty remains.
To
be clear, if you're using this event to criticize the "rhetoric" of Mrs.
Palin or others with whom you disagree, then you're either: (a)
asserting a connection between the "rhetoric" and the shooting, which
based on evidence to date would be what we call a vicious lie; or (b)
you're not, in which case you're just seizing on a tragedy to try to
score unrelated political points, which is contemptible. Which is it?
I understand the desperation that Democrats must feel after taking a
historic beating in the midterm elections and seeing the popularity of
ObamaCare plummet while voters flee the party in droves. But those who
purport to care about the health of our political community demonstrate
precious little actual concern for America's political well-being when
they seize on any pretext, however flimsy, to call their political
opponents accomplices to murder.
Where is the decency in that?
The Left, Not The Right, Owns Political
Violence
Michael Filozof
says it took less than 24 hours for the political Left to seize upon
the attempted assassination of Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, and the
murder of six people on Saturday, to blame the political Right for the
shooting.
Perhaps the most egregious example came from Paul
Krugman of the New York Times, who wrote, "We don't have proof yet that
this was political, but the odds are that it was." (The newspaper
that published plagiarized and fabricated accounts of the "D.C. sniper"
by affirmative-action hire Jayson Blair in 2003 is still publishing
unsubstantiated suppositions without "proof," eh?)
"[Giffords']
father says that 'the whole Tea Party' was her enemy...," continued
Krugman, "And yes, she was on Sarah Palin's infamous 'crosshairs' list."
As if that was not enough, Krugman went on to invoke the specter of Tim
McVeigh.
Well, we do have some proof now, and it's clear that
the shooter was in no way connected to the Tea Party, the Republican
Party, or any other movement on the political Right. Law
enforcement officials have revealed that suspect Jared Loughner was
rejected by the Army, kicked out of college, appeared to have
mental-health issues, was a reader of the "Communist Manifesto," and has
been described as a leftist since high school by his friends.
But since Krugman and the other members of the Leftist chattering
classes have brought up the subject of politically-inspired violence,
maybe we ought to remind them of the Left's protracted association with
political violence.
We could begin over a century ago when
William McKinley was shot by Leon Czolgosz. Czolgosz was inspired
by anarchist Emma Goldman (today a darling of the academic feminists).
Goldman's lover, Alexander Berkman, attempted to assassinate Henry Clay
Frick because Frick was a prominent capitalist.
But it wasn't
until the 1960s (when Che Guevara, Fidel Castro, and Ho Chi Minh became
idols of the American Left) that the Left really ramped up the violence.
Who can forget Malcolm X and the Nation of Islam? Or Eldridge
(rape is an insurrectionary act) Cleaver and his Black Panthers?
What about the bombings perpetrated by the Weathermen? Former
Weatherman bomber Bill Ayers is, of course, a close associate of Barack
Obama. Ayers managed to escape prosecution (and proclaimed himself
"Guilty as hell, free as a bird"), but his wife Bernadine Dohrn served
jail time for her part in the violence. Black radicals seized
Cornell University at gunpoint in 1969, the same year the SDS and the
Weathermen staged the "Days of Rage" riots. Race riots took place
in Watts in 1965 and nationwide in 1968; leftists rioted at the
Democratic Party Convention in Chicago in 1968. John Kennedy was
murdered by a communist, and Robert Kennedy was shot by a Palestinian --
hardly men of the Right.
The 1970s weren't much calmer. The
Army Math Center at the University of Wisconsin-Madison was bombed by
Leftist radicals in 1970. Heiress Patty Hearst was kidnapped and
took part in and a series of armed bank robberies by the left-wing
Symbionese Liberation Army. The SLA inspired Sarah Jane Moore to
try to assassinate Gerald Ford -- less than three weeks after Lynette
"Squeaky" Fromme, a disciple of Charles Manson, tried to kill Ford also.
And what about the shooting of FBI agents at Wounded Knee by the
American Indian Movement in 1975?
Since we're taking about
violence against members of Congress, how can we possibly fail to
mention the murder of Congressman Leo Ryan and the mass suicide of 900
people by the Leftist/Marxist Jonestown cult in 1978?
Does
anyone recall that President Clinton pardoned members of the
Marxist-Leninist inspired Puerto Rican terrorist group FALN?
Clinton also pardoned left-wing radical Susan Rosenberg, who was
imprisoned for her role in the murder of two police officers and a
security guard in a robbery in 1981. She was offered a teaching
job at Hamilton College, but public outcry forced her to decline the
position.
More recently, we've seen anarchist and communist riots
against the WTO in Seattle in 1999, and violent anti-Bush and anti-war
protests. In 2007 Leftist playwrights in New York created a stage
performance about killing president Bush.
The politics of the
contemporary Left is absolutely intertwined with either tacit or overt
support for violence. How dare the left-wing media attempt to pin
the actions of a deranged individual in Tucson on the Right! To do
so is nothing less than a calumny, a slander, and a blatant hypocrisy.
Palin Must Be Assassinated
Aurelius
ponders the continuing craziness that has been on full display for
two days now. Insane liberals are now calling for the
"assassination" of former VP candidate Sarah Palin. Since Jared
Lee Loughner's assassination of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, liberals have
been desperate to link Loughner to Palin for no apparent reason.
Apparently liberals believe "evidence" and common sense be damned.
Not only do they not have evidence to link Loughner to Palin, but now
crazed liberals are calling for the "assassination" of the former
governor of Alaska. Why? I'm not sure, but liberals are
angry and vengeful.
Once again this isn't an isolated incident,
but many liberals are going nuts just to scream for the death of Sarah
Palin. Like this one on
SodaHead:
Fox News
is reporting that heightened and "vitriolic" political rhetoric is
being blamed by some for the kind of violence that landed Arizona Rep.
Gabrielle Giffords in intensive care following a mass casualty shooting
on Saturday, but others say a blame game is hardly appropriate or useful
right now. Democratic sheriff, Clarence Dupnik of Pima County,
sparked much of the debate during a press conference Saturday evening in
which he blamed talk radio and television for a decline in America.
The sheriff said:
"I think the vitriolic rhetoric that we hear
day in and day out from people in the radio business and some people
in the TV business and what (we) see on TV and how our youngsters
are being raised, that this has not become the nice United States of
America that most of us grew up in. And I think it's time that
we do the soul-searching."
"I think we're the tombstone of the United
States of America. To try to inflame the public on a daily
basis, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, has impact on people,
especially who are unbalanced personalities to begin with."
Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) was one
who chimed in, saying, "I think the sheriff was right." Rep. James
Clyburn (D-SC), the assistant minority whip, jumped on board, saying,
"Words do have consequences. And I think that we have to really --
this is nothing new. I've been saying this for a long time now."
Yesterday, Dupnik, in
this video, went way over the edge attacking Rush Limbaugh,
saying:
"The kind of rhetoric that flows from people
like Rush Limbaugh, in my judgment he is irresponsible, uses partial
information, sometimes wrong information. [Limbaugh] attacks
people, angers them against government, angers them against elected
officials and that kind of behavior in my opinion is not without
consequences."
However, if there is any fault here, it is the
sheriff's.
There are now accusations that Dupnik knew about
previous threats by leftwing pothead Jared Loughner and did nothing to
protect the Tucson community from this homicidal young man (video). The Cholla Jumps blog
says Jared Loughner is a product of Sheriff Dupnik's office.
The sheriff has been editorializing and politicizing the event since he
took the podium to report on the incident. His blaming of radio
personalities and bloggers is a pre-emptive strike because Sheriff
Dupnik knows this tragedy lays right at his feet, and his office.
Six people died on his watch and he could have prevented it. He
needs to step up and start apologizing to the families of the victims
instead of spinning this event to serve his own political agenda.
Dupnik and his office have had previous contact with the alleged
assailant and
failed to act. Now he's covering his ass.
Loughner has been making death threats by phone to
many people in Pima County, including the staff of Pima Community
College, radio personalities, and local bloggers. When Pima County
Sheriff's Office was informed, his deputies assured the victims that he
was being well managed by the mental health system. It was also
suggested that further pressing of charges would be unnecessary and
probably cause more problems than it solved.
Every victim of his
threats previously must also be wondering if this tragedy could have
been prevented if they had been more aggressive in pursuing charges
against Loughner. Perhaps with a felony conviction he would never
have been able to lawfully buy the Glock 9mm Model 19 that he used to
strike down the lives of six people and wound 14 more.
This was
not an act of politics. This was an act of a mentally disturbed
young man hell bent on getting his 15 minutes of infamy. The Pima
County Sheriff's Department was aware of his violent nature and they
failed to act appropriately. This tragedy leads right back to
Sherriff Dupnik, and all the spin in the world is not going to change
that fact.
What If The Shooter Were Named Muhammad?
Joe Kovacs
says Rush Limbaugh is now posing a new question:
"Just ask yourself this. If the
shooter had been a 22-year-old named Muhammad, would we be hearing
that Muslim talk radio and the Muslim Internet blamed for it?
"No, we'd have been told that we can't blame Muslims for the action
of one kook."
Limbaugh spent all three hours of his program today
focusing on coverage of the weekend massacre that left Rep. Gabrielle
Giffords, D-Ariz., in critical condition and six others dead, and called
attempts by many on the left to make the shooter seem influenced by
those on the political right "sick."
"In continuing this template and narrative
that the tea party and Sarah Palin, that talk radio and Fox News,
are inspiring violence, they forget that, in the process of so
doing, they are attacking what is now a majority of America." ...
"They are accusing a majority of Americans of being accomplices to
murder." ... It's all just surreal. These people are making
abject fools of themselves in open, public now."
"Whoever
they think is the biggest threat of the moment is who's responsible
for this. When I heard over the weekend 'Sarah Palin,' I
almost started laughing. How utterly irresponsible and
predictable. Sarah Palin responsible for murder? They
say Sarah Palin's too stupid to put two sentences together.
Now all of a sudden Sarah Palin has all this ability of mind
control. Sarah Palin? Talk radio? People ought to
be dropping like flies if that's the case. I mean I'm in my
23rd year here, folks. People ought to be dropping like flies,
but they're not. These are isolated incidents and in
practically every one of them you're dealing with someone who's
insane or deranged, or a schizophrenic or something."
I'm
always amused at how it's never socio-economic causes or other
influential items that cause behavior except when conservatives do
it."
"I wouldn't be surprised if somebody in the Obama
regime or some FCC bureaucrat or some Democrat congressperson's
already written up legislation to stifle and eliminate conservative
speech and that legislation's sitting in a desk drawer somewhere
just waiting for the right event to clamp down." ... "They can't
beat us, and so they're going to do what they can to shut us down.
And even if they don't have popular political support for it, they
will still try it. That's what this is all about."
He also noted that if there's one side of the
political spectrum that's more prone to violent acts, it's the left and
not the right.
"Wherever there is mass violence, wherever
there is mass murder, civil unrest or what have you, it's leftists.
"They're the ones who don't have jobs and who thus have the time."
Obama A Murderer?
During an interview with WOR talk radio host
Steve Malzberg Wednesday, Columbia University professor Dr. Marc Lamont
Hill calls for a relaxation in political rhetoric while simultaneously
calling George W. Bush and Barack Obama "murderers."
The liberal
professor stands firm in his accusation of Bush, but when pressed with
his characterization of Obama, Hill backs down, using a generalization
to say the "U.S. government is responsible for murder."
The Entitled Party
Karin McQuillan says Obama and the left wing of
the Democratic Party think they are entitled to win. From their
narcissist-in-chief to screaming union organizers, they are puffed up
with self-righteous zeal. They must have health care to save the
sick. They must shut down Louisiana oil rigs to save the planet.
They must defend government unions to save the middle class.
Of
course, each side thinks they are right. Being right is no excuse.
You have to abide by the law. You have to abide by elections.
You have to respect the courts and constitutional separation of power,
or else we no longer live in a democratic country. In our
democracy, no one is entitled to win. If you won't lose, you
cannot have democracy.
What you have are the Wisconsin Democrat
senators who are unwilling to abide by the election results that put
them in a minority. What you have is Reid and Pelosi, ramming
ObamaCare through by breaking rules of procedure, in order to flout the
2008 election results. What you have is the Obama White House,
blocking Congress's right to confirm appointees, and openly ignoring
federal courts. What you have is the Justice Department announcing
it will no longer defend the 1996 Defense of Marriage Act in court.
Obama is now deciding which laws are constitutional. What you have
is a Democratic Party run amok, undercutting our democracy in the
service of their own power.
The complacency, nay, the vociferous
support, from Democrat leaders and the legacy media for this disregard
for the rule of law reminds me of the old joke about the psychiatrist. A
man is sent by his family to see a shrink because he thinks he's a
chicken. After months of treatment, he is still clucking.
The family asks the psychiatrist if he's told his patient he is not a
chicken. "No," the psychiatrist admits. "Why not!" "Because
I like the eggs."
The Democrats like the eggs. They like
getting imposing their will, whether it be ObamaCare, or the off-shore
drilling moratorium, or the blockage of Wisconsin's elected government.
Are they really this short-sighted? Don't they understand the
damage to our democratic system by these anti-democratic precedents?
Do they really want to change congressional rules so that the House and
the Senate version of bills no longer have to be reconciled, as they did
to jam ObamaCare through by the fiction it was a finance bill? Do
they really want the Justice Department practicing selective enforcement
of our laws ? Do they really want the Interior Department ignoring
federal court orders? Do they really want state senators refusing
to accept that when you lose an election, the other side gets to pass
their agenda?
Obama appointed extremists for important
administrative positions, controversial and even creepy people, like Van
Jones, whom he knew would not get past Congressional confirmation.
The checks and balances between executive and legislative branch were
instituted by our founders for this exact purpose. The executive
nominates but Congress must confirm -- bedrock principles of American
democracy. Obama's answer: flout the law. Call his
appointees "czars" and bypass confirmation. This is not legal and
it is not democracy. Do the ObamaMedia and Obama's fellow
Democrats want presidents to have this unlimited power? Do they
really want to give up the safeguards of congressional confirmation by
calling appointees czars?
Michael O'Brien
is reporting a top union and a top liberal blog announced Tuesday
that they'll team up to sponsor polling through the 2012 elections.
Daily Kos and the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) said
they will join forces to conduct issue and campaign polling in key
states and races over the next two years.
The joint poll
continues an effort by Daily Kos, a premiere liberal blog founded in
2002 by Markos Moulitsas, a contributor to The Hill, to take its
advocacy a step further, and provide raw political information to
readers, especially on races and issues of importance to that online
community.
"Rather than sit around and have know-nothing pundits
and politicians in DC tell us what the American people think, we prefer
to ask them directly," Moulitsas said in a statement. "And this
partnership will allow us to conduct significantly more polling than any
other media organization in the country."
"We continue to work to
ensure our members have their voices heard in the political process and
honest, objective polling plays an important role in identifying the
issues that concern working families and the politicians that can best
advocate for working people," added SEIU National Political Director
Brandon Davis.
The SEIU/Daily Kos poll will use Public Policy
Polling (PPP), a Democratic firm that uses automated polling rather than
live, over-the-phone survey methods. Moulitsas contracted with PPP in
June of 2010 after severing ties with Research 2000, which faced
allegations of producing faulty poll results.
Daily Kos, like
other liberal blogs, have taken an increasingly active role in advocacy,
campaigns, and fundraising. The
Progressive Change Campaign Committee
(PCCC), for instance, has used Daily Kos as a medium to help raise over
$500,000 to support recall efforts against Republican state senators in
Wisconsin.
Now, where did
we see the Daily Kos before? And check out the Progressive Change Campaign Committee:
"The Progressive Change Campaign
Committee is filling this void -- providing needed
infrastructure and strategic advice early to progressive
candidates so they can run first-class campaigns and win.
And when PCCC-endorsed candidates get elected by working
hand-in-hand with the progressive movement, they'll trust
the political instincts of progressives and be sturdy allies
as we work with them to pass a bold progressive agenda."
These people sure are organized.
IT's really just one big movement with a lot of independent entities.
And they're all getting government money, and monies from outfits like
the Annenberg Foundation.
These people are out of the closet and
don't care who knows it.
Do the initials "PCCC" remind you of
anything?
Click here . . .
Because He's A Black Liberal
In a stunning moment of honesty, MSNBC's Dylan
Ratigan admits the Left is scared to criticize Obama because he's a
black liberal:
"There’s a bigger issue here because the
political machine has been immobilized because it is a liberal black
Democratic president who is in charge that the left by my opinion
does not want to criticize even though he is exhibiting behavior
that were it to be a right-wing older white man, the left would be
holding vigils."
Obama's Peeps Plan The
Destruction Of The Economy In May
Seven minutes, but you should
listen to this conspiracy to destroy the American economy. If
Obama and Holder were Americans, these people would be arrested,
tried, and imprisoned.
A former official of one of the
country’s most-powerful unions, SEIU, is detailing a secret plan to
"destabilize" the country.
Specifically, the plan seeks to
destroy JP Morgan, nuke the stock market, and weaken Wall Street’s
grip on power, thus creating the conditions necessary for a
redistribution of wealth and a change in government.
The
former SEIU official, Steven Lerner, spoke in a closed session at a
Pace University forum last weekend.
The Blaze procured a tape
of Lerner’s remarks. Many left-wing Americans will undoubtedly
sympathize with and support them. Still, the "destabilization"
plan is startling in its specificity, especially coming so close on
the heels of the financial crisis.
The heated rhetoric and aggressive attitude of some Democratic
lawmakers in Wisconsin has surprised many, even revolutionaries, says a
leader of the Communist Party USA.
The Wake-Up Call
Lizp4
asks,
do you see now why the TEA parties have formed? Have you finally
seen the truth about the Democrats, Leftists, Socialists and their true
motives? Look at what happened after the democrats regained both
houses of congress in 2007, and what has been imposed on us since then.
In four years, their total domination of POWER in this country has
virtually brought it to its knees.
Passing laws "in order find
out what's in them," without debate or votes, political correctness that
would gag a skunk, giving up OUR Constitutional rights every time some
noisy Muslim nitwit feels "offended" by EVERY single aspect of free
American society, and committing national suicide by stabbing ourselves
repeatedly in the heart with PC stupidity.
If there was ever a
made-to-order scenario for the Marxists, today's American life would be
it. In my mind's eye, I see them watching the US news, rubbing
their hands and gloating. They never had to fire a shot to destroy
the most powerful nation in the world. All they had to do was
stand back and watch us disembowel ourselves on the altar to political
correctness.
Not content to let the democrat liberals have all
the fun, the RINOs in congress have sold their souls to political
correctness and craven greed in their desperate attempts to have their
names inscribed on the monument to the destruction of this country.
They might even have had a good intention or two, which is the PC coin
of the realm inside the beltway. Their enabling ways have put them
solidly in the camp of the Marxist-Socialists, no matter how much they
protest that "the Democrats made them do it."
The newest liberal
height of hypocrisy has to be the current resident's stand on drilling
for American oil and gas, and his sanctimonious attempts to stall on
permits, to refuse to open up the OCS for exploration and drilling, to
release the resources of Escalante Grand Staircase in Utah; all in an
effort to weaken America and her bounty, and to set aside as much of
American land as possible for the "environment," so the animals can live
and exist freely. We sequester America's abundant resources from
our own use in order to send our treasure and tribute to those who plan
to enslave us, promising to become their best customer.
All of
this, so we can turn America's beauty and bounty back over to the
animals, yield our sovereignty to the UN, subside without clamor into
Third-World status, and limp along with $5/gallon gasoline and electric
cars we can't recharge because our power plants run on coal, which he
has promised to abolish. We demand windmills, then whine and
complain when the noise drives us nuts, which is just before the ice
chunks that form on the giant blades come screaming through our roofs
and smashing through our windshields.
If there was EVER any
doubt in anybody's mind about what the Leftists have in store for
America, the above should put those doubts to rest. Today's
American life should be a screaming, frantic, ear-splitting wakeup call.
Wake UP, America!!
Obama, The God That Failed
Paul Kengor
says the Left pinned its hopes and dreams on Barack Obama. He wasn't
merely another politician, he was post-modern, post-racial,
post-cultural, post-political. We were told Obama didn't need political
experience. His international upbringing, his multi-national background,
his inherent diversity and multiculturalism, his youthful hopping and
groping from country to country, culture to culture, faith to faith,
through Islam, Buddhism, asceticism, Christianity, Augustine, Aquinas,
Graham Greene, Nietzsche, Rev. Wright, and whatever else -- heaped atop
his overflowing innate brilliance -- would beget a new breed of
political man, a supreme decision-maker worthy of the most vexing
challenges. He was no George W. Bush; he was the anti-Bush.
All
of this, of course, was twaddle, but it's sadly in keeping with the
perverse political-spiritual sentimentality that plagues the Left.
Liberals have a bizarre tendency to revere their political leaders as
geniuses. They did so even with the Clintons and Al Gore. In handy
contrast, they reflexively caricature their opponents, irrespective of
stature or fact, as stupid. It's a very shallow thing to do, a triumph
of emotion over logic; still, they do it incessantly.
Worsening
the situation is the hard secularism of today's Left. Progressives are
more agnostic and atheistic than ever. They tend to search for salvation
in politics, which is a god that will always fail. In Obama, many of
them hoped for some sort of political messiah, approaching levels of
earthly omnipotence not possible by previous presidents.
This
brings me back to the Middle East. Now, with great historic moments --
and perhaps opportunities -- afloat in Libya and Egypt, on the heels of
Iran in June 2009, watching Obama unable to arrive at a clear sense of
understanding, let alone direction or purpose, has liberals flummoxed.
They wander in the desert without their Moses, who, in a much
anticipated speech on Libya last week, at best muttered something about
a humanitarian crisis; how utterly unsatisfying.
Remember, too,
it was the Middle East that was supposed to be Obama's strength. He
would be better than Bush, and precisely at the right place and time.
Far from Barack Hussein Obama's middle name being a liability, liberals
assured us it was his saving grace. Their faithful leader would know
what to do, in a way that "Bush," Texas rube, was fully incapable.
Instead, Obama appears clueless on the small picture let alone big
picture, as do the wise men and women he has surrounded himself with.
Neither teacher nor disciples have answers.
Of course, those of
us not suffering on the Left recognized liberals' grandiose blather
about Obama as pure codswallop from the outset. Sadly, however, and not
surprisingly, liberals duped enough moderates and independents to elect
Obama president. And now America suffers en masse, as does, potentially,
the worldwide "March of Freedom" that both Bush and Ronald Reagan
trumpeted and pushed.
To be fair to Obama, he never billed
himself as messiah; his acolytes did. He was the light that had been
hidden under bushel. He needed to be chosen by the people so his light
could shine before men. American wasn't the beacon, the Shining City --
Barack Obama was.
That brings me, in closing, to a Reagan analogy
that provides a measure of just how tragically out of place Obama is at
this historical juncture: When the Solidarity movement rose up in Poland
in opposition to Soviet communism, Ronald Reagan knew exactly what to
do. He was born for that moment; his entire life experience, from the
First Christian Church in Dixon, Illinois to Hollywood to the White
House, had prepared him. His international contacts (unlike Obama's)
were soul-mates and the real deal, profound figures like Pope John Paul
II and Margaret Thatcher, who in the fullness of time had the proper
understanding of nature, man, Providence. They possessed a shared
comprehension of the big picture. The same was true for movements like
Lech Walesa's Solidarity and Vaclav Havel's Charter 77 in
Czechoslovakia. Reagan knew what stood behind them and what opposed
them. He got free elections within a decade, and the liars and thieves
were tossed to the ash-heap of history.
And all along, liberals,
naturally, called Reagan a moron.
There's a distinct intellectual
vacuity among the American Left. I'm reminded of a Reagan quote
regarding the distant-Left cousins of liberals: "Marxist-Leninist
thought," Reagan informed, "is an empty cupboard."
So it is. And
right now, we're seeing the Left empty. After burning down the house of
Bush -- torching a good man with every weapon in the smoldering arsenal
-- and assuring a Promised Land under Barack Obama, the Left appears
naked, with no answers anywhere in the cupboard. No
water-turned-into-wine, no manna from heaven, no Holy Grail. All that
remains are false promises from a false messiah made in the Left's own
image. From Iran to Egypt to Libya, there are no solutions. This wasn't
supposed to be.
Bolder And Bolder
The Blaze has a video, Social Justice in
School PART 1, that features
Frances
Fox Piven and assorted left-wing professors pushing
for voting rights for non-citizens and borderless, one-world,
anti-capitalism, government.
A Sick Joke
Alana Goodman says Noam Chomsky may have mused
about the world’s reaction if President Bush had been assassinated in
the same way that Osama bin Laden was, but an article at
Cageprisoners picks up where Chomsky left off. It gives a fictional
account -- I hesitate to use the word "satire," though that seems to be
what they were going for -- of Obama’s death. By itself, the article is
a clumsy exercise in moral equivalence that isn’t really worth
commenting on, but the website topped off the piece with an extremely
graphic image of Obama shot in the head.
It probably wouldn’t shock most people that Cageprisoners is
run by a former Guantanamo Bay detainee,
Moazzam Begg.
But it may come as a surprise that the group has routinely partnered
with
Amnesty International, which was so taken by Begg that that it
promoted him around the UK as a human rights activist.
This seems
to be more than just simple naivety of Amnesty’s part. The organization
benefited significantly from its partnership with Cageprisoners, using
Begg’s story as a centerpiece of its anti-Guantanamo Bay propaganda.
Amnesty has disingenuously presented him as a moderate for years, and
this latest incident should prompt the group to publicly clarify its
views on him.
"Audacity Of Hope" Set To Join
Leftist-Islamist Flotilla
Gavriel Queenann is reporting that a ship
flying US colors and carrying 34 passengers is set to joint this year’s
Gaza-bound,
IHH-sponsored "Freedom Flotilla 2" in June, the New York
Times reported.
So-called "peace activists" on the first IHH
flotilla in May 2010 ambushed Israeli naval commandos who boarded the
ship in accordance with international law, attempted to take them
captive, and seriously injuring several. The commandos were forced
to kill nine aggressors in order to rescue their imperiled comrades.
This year’s American vessel, named The Audacity of Hope,
after Barack Obama’s best-selling book, is being organized by an
American group called "US Boat to Gaza." (Organization
and individual
endorsements)
Obama links to the
Audacity do not end there, however. Prof.
Rashid Khalidi, director
of the Middle East Institute at Columbia University’s School of
International and Public Affairs, and a friend from Obama’s time in
Chicago, is among the supporters of an appeal launched by the group last
week.
