When Texas Governor Rick Perry suggested his state had the right to secede from the union, liberals laughed at the mere suggestion. But secession not only has deep American roots, but is no “crazier” than socialism.
Tag: Opinion
Tom Ridge decides not to run
MSNBC’s (I know, icky!) First Read reports, that Tom Ridge has decided not to run for Arlen Specter’s seat.
The full statement:
“After careful consideration and many conversations with friends and family and the leadership of my party, I have decided not to seek the Republican nomination for Senate.
“I am enormously grateful for the confidence my party expressed in me, the encouragement and kindness of my fellow citizens in Pennsylvania and the valuable counsel I received from so many of my party colleagues. The 2010 race has significant implications for my party, and that required thoughtful reflection. All of the above made my decision a difficult and deeply personal conclusion to reach. However, this process also impressed upon me how fortunate I am to have so many friends who volunteered to support my journey if I chose to take it and continue to offer their support after I conveyed to them this morning how I believe I can best serve my commonwealth, my party and my country.
“Public service has long played a significant role in my life. That service does not end here. There are causes to which I remain intensely committed, including my work on behalf of the disability community, our nation’s veterans, our national security and the GOP — the party I enthusiastically joined more than four decades ago.
“To those who believe that the Republican Party is facing challenges; they are right. To those who believe the Democratic Party is without its own difficulties, they are wrong. No one party has a monopoly on all of the answers. The more important view, in my mind, is that we remember, whether Republican or Democrat, we are foremost Americans. And as Americans, we have always overcome challenges when we put partisanship aside and solutions first.
“And so my desire and intention is to help my party craft solutions that both sides of the aisle can embrace. My hope is to raise the level of civility in public debate and raise the bar on outcomes that serve our citizens fully, fairly and equally. My belief is that those in my home state can best be served by the principles of limited government, less taxes, competent governance and shared responsibility. So I stand ready and excited to help my party and my country prevail as we continue to work to preserve and protect our strong, storied and much beloved nation.
Some think this might be a blow to the G.O.P.; personally, I am not so sure. I believe that the Democrat’s might leave Arlen Specter twisting in the wind. However, Pat Toomy is running, and could use the support.
The Republican Party and Reagan
A very interesting piece is in the Wall Street Journal today, about the Republican Party and the Era of Ronald Reagan. Republicans and most Conservatives; including this writer, find themselves nostalgic about the Reagan era. The 1980’s was a magical time for me. I could get into all that; but this entry would soon turn into a sappy trip down memory lane. Because I am not ready to break out the ensure and reminisce about the good old days just yet, I will spare you the stories. —– I mean, I am only 36 people, give a guy a break!
Getting back on track here, the Wall Street Journal does an excellent piece on the Era of Reagan and the Republican Party. Here is a summary video:
Quote:
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush made headlines last weekend suggesting it’s time for the party to get over its glory days: “I felt like there was a lot of nostalgia and the good old days in the [GOP] messaging. I mean, it’s great, but it doesn’t draw people toward your cause.” Joyful Democratic bloggers put this more clearly in five tight words: GOP Needs to Forget Reagan.
Is this true?
The answer to that historic question is an apt subject this week as the GOP, looking for a path from the wilderness, says farewell at National Cathedral tomorrow to Jack Kemp, who remained a Reaganite to the end.
Jack Kemp, anyone who spent time around him will tell you, stayed on message. That message, like Reagan’s, had a number of parts, but it is not possible to even guess how many times Jack Kemp summarized his explanations of that message in three words: “Work, save and invest.” Republicans should think hard about building a governing philosophy on the foundation of those three words, ideas that most voters understand.
The article goes on to praise Jack Kemp and to further praise Reagan and his ideals. Those ideals, I believe, are important to remember; Self-Reliance, Small Government, Personal Freedom, all are commendable principles and are ones that all Americans should know and believe in. However, it would be a monumental mistake to sit here and not acknowledge the fact that Ronald Reagan’s policies were not perfect at all. The fact is the man had flaws. As humans, we tend to gloss over the bad parts of a President legacy that we hold in high esteem. Even President Franklin Roosevelt, of whom I admire greatly, had flaws as well. Some of his policies did more to hurt, than they did to help.
Richard Gamble over at The American Conservative, writes a very interesting piece on the policies and legacy of President Ronald Reagan, here are some excerpts:
Such an endorsement from one of the greatest inspirations of the post-World War II conservative renaissance carries considerable authority with the movement. And rightly so. It should give pause to anyone reckless enough to challenge Reagan’s legacy. But that legacy itself raises nagging questions. The federal payroll was larger in 1989 than it had been in 1981. Reagan’s tax cuts, whatever their merits as short-term fiscal policy, left large and growing budget deficits when combined with increased spending, and added to the national debt. His tax increases were among the largest proportionate ones in U.S. history. And more than one historian has called Reagan’s foreign policy “Wilsonian.” In short, it is hard in 2009 to point to any concrete evidence that the Reagan Revolution fundamentally altered the nation’s trajectory toward bloated, centralized, interventionist government. Conservatism in the 1980s made its peace with much of liberalism—if not with all of its legislative agenda, then at least with its means to power. Republicans and Democrats now argue over how big the bailouts should be or how long the troops should remain deployed, rarely about first principles.
(…)
Reagan’s speeches abounded with themes that were anything but conservative. He aligned the Republican crusader more closely with America’s expansive liberal temperament. In particular, his brand of evangelical Christianity, combined with fragments of Puritanism, enlightenment optimism, and romantic liberalism, set Reagan apart in key ways from historic conservatism.
(…)
Reagan grew up in the 1920s in Dixon, Illinois in the pietistic, revivalist world of the Disciples of Christ—a world known to many millions of American evangelicals then and since. Biographer Edmund Morris’s Dutch (1999) and Paul Kengor’s God and Ronald Reagan (2004) make much of the “practical Christianity” espoused by Reagan’s mother, the local pastor and congregation, and such religious best-sellers as That Printer of Udell’s. This activist faith shared important assumptions with the social gospel’s “applied Christianity.” Both set out to remake the City of Man through the power of the church’s moral influence. Reagan’s spirituality was shaped by a “Jesus-only” populist Christianity that emphasized the conversion experience and an activist faith suspicious of creeds, rituals, ecclesiastical bodies, and denominational boundaries.
Reagan never turned away from this transformationist Christianity. It became a fundamental part of his civil religion. Historian John Patrick Diggins, in Ronald Reagan: Fate, Freedom, and the Making of History (2007), goes as far as to say that the president’s theology “seemed to offer a Christianity without Christ and the crucifixion, a religion without reference to sin, evil, suffering, or sacrifice.” Diggins’s implicit question, “Why couldn’t Reagan have been more like Reinhold Niebuhr?” may not be exactly the right one. Why should we expect our presidents to do theology at all, even neo-orthodox theology? But his point is well taken. Reagan’s optimistic Christianity seemed ready made for an America disinclined to hear talk of limits to power and wealth. The historic Christian message can sound downright un-American.
(…)
In a further criticism, Lukacs traced the “militarization of the image of the presidency” to Reagan. It was Reagan, after all, who began the practice of returning the salutes of the military—a precedent followed by every president since. While doing so may seem to honor the military, it in fact erodes the public’s understanding of the presidency as a civilian office, Lukacs argued. Indeed, Fox News bears out Lukacs’s warning. The cable news giant got into the habit during the Bush II administration of referring to the president as commander in chief no matter what story they were reporting, seemingly unaware that the nation’s executive is the commander in chief of the Armed Forces of the Untied States and not commander in chief of the American people at large. If the president visits a city ravaged by a hurricane, he is emphatically not there in his role as commander in chief. If every American thinks of the president—of whatever political party—as my commander in chief and not narrowly as the Army or Navy’s commander in chief, then we have taken another decisive step from republic to empire. If every American expects the president to be the commander in chief of the economy, then we can’t be surprised by nationalized banks and corporations.
I think it would be a good idea to read that article in it’s entirety to truly get what is being said. It is indeed a truly interesting article to read.
My take on the subject at hand is this; The Republican Party needs to catch up with the times. This is not 1981; this is 2009, America is facing some serious challenges in this new era. The Republican Party needs to provide a sane alternative to the socialist madness of the Democratic Party; doing so, while keeping Reagan’s principles in mind. But the Republican Party must also be mindful that some, not all, some of Reagan’s policies did more to hurt, than they did to help. If they do this properly, they will be able to retake the White House in 2012. Another important issue is who they choose to run against Obama in 2012. If they try and run someone like Mitt Romney or Sarah Palin, they are going to get eaten alive in the election. However, if they run someone like Mark Sanford; they might just have a chance at winning. The problem with the Republican Party has not been principles, but the framing of the Party’s message. The Party needs to be a little more Mark Sanford and Ron Paul, and maybe even Pat Buchanan and much less Coulter, Limbaugh, Hannity and Ingraham. There is nothing wrong with Conservative principles, but when the people that are attempting to promote them are doing more to alienate, than they are to actually promote them, something is wrong.
It has been said, that you can catch more files with honey than you can with vinegar. The Republican Party needs to work on that.
Update: Thanks to memeornadum for the link in and hello to the readers from that service! 😀
Update #2: Hello to all the readers of the Moderate Voice, thanks to Joe for the link in! 😀
We’re such nasty fascists!
If there was any one person that I still feel funny about linking to, it’s Jonah Goldberg. When I was still “Left of Center”, I despised the man. However, once I switched my moderate “Right of center” position, I began to see that Mr. Goldberg was a bit more right about liberalism, than I thought.
Goldberg makes the following observation:
Here’s a really perfectly distilled bit of stereotypical idiocy about the threat from the oogy-boogy-gun-loving-Right by Sara Robinson of the Campaign for America’s Future . It’s funny how I thought it was cribbed from David Neiwert and all of his campus coffeehouse philosophizing and — lo and behold — on page two the author reveals she is a colleague of Neiwert’s. It’s tiresome overheated nonsense that actually fits the us vs. them paranoia she ascribes to the Right better than most of the stuff you’ll ever find on the Right.
Do go follow the link, it is a very interesting read. I didn’t read it all myself. I couldn’t stomach the bile that comes out of the far left this early in the morning. Even I have limits. Even Goldberg’s readers were not very pleased with it either. Yes, I know, Goldberg is a Neo-Conservative; but he makes some very valid points about the left. Especially when it comes to tolerance, it seems that the Liberals of today are much less tolerate on dissenting opinions than they used to be; especially during this time of Obama’s Hope and Change mantra.
The Southern Avenger on “The Mexican Flu”
How the news coverage of the swine flu isn’t so much indicative of any serious crisis, but the mainstream media’s corporate and government, PC sensibilities.
The Obligatory Carrie Prejean half nekkid photos posting
Yes, I know about it. Yes, I think she was stupid for doing it. But, Hey, it makes for some awesome traffic.
The Photo: (one of supposedly, uh, 5, I think…) (H/T The Dirty)
Hubba….Hubba…Hubba…bub…bub...bub…bub…
I’d hit it. hard, very, very…uhm, uh…hard.
Is it hot in here, or is it just me?
Others drooling:The Dirty’s Fresh Dirt, Flopping Aces, Liberal Values, American Power, AmSpecBlog, Pam’s House Blend, Redhot, The Other McCain, HotAir
For once; I can honestly say, I agree with “Joe The Plumber”
That’s right. For once, Sir-Bald-Alot, AKA Mr. Clean Jr. or as a he is commonly known as, “Joe The Pumber” — made a few statements that I actually agree with; for a change. Well, somewhat….
His comments will be followed by my thoughts:
Q:In the last month, same-sex marriage has become legal in Iowa and Vermont. What do you think about same-sex marriage at a state level?
A: At a state level, it’s up to them. I don’t want it to be a federal thing. I personally still think it’s wrong. People don’t understand the dictionary—it’s called queer. Queer means strange and unusual. It’s not like a slur, like you would call a white person a honky or something like that. You know, God is pretty explicit in what we’re supposed to do—what man and woman are for. Now, at the same time, we’re supposed to love everybody and accept people, and preach against the sins. I’ve had some friends that are actually homosexual. And, I mean, they know where I stand, and they know that I wouldn’t have them anywhere near my children. But at the same time, they’re people, and they’re going to do their thing.
I would not have used the phrasing that Joe did, as that only invites Ad-hominem attacks from the left, and of course, Joe will be called a hate monger by the far liberal left. But I have to say, that I wholeheartedly agree with the guy here. If I were a Father, I would not want Homosexuals around my children either. Sorry if that offends some, but hey, I believe that I; as well as Joe, has a right to protect his children from any sort of behavor or lifestyle that deems to be immoral and out of the ordinary. You also notice that Joe does not condemn the people themselves or even thier lifestyle. He just says that he has the right to shield his children from those who choose to pratice the homosexual lifestyle. Which is his right.
Q:Why does conservatism appeal to you as a Christian?
A: Conservatism is about the basic rights of individuals. God created us. As far as the government goes, the Founding Fathers based the Constitution off of Christian values. It goes hand-in-hand. As far as the Republican Party? I felt connected to it because individual freedom should not be legislated by the federal government.
This is where Joe goes into a revisionist history of our Government. We were not founded as a Christian Republican or as a Theocracy. We were founded as a secular Republic, which paid homage; albiet a rather lame homage to a “God”. We did not get into specifics as to which God, at all. Joe is flat wrong here, and he is engaging in revisionist history; or at worst reading from Roger Simon’s or Neil Podhartz’s Script.
Q:Does the Republican Party reach out to evangelicals enough?
A: No. None of them stand up for anything. They use God as a punch line. They use God to invoke sympathy or invoke righteousness, but they don’t stay the course. That’s why I think that all needs to be taken out of the federal level and give it back to the states. We’ve lost our American history. Every state has “In God we trust” or “With God’s help” in their constitution. God is recognized as, if you will, America’s religion.
The first part of that, is absolutely correct, the Republican Party; starting of President Reagan used the Christian community as “Useful idiots”; back in the 1980’s. What did they get in return for it? Nothing. Prayer in schools is still outlawed, Abortion still happens every day. So much for Reagan’s promises eh? George W. Bush and his band second generation of Neo-Conservatives did this to a more abusive level, even to the point of laughing at them in the oval office. Bush even went as far as to rub it in their faces, after his term in the White House, as he said in a exit interview, that he was not a Bible literalist. This was seen by many Christians as a slight towards them. Now the part about Christianity being America’s Religion; again Joe’s going off of the reservation with me. Because he is again, reciting that Christian Right fable that American was founded as a Christian Republic. That, I am afraid is a crock of bull. The United States States of America was founded by men, who just happened to Christians, although there are some, like myself; who happen to think that they were more Religious, then actual Christians. Benjamin Franklin, was, by most accounts an agnostic.
Q: Some people have criticized the Republican Party as being the party of the rich. How can they change their image?
A: I don’t know if they can change their image. I really don’t. But, you also have to take into consideration that the Democrats say they are for people in poverty. They’re not. They take advantage of all the tax breaks that the IRS has put in place for them. Tax lobbying is a billion-dollar industry up in Washington. Get rid of the tax code we have. Implement a fair tax—make it a level playing ground. People in poverty keep them in power—that’s what people have to understand.
I hate to say it, but Joe is right here as well. Personally, I do not see the problem with the well-off in this country having a party that represents them. Then again, I do not have that inbred hatred of those who are financially better off than I am. That is what the Democratic Party indoctrinates into people; hate or resent those who are better off than you, and rob them of their money and give to the poor. All of that is backward to the founding principles of this Country.
There’s more there, but these are the ones that I was interesting in commenting on.
Why I will not write a posting attacking Kareem Dale
Yes, I have seen and know about the Video of Kareem Dale expressing his and the White House’s Love for MSNBC. However, I refuse to write a blog posting attacking the man, and I think if any of my fellow Conservatives had actually watched the video; they would have most likely not have attacked this man in the fashion in which they did.
The Video:
Notice anything overly different about him? No, I am not talking about him being a Democrat…..
The man is stone.friggin’.blind. —– Well, partially blind according to what I have read.
I have a rule, when it comes to blogging, writing and just life in general, and that rule is this; you just do not mock, bad mouth, or generally give a hard time to the handicapped. You just do not do that. I do not care what Mr. Dale said. He is blind, you do not mock the handicapped. If Mr. Dell would have said that he thought President Obama was Jesus Christ; I would feel the same way.
I hate to be the one to say this, but I think my fellow Conservatives need to go back and read books on manners. Because really, we are making our cause look horribly bad, at this point. Yes, I know what liberals did to John McCain during the election; So what? Does that make it automatically okay for we Conservatives, who are supposed to be better than the morally depraved liberals, to mock someone who has a handicap, that he has no control over? Not the last time I checked.
Sorry guys, whoever thought that it would be funny to bring this up, obviously did not look at the tape, and notice that they were about to mock a man, who was, essentially blind. Sorry to say it; but mocking the President is fair game, mocking his policies is also fair game. But mocking a man who has been blind his entire life, that is off limits in my book. As someone who has a developmentally disabled aunt, doing this sort of a thing is just god-awfully wrong.
I say this, because on a former blog, that I used to run; before it was hacked. I made one of those sort of mistakes, one so horrible that I do have the stomach to even mention what it was, mostly because I am ashamed of it. Let me just put it to you this way; remember what Ann Coulter said to that disabled vet, that go her tossed off of MSNBC for a long time? Remember what Michael Savage said that got his late night TV program cancelled? Something along those lines. Oh Yeah, I screwed up bad, and made many people angry for it; Mostly Conservatives. How is it that they now can mock this blind man, and it is okay? I just do not get it.
Anyway, There is my reason for not mocking Kareem Dale. I just wish others felt like I do. Maybe, just maybe our movement would be taken seriously again.
Some Conservatives that need to learn this:: The Atlanticist, Outside The Beltway, PoliGazette, Jules Crittenden, Scared Monkeys, TBogg, Fausta’s Blog, Weekly Standard, Sister Toldjah and Brutally Honest (Via Memeorandum)
Uh-Oh – Iran carries out Airstrikes on Iraqi Kurdish Villages
Oh boy, this is going to throw a monkey wrench into the plans of the Obama Administration:
Iranian aircraft attacked three villages inside Iraq over the weekend. The airstrikes — Iran’s first on Iraqi soil since the U.S. invasion — could complicate the Obama administration’s efforts to normalize relations with Tehran.
“The bombardments appeared to have targeted the Party of Free Life of Kurdistan (PJAK), an Iranian Kurdish separatist group which has launched attacks on Iran from rear-supply bases in the mountains of northern Iraq,” AFP reports. Iran has attacked the Kurdish group before, with artillery. But this is the first time the Iranians followed up, with assaults from the air.
“The incident comes a week after reports of a clash between Iranian police officers and suspected PJAK fighters in the country’s western province of Kermanshah,” Al-Jazeera reports. “At least 10 policemen and 10 fighters were killed in the gun battle.”
Details on the airstrikes remain sketchy. Voice of America says the attacks were carried out by helicopters, which remained in Iranian airspace. Al-Arabiyah television, on the other hand, says it was “Iranian planes [that] raided those villages.”
via Iran Launches Airstrikes on Iraqi Villages | Danger Room.
Hmmm… Did not President Obama say this at one point?
Sounds like Barry is now going to get a full dose of reality, when it comes to Iran and their way of doing business. I wonder what he will do? Possibly employ some smart power and leadership to the situtation? Will he call for a meeting with the top military brass and make a decision based on the interests of the United States?
Don’t bet on it, he’s too busy out taking a stroll with his American-Hating, White Man-Hating Wife.
I am afraid that this is what the next 4 to 8 years is going to be like. International Threats and a Liberal President who is more interested in making photo ops that he is trying to defend our nation and interests. All the while spending this country into a giant economic hole. I am just glad, that I did not vote for the man; I couldn’t, I would not be able to live with myself, if I had of. The man is obviously not qualified for the office; and I am not talking about the Birth Certificate thing either. I am just referring to the man’s ability to lead the country. President Obama is a complete buffoon, who landed this election because of his skin color.
This should be a very interesting story to watch and follow. If it is not buried by our drool bucket Liberal Media. 🙄
Football Star and Former V.P. nominee Jack Kemp dead at 73
Some sad news, that I put off blogging about until now. I was not going to even blog about it. Namely because I did not know a thing about the man. So, I won’t pretend that I do.
Here’s a round up of comments about the passing of Jack Kemp:
“Jack Kemp was a leader – whether it was in a football huddle, a national political campaign or a policy discussion about the Austrian school of economics.
“I first met Jack nearly 40 years ago, during his freshman year in Congress. When he introduced The Jobs Creation Act – a major legislative advance of supply-side economics – I knew I had found an ally. That ally soon became my friend
“Jack was a ‘bleeding-heart conservative.’ He wanted to make it possible for every American to succeed and eagerly worked with people of all races, colors and creeds toward that end.
“Across-the-board tax cuts and ‘enterprise zones’ for blighted neighborhoods are now common economic prescriptions – especially during these hard times. But to make these ideas respectable, Jack had to fight for them constantly during his years in Congress, as Housing and Urban Development secretary, as chairman of a national tax reform commission, and during his presidential and vice presidential campaigns.
“He won those fights, and millions benefited. The tax cuts that Jack helped engineer in the 1980s gave Americans unprecedented prosperity for decades. His commission also boldly proposed a national flat tax. Those policies also helped spread freedom around the world.
“I remember standing with him in Moscow’s Red Square in 1990. The Cold War was starting to thaw, but few even suspected that the Soviet Union’s days were numbered. Jack knew. As we stood on the square, in view of the Kremlin, he pointed out an astonishing sign: The line for the new McDonald’s restaurant was longer than the line for Lenin’s tomb.
“Many people will remember Jack as a great football player – and rightly so. But he was also a great player in the world of ideas, with a mind as strong as his arm. I will miss his strength and friendship greatly.” —Edwin Feulner -President -Heritage Foundation
***
For those of us who came of age politically after Reagan was President, Jack Kemp was, if not Reagan, then the next best thing. He was arguably the most consequential and electric conservative between Reagan and Newt. Had Kemp run for President in 1996, I would have been his first volunteer (I missed ’88). Of course, Kemp’s contributions to the cause of freedom long predated that time, having helped Reagan break the grip of an oppressive marginal tax regime. —Patrick Ruffini – Founder – The Next Right
***
The “Kemp-Roth” tax cuts were at the cornerstone of Ronald Reagan’s early legacy as president and his brand of fiscal conservatism and innovative ideas to spur the entrepreneurial spirit were a huge part of the Republican Party of my formative period. By 1996, when he ran with Bob Dole, has was becoming an outlier in the party because of his relative moderation on social issues like affirmative action (thus the “bleeding-heart” descriptor). – James Joyner – Outside the Beltway
***
As the nation struggles with the trillion-dollar deficits and promises from Democrats to increase the role of government—the very government that got us into this hole in the first place—the ramparts of the free market will not be manned by Jack Kemp. – No Sheeples Here!
***
Jack Kemp, in my mind, was the premier Republican on race relations in American politics. No one spoke to the power of markets and opportunity to empower black Americans as he did. His agenda as HUD Secretary in the first Bush administration would still be light years ahead if its time if applied today. We need more conservatives like him. What a wonderful man, and a great loss to the nation. – Donald Douglas — American Power
***
“A successor to Ronald Reagan who himself has not had a successor. When his cancer was announced earlier this year, Jeff Lord wrote movingly about him and the greatness he had in him. I remember him from several live moments. Once at an American Spectator gala dinner right after the fall of Communism. “Wlady, did you think Vaclav Havel would be president of Czechoslovakia?” he asked from the podium. We always forget what a champion of freedom he was not just at home. Bob Tyrrell had introduced Jack as a perfect specimen of “sound body, sound mind.” Was he ever. I remember him on the floor of the San Diego convention in 1996. He was the announced vice-presidential nominee, basking in adulation and adoring fans. But he shut everyone up around him at that moment, his eyes rapt in attention directed at the podium, where Rep. J.C. Watts was delivering that evening’s keynote. You didn’t mess with Jack when he was in charge. Everyone quickly got quiet and paid attention to Watts too. Jack’s football position was quarterback — but in fact his position was leader. Even at the small Saturday Evening Club dinner he once attended as our guest, where he felt called upon to tell other guests when to come to the table and where to sit. He couldn’t help himself. Wherever man still wants to breathe freely, his memory will remain cherished. Jack Kemp in all his splendid energy will be terribly missed.” — Wlady Pleszczynski – The American Spectator
***
“He was a true gentleman and a great sportsman” – Charles Johnson – Little Green Footballs
***
Kemp had the courage to move beyond the usual issues for conservatives, choosing to work on poverty and housing issues, and challenging his fellow conservatives to make conservatism work across the board. It’s one of the reasons why Kemp will be missed. — Ed Morrissey – HotAir
****
Didn’t agree with him on many core issues, but he was a GOP institution with a wonderful family. – Michelle Malkin
***
At a time when conservatives are trying to find their way ideologically and rhetorically, they would do well to emulate this most happy and principled warrior. He will be greatly missed. — Jennifer Rubin – Commentary Magazine’s Contentions
***
Kemp and those around him liked to explain his political outlook in part by reference to his encounters with racial segregation while a professional football player. Kemp found it stomach-turning that his black teammates were denied whites’ accommodations in the South simply on account of their race. In this, as in much else about him, there is a great deal to admire. It helps to account for the fact that in the 1980s, many were happy to consider ourselves Kemp supporters—and thought him far the best candidate for president in 1988. — Kevin R. C. Gutzman – Taki’s Magazine
So, there you have it. The round up of voices on the man. May He Rest in Peace and My Prayers to the family.
Update: Right on Schedule, The far lefty loons are attacking this man with fury. See here and here. I guess they had to sleep it off first. But, there you go…. The tolerance and civility of the Democrat Party. You see now, why I’ll never vote for another Liberal Democrat? Amazing. 🙄
Video: Laura Ingraham and Gloria Feldt yell at one another about Miss California Carrie Prejean
I don’t watch this stuff, because I do not much care for Laura Ingraham; her screechy harpy nasally voice makes my stomach turn. However, she does deserve a few points, i think, for putting this idiot feminist liberal bitch in her place.
Personally, I think the castigation of Miss California Carrie Prejean by the liberal left is just wrong. But the demagoguery of position of both sides, is just maddening.
I won’t watch it, but it’s good for hits, I suppose.
(H/T Jeff G)
The Video that Perez Hilton does NOT want you to see
Patterico is reporting that Perez Hilton is trying to get this video taken down off of youtube. Well, guess what?
I’m uploading it to my blog. Come after ME Perez; er, I mean Mario Lavandeira, you mentally and moral depraved faggot!
[podcast format=”video”]http://www.politicalbyline.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/prezhiltonvid.flv[/podcast]
Support the National Organization for Marriage and check out their website
Others:Redhot, Cold Fury, Protein Wisdom
Updated: Communism Unleashed: The White House threatens Chrysler investors
Now this here is a bunch of Bull. My Dad’s a Union man, But, I think even any Democrat, that even has an ounce of a brain. Would think something is wrong with this.
The relevant part is around the1:30 mark: (H/T to Island Turtle)
[podcast]http://wjrpodcasts.com/podcasts/frankbeckmann/Lauria-050109.mp3[/podcast]
Lauria: Let me tell you it’s no fun standing on this side of the fence opposing the President of the United States. In fact, let me just say, people have asked me who I represent. That’s a moving target. I can tell you for sure that I represent one less investor today than I represented yesterday. One of my clients was directly threatened by the White House and in essence compelled to withdraw its opposition to the deal under the threat that the full force of the White House Press Corps would destroy its reputation if it continued to fight. That’s how hard it is to stand on this side of the fence.
Beckman: Was that Perella Weinberg?
Lauria: That was Perella Weinberg.
Now, let me be clear here; I am all for saving of jobs. But communist-style strong arm tactics, is just damned wrong. Of course, you’ve got your liberals who arm dismissing this. But folks, this is serious. What if you had a contract or an investment and it was ripped away from you? I suspect many of you would be ticked! I know I would be. Of course, our feckless Liberal media is not touching this, at all. Not that I am surprised.
If this is what the next four years is going to be like, I fear for this country. 🙁
Update: Via Jack Tapper: The White House is now denying the charges:
A leading bankruptcy attorney representing hedge funds and money managers told ABC News Saturday that Steve Rattner, the leader of the Obama administration’s Auto Industry Task Force, threatened one of the firms, an investment bank, that if it continued to oppose the administration’s Chrysler bankruptcy plan, the White House would use the White House press corps to destroy its reputation.
The White House said the story was false.
“The charge is completely untrue,” said White House deputy press secretary Bill Burton, “and there’s obviously no evidence to suggest that this happened in any way.”
I do not buy that at all, sorry. Neither does Ed Morrisey over at HotAir.com:
No evidence? What about Lauria’s personal testimony?
Meanwhile, Tommy Christopher — who actually reports from the White House — dismisses the charge:
As far as the “threat” Lauria alleges, it sounds an awful lot like someone told his client that public opinion would not likely be favorable to people who would obstruct a fair deal to save Chrysler. That’s not a threat, it is a reality. It’s no more a “threat” than John McCain’s campaign promise to make earmarkers “famous.”
Apples and oranges. McCain threatened to make public officials “famous” for wasting taxpayer money. The Obama administration allegedly threatened to use the WHPC to destroy the reputations of private citizens as a punishment for not relinquishing their contractual rights for having helped float Chrysler. There’s a huge difference between the two.
Indeed, the White House just got caught with it’s proverbial “Britches” down and now they’re spinning and denying. Kind of like the stuff that President George W. Bush used to do, but now it is on the other side. The difference is this. Had this been Bush’s White House and the person being threatened was a Environmental company? It would have been front page news. But because it is a big old mean “Rich” investor, it is a Conservative story. Oh, the irony and hypocrisy of it all.
Others:Politics Daily, Hot Air, Political Punch, , Pajamas Media, Gateway Pundit, Reason, Clayton Cramer’s BLOG, NewsBusters.org, Instapundit, Nice Deb, Founding Bloggers and BizzyBlog
Oy Vey – Why Conservatives do stupid stuff like this?
Man, I hate it when I have to sit here and blog about stupid crap that my fellow right wingers do.
See here to see what I am referring to. 🙄
Ugh. No wonder the rest of America does not take us seriously. Goats? Seriously? What.the.hell?!
…and to beat all, the asshat rips on Mark Sanford! 😡
The Liberal Moderate Voice says “No one else has commented”, The fuck am I, chopped liver?
America-Hating First Lady has a shoe fetish
Great, the first black First Lady, who hates America and white people with a passion, has a shoe fetish.
Michelle Obama has taken casual to a haute new level.
While volunteering Wednesday at a D.C. food bank, the First Lady sported her usual J.Crew
America-Hating black bitch
cardigan, a pair of utilitarian capri pants and, on her feet, a sneaky splurge: trainers that go for $540.
That’s right: These sneakers – suede, with grosgrain ribbon laces and metallic pink toe caps – are made by French design house Lanvin, one of fashion’s hottest labels. They come in denim and satin versions, and have been a brisk seller all spring.
They’re out of stock at posh Meatpacking District boutique Jeffrey, and Barneys New York boasts a limited selection of the sneaks, which are a cult favorite among fashionistas.
It’s likely Michelle got hers through Ikram, the Chicago retailer that often outfits her.
“They’re shoes,” the First Lady’s reps sniffed when curious reporters inquired about the fancy footwear. – Via New York Daily News AKA Obama Slobber Liberal News
Michelle Malkin, Aka the “other” Michelle, points out the fact that one of Obama’s biggest videos, used against John McCain was the following. As a side note, Michelle Malkin does not have the goodamned balls to criticize Michelle Obama. What the hell is wrong with you woman? You don’t have the goddamned balls to call this woman what she is? She’s an America-Hating Negro First Lady, who hates White people and anyone else, who isn’t black; not to mention she hates any sort of success by White Americans, this is why she favors taking thier damned money, just like her useless Husband. So, Michelle, grow a damn pair and call it like it is, “sweetie”.
Here’s the video:
So, yeah, Michelle Obama is one thing and one thing only, An self-loathing, American-Hating, Black BITCH who has a shoe fetish. Joy. …and while white people; like me, are out of work, and living hand to mouth. I guess she sees this as punishment for what my ancestors did to her people. Good going ancestors; if we’d just left thier dumb asses in Africa, we would not be in this position in the damned first place.
Just letting my readers know, I’m closing the comments on this one, because I do not want to have to deal with the idiot liberals, who will most likely want to come here and cause trouble. Because I am no mood to battle with brain-dead idiots.
Others:JustOneMinute, Michelle Malkin, Hot Air, Fausta’s Blog, RedState, Moonbattery, Don Surber, Brutally Honest and 24Ahead
The Obligatory Supreme Court Justice Souter To Retire Posting
Only reason I am posting about this now, is because it broke last night and I was busy with other things.
Supreme Court Justice David Souter is planning to retire at the end of the current court term.
The vacancy will give President Obama his first chance to name a member of the high court and begin to shape its future direction.
At 69, Souter is nowhere near the oldest member of the court. In fact, he is in the younger half of the court’s age range, with five justices older and just three younger. So far as anyone knows, he is in good health. But he has made clear to friends for some time that he wanted to leave Washington, a city he has never liked, and return to his native New Hampshire. Now, according to reliable sources, he has decided to take the plunge and has informed the White House of his decision.
Factors in his decision no doubt include the election of President Obama, who would be more likely to appoint a successor attuned to the principles Souter has followed as a moderate-to-liberal member of the court’s more liberal bloc over the past two decades.
Most people on the right are saying that this guy was not much of a Conservative, so this might not be that big of a deal anyhow. However, it does change the balance of the Government. It tilts the SCOUTS to a more liberal court. Which has some on the far, far, right quite upset. The question is, what will President Obama do? Will he appoint a hyper-uber-Liberal to the seat, or will he appoint a moderate to the seat? Either way, it will be interesting to follow.
Personally, I do not believe that the court is going to go balls out totally liberal. If anything, there will be a ever so slight lean towards a liberal court. But there are enough Conservatives still in the court to keep a Conservative voice up there. So, I think any panicking at this point is just abject foolishness.
Others: SCOTUSblog, Top of the Ticket, protein wisdom, , Don Surber, Hot Air, Wake up America Jules Crittenden,
The Charles Johnson, Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller feud…. A Follow up
This is a follow up to a posting that I made a while back about the running feud between Charles Johnson against Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller and a few other players.
I realize that no matter how I phrase this posting; someone is going to be offended or is going to hate me to the point of wanting to see my death. I mean, in this sort of a damned thing, you cannot win. If you say anything that one of the parties dislikes, you will be smeared and forced to take a side in the argument. When I lost my other blog to a hacking job; by somebody who was angered about comment that I made about a person on another blog, which was a horrific misstep on my part, which I did and still do readily admit. I made a promise to myself, that I would never engage in Blog wars or any other sort of nonsense.
However, I believe it is important to be clear where I stand; and because of this, I am going to make my feelings clear…
I was contacted by Dr. Robert Spencer about my initial posting. We discussed what I wrote and how I phrased my posting. He did ask me some very pointed questions and I answered honestly, I commend him for writing and asking. Because of this I feel the important need to clear the air.
It appears that Charles Johnson is playing a little game; a deadly game, that hurts people, smears them and makes them into something that they are not. This, I am afraid is wrong. That game is called “guilt by association.” This is a game that liberals play, especially when they are trying to further their agenda of identity politics. It appears that Mr. Johnson is now trying to smear Pat Buchanan, he seems to believe, for whatever foolish reason; that Pat Buchanan is an Anti-Semite. This is nothing more than a classic liberal smear. That’s right, I question the very idea that Charles Johnson is even a Conservative.
For the record, I have zero against Israel, Jews or Judaism. I do however, reject the Zionist movement, on Biblical theological basis only. (See 2 Corinthians 6:14-18) I have Zero against those who choose to practice Islam. However, I reject Islam as a false religion, and those who practice it, as lost and in need of Salvation, that comes only by Jesus Christ. The same goes for those who reject Christ and follow strictly after of the Law of Moses. (See John 14:4-11 and John 10:22-38 and Galatians 3:6-18)
Now, I will be the first to admit that some of the postings over at Pamela Geller’s Blog are, at times, borderline hysteria and could be interpreted by some as Anti-Islamic. However, for Charles Johnson to simply smear someone, because they are associated with a particular group is, in my opinion, unfair and is borderline libelous. I suppose that someone like me would be labeled Anti-Semite by Johnson as well, because of my issues with the Zionist Movement and its influence on the foreign policy of United States. If that is the badge that Mr. Johnson wants to hang on me; fine, I will wear it, I make no apologies for thinking and believing that the Capital of the United States of America is Washington D.C. and not Tel Aviv, Israel. If the Neo-Conservative and Liberal thought police want to try and smear me on this one, fine.
While my initial posting might have sounded like I was praising Charles Johnson, I was not, at all. It was simply lamenting the fact that people, who are supposedly opposed to Islamic fascism, were engaging in a bitter feud. However, since that posting, it seems that Charles Johnson wants to go after people like Michelle Malkin and others, who are in support of the combating of Terrorism and Islamic Fascism. This is totally unacceptable, and I hereby reject Charles Johnson as an enemy to America and a Liberal.
Pamela Geller may not like me, because of my position on Zionism. However, I stand for Freedom of speech and against the Liberal thought police. Hopefully, she understands.
My thoughts on Rep. Virginia Foxx and Hate Crimes Bill-gate
I saw this Meme burning up the Blogosphere last night. I was way too tired to try blogging on it last night. I have been, as of late, getting my sleeping habits straightened out.
It seems that Rep. Virginia Foxx made a speech yesterday on the House floor about a hate crimes bill, that is winding it’s way through Congress. Here is the speech in question:
Transcript:
I also would like to point out that there was a bill — the hate crimes bill that’s called the Matthew Shepard bill is named after a very unfortunate incident that happened where a young man was killed, but we know that that young man was killed in the commitment of a robbery. It wasn’t because he was gay.”
“This — the bill was named for him, hate crimes bill was named for him, but it’s really a hoax that that continues to be used as an excuse for passing these bills.
Well, the Liberal funded and far left Media Matters for America is raising a tizzy about this. They and many other liberal groups and Gay Rights groups claim that Matthew Shepard was murdered because he was gay. Thier basis for this? This right here:
Detective: “They Knew Damn Well He Was Gay.” The Slate article went on to report: “According to detectives who interviewed both of the convicted murderers, there is no evidence that Shepard made any sexual advances to the pair — and the detectives dismissed the idea that the murder was the mere result of a robbery gone bad. ‘Far from that!’ scoffed Sgt. Rob DeBree, the chief investigator in the case. ‘They knew damn well he was gay … It started out as a robbery and burglary, and I sincerely believe the other activity was because he was gay.'” [Slate.com, 11/6/99; emphasis added]
However, the problem is that is this right here: (H/T to Sister Toldjah)
Unfortunately for them, Rep. Foxx was correct … according to an ABC report from 2004 in which the killers – Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson – were interviewed, along with various witnesses, law enforcement officials, and Cal Rerucha, the prosecutor. I’ve emphasized the most relevant parts of the story:
Shepard’s Friends Suspect Attack Was Hate-Motivated
Just hours after Shepard’s battered body was discovered, and before anyone knew who had beaten him, Shepard’s friends Walt Boulden and Alex Trout began spreading the word that Shepard was openly gay and that they were concerned the attack may have been a gay-bashing.
Boulden told “20/20? in an interview shortly after the attack in 1998, “I know in the core of my heart it happened because he revealed he was gay. And it’s chilling. They targeted him because he was gay.”
Prosecutor Rerucha recalls that Shepard’s friends also contacted his office. Rerucha told “20/20,” “They were calling the County Attorney’s office, they were calling the media and indicating Matthew Shepard is gay and we don’t want the fact that he is gay to go unnoticed.”
Helping fuel the gay hate crime theory were statements made to police and the media by Kristen Price, McKinney’s girlfriend. (Price was charged with felony accessory after-the-fact to first-degree murder. She later pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of misdemeanor interference with police officers.)
Price now says that at the time of the crime she thought things would go easier for McKinney if his violence were seen as a panic reaction to an unwanted gay sexual advance.
But today, Price tells Vargas the initial statements she made were not true and tells Vargas that McKinney’s motive was money and drugs. “I don’t think it was a hate crime at all. I never did,” she said.
Former Laramie Police Detective Ben Fritzen, one of the lead investigators in the case, also believed robbery was the primary motive. “Matthew Shepard’s sexual preference or sexual orientation certainly wasn’t the motive in the homicide,” he said.
“If it wasn’t Shepard, they would have found another easy target. What it came down to really is drugs and money and two punks that were out looking for it,” Fritzen said.
‘All I Wanted to Do Was Beat Him Up and Rob Him’
Asked directly whether he targeted and attacked Shepard because he was gay, McKinney told Vargas, “No. I did not. … I would say it wasn’t a hate crime. All I wanted to do was beat him up and rob him.”
But if the attackers were just trying to rob someone to get a drug fix, why did they beat Shepard so savagely?
Rerucha attributes McKinney’s rage and his savage beating of Shepard to his drug abuse. “The methamphetamine just fueled to this point where there was no control. It was a horrible, horrible, horrible murder. It was a murder that was once again driven by drugs,” Rerucha said.
Dr. Rick Rawson, a professor at UCLA who has studied the link between methamphetamine and violence, tells “20/20? the drug can trigger episodes of violent behavior.
“In the first weeks after you’ve stopped using it, the kinds of triggers that can set off an episode are completely unpredictable. It can be: you say a word with the wrong inflection, you touch someone on the shoulder. It’s completely unpredictable as to what will set somebody off” Rawson said.
“If Aaron McKinney had not become involved with methamphetamine, Matthew Shepard would be alive today,” Rerucha said.
So, basically, what you have here, is the liberals taking the words of a Detective and a few other idiots over the words of the prosecutors. But that really is not the point of all this. The point really is about the law that is attempting to be passed through the House. Jazz shaw over at the moderate voice, makes a very good point on this Law:
The larger issue, though, is found in the 14th Amendment.
All persons born or naturalized in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
(Emphasis mine.) Long story short: When you pass laws which assign greater guilt to certain parties for committing the same crimes, based on nothing more than what they were thinking at the time and the “class” of citizens who were the victims, then you are providing unequal protection of the laws. You are assigning a higher value to the lives, liberty and property of some victims than others based on their sexual orientation, their race, skin color, religion, etc.
Sadly, we have no elected leaders with the will to drive these questions home in the halls of Congress and I’d be shocked if we have any justices on the bench who will call these laws out for what they are.
You see, what these Liberals are trying to do, is get bills passed that violates our Constitution. See what I put in Bold an underlined text up there? When the Federal Government goes in a tries to tell someone, “Hey, you killed this person, and he was gay, that’s a hate crime and we’re going to punish you harder”, that is a violation of our Constitution. If we open the door for gays; we will have have bills for everyone else too. Pretty soon, you will have bills for Blacks, Jews, Women and everything else under the sun. Our nation’s laws should be uniform for everyone and no harder or softer for any particular class of people.
Some are warning that Hyper Inflation is coming
Not sure if I agree with this or not, because I do not believe that we can predict this sort of a thing; but it is a interesting read.
Those who refuse to learn from history are doomed to repeat it, said George Santayana, the philosopher. But this familiar maxim is being ignored this week by President Barack Obama and his fellow Democrats on Capitol Hill this week as they complete action on the chief executive’s proposed 2010 federal budget. With its unprecedented deficit approaching $2 trillion, this budget proposal is a certain prescription for hyper-inflation. So every senator and representative who votes for this monster $3.6 trillion budget will be endorsing actions that will turn America into the next Weimar Republic. For those too young to remember, that was the period in Germany in the years between the two world wars when people needed wheelbarrows full of money to buy a loaf of bread.
In a 1993 interview, Harvard law professor Friedrich Kessler described what living with Weimar hyperinflation was like: “It was horrible. Horrible! Like lightning it struck. No one was prepared….The shelves in the grocery store were empty. You could buy nothing with your paper money.” Thanks to the expanding profligacy on Capitol Hill, a version of such economic hell will likely happen here, according to two prominent economists. Johns Hopkins Professor Steve Hanke notes that the Federal Reserve’s balance sheet “has more than doubled in size since August…Unless the Fed shrinks its balance sheet,” he warns, “…inflation will roar back with a vengeance.”
via www.washingtonexaminer.com – Get ready for Obama’s coming hyperinflation.
Instapundit says that you do see gold prices going up, which might be a sign that the tea leave readers are shoring up, in case of a massive collapse. It is an interesting read. Some would say that this is nothing more than mas hysteria. by the dooms day folk. But it is an interesting fact that Obama has pour massive amounts of money into the system. It should be interesting to watch.
Update: Instapundit comments: “Actually, my point was that gold prices haven’t gone up particularly, as one would expect if hyperinflation were coming. Or, at least, if a lot of people thought it was coming.”
I stand corrected. Wow, The Glenn Reynolds commented on my Blog. 
I’ll never wash this Blog posting, ever. 
I guess he does read his incoming links! 
Local Auto News: Chrysler looking at Bankruptcy
A pretty sad thing to wake up today. However, I am sorry to say this, but I knew it was coming. Chrysler never was able to get their act together; unlike G.M. and get a resolution together.
The Report comes via the Washington Post, I won’t quote the whole thing and I kindly ask that you go over and read the whole thing. But rather, I will give some my impressions from the interesting stuff.
My impressions:
The Obama administration last night planned to send Chrysler into bankruptcy, replace chief executive Robert L. Nardelli and pump billions of dollars more into the effort, all in hopes the company can emerge from court proceedings as a reenergized competitor in the global economy.
Government officials clung to 11th-hour hopes last night that bankruptcy could be averted, but talks broke down with Chrysler’s creditors. A bankruptcy filing could happen as soon as today.
The U.S. government’s attempt to save the automaker amounts to another extraordinary intervention in the economy and a landmark event in the history of the American auto industry.
Under the administration’s detailed court strategy, ownership of Chrysler would be dramatically reorganized, the leadership of Italian automaker Fiat would take over company management and the U.S. and Canadian governments would contribute more than $10 billion in additional funding.
Company and government officials had feared that a bankruptcy would stain the brand, shake customer confidence and erode sales, but the administration said it would seek to use the process to create a new Chrysler company. Its ownership would be divided, with the company’s union retiree health fund receiving a 55 percent stake, Fiat would claim as much as a 35 percent share and the United States would take 8 percent. The Canadian government would receive two percent.
Basically this is what General Motors did voluntarily. Minus the Fiat equation, of course. It is a tough break that the creditors, bond holders, and company management could not come together to an agreement. The main and good thing is, that the automaker, itself, will be saved, and that American jobs will be saved.
Now comes the part that will make people like Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, and the rest of the far right wing people howl at the moon:
The automaker’s current majority owner, the private-equity firm Cerberus Capital Management, would have its holdings wiped out.
Now, to be fair; I will report the truth about this holdings company. This company, from what I have read and have been told; is notorious for buying up struggling companies, like Chrysler and shutting them down and selling off the assets to make money. They have done this in past, from what I told. So, while I hate to see anyone lose their money. I actually am glad to see Chrysler being taken away from this company.
Let me also say this. As an Conservative, who believes in “America First”, and believes that business sometimes have to fail; I am not exactly jumping for joy, when it comes to fact that this auto company is having taxpayer dollars being pumped into it. Nor am I happy at the fact, that a US automaker is having a foreign auto company’s management taking over its operations. However, I believe we must be realistic about such matters. We are not living in the 1950’s any longer, we are in a economic recession of monumental proportions, and if we do not drastic measures quickly, we could see a total collapse of the American auto industry. I also know that there is a undeniable truth that “as Detroit goes, so goes America.” Pat Buchanan and I, have been saying this all along; if allow the big three or in this case, the big two to disappear our Nation’s economy would go into free fall. I shudder in absolute horror at the thought of the far reaching implications of such an event.
I will say, as a devout Paleo-Conservative; If we would have rejected the globalism of the Rockefeller-type conservative types and would have imposed strict trade restrictions on Japanese and other such foreign automotive products, these auto companies would not be in the position that they are today. It is because of the Rockefeller-type, Madison Avenue, Neo-Conservatives, whose mantra is “screw the American middle class”, is the reason we are in this position today. Further more, it is the reason that the world is also partaking in our recession as well. Perhaps President Obama will see the state of our globalist economy and will rethink his position on NAFTA and TAFTA and the rest of those toxic free trade agreements that are in place; and impose strict tariffs on imports that are bleeding our economy dry.
Realistically however, I highly doubt that President Obama will do any of that, because he is trying to run as a centrist, or as I like to call it; he is sucking up to the Neo-Conservative right, as they are his biggest supporters, strangely, after trying so very hard to defeat him in the election. Of course, we Paleo-Conservatives know why this is; because the only difference between a Neo-Conservative and a Democrat is the letter next to the name.
Liberals begin high level attacks on High Level Conservatives….Case in Point: Michelle Malkin
It appears that Liberals; emboldened by the win of President Obama’s of the White House, now have a new mission in life. That mission is to destroy Conservatism, The Republican Party and anyone else that happens to disagree with their political views.
The first example of this; is the ad-hominem, over the top, screechy attack of Michelle Malkin by Keith Olbermann; of whom I have totally stopped watching, since his baseless and hateful attack on the Tea Party protestors. This is a perfect example of desperate Liberals who are losing ground with the public discourse and are trying to marginalize the enemy.
The Video:
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Keith’s Yes-Lady in that interview was none other than Margaret Carlson, that writes for Bloomberg and The Week, She has also written in the past at The Huffington Post. What these two chowder heads are carping about, is this entry by Michelle Malkin:
I’ve blogged for years about the spread of contagious diseases from around the world into the U.S. as a result of uncontrolled immigration. We’ve heard for years from reckless open-borders ideologues who continue to insist there’s nothing to worry about. And we’ve heard for years that calling any attention to the dangers of allowing untold numbers of people to pass across our borders and through our other ports of entry without proper medical screening — as required of every legal visitor/immigrant to this country — is RAAAACIST.9/11 didn’t convince the open-borders zealots to put down their race cards and confront reality.
Maybe the threat of their sons or daughters contracting a deadly virus spread from south of the border to their Manhattan prep schools will.
To be fair to Michelle, she does have a valid point. Out of control immigration does bring disease into this country. So does Illegal Immigration. Liberals; when confronted with facts, like this, always play the race card and also do the race baiting bit. Hence the attack on Michelle.
But wait, it gets better. Now, a liberal in Canada has basically posted, what could be construed as a veiled threat towards Michelle:
Who would write such screed? That is the twitter feed of none other than a liberal columnist from the Toronto Star named Antonia Zerbisias. Of course, now that she’s been caught; she is now playing the victim card.
Here’s the little snot-wad’s picture:
By the way, as Michelle notes, you can let your displeasure be known by contacting the following people; just remember, be nice and respectful:
Living/Fashion/Food
Living Editor: Alison Uncles
Phone: 416-869-4015
Fax: 416-869-4410
Email: living@thestar.caManaging Editor: Joe Hall
The main newsroom phone number is 416-869-4300; fax 416-869-4328; email city@thestar.ca
General inquiries can be sent to:
Editorial Department
Toronto Star
One Yonge Street, Fifth Floor
Toronto, Ontario
M5E 1E6
Michelle also notes that this woman has a history of accusing others of Hate Speech and she has also accused Michelle of it as well. The irony of all this is the following:
- Had a Conservative blogger/talking head/pundit said anything like this about a Liberal; say maybe, President Obama? The fury would be been deafening. Not to mention the fact that they would have been sitting in jail cell somewhere.
- I also find it very ironic that a Elitist White Liberal Female Columnist, is now attacking a Conservative Filipino-American Columnist. Where are all the race baiters when you need them?
- I also find it quite ironic that the same day that Arlen Specter decided to hang his boots up with the G.O.P., that this attack started.
I will be honest with you all. I am not nearly to the far to the right as Michelle. (I like to think of myself as a bit more of a Moderate…) I’ve disagreed with her in the past. In fact, me and Michelle have had it out in the past. Back before I switched sides. But man, this stuff right here is nothing more than a coordinated attack against the Conservatives. I mean, the Liberals won. What the hell else do they want? I’ve said that before on my Blog. But it just seems like they are not happy with just winning the election, they want to destroy anything and anyone, who disagrees with their beliefs. I know, some of you might think, that I sound like Bill O’Reilly or something like that. But the man does have a point, when it comes to this.
I mean, I guess the MSNBC people are doing this because their rates are tanking. So, they feel the need to lash out. I mean, since the election, MSNBC’s ratings have been in the toilet. Fox News has beaten MSNBC and CNN. I mean, I thought the Tea Party coverage was just plain awful. As I said in my Video that I made, Keith Olbermann was, and I do mean, was, a valid voice of dissent, now he’s nothing more than a partisan hack. He has now proven that to me, beyond a shadow of a doubt. I mean, Michelle has said things that make me cringe, at times. But this sort of nonsense, like this nonsense on twitter, is just unbelievable.
Something tells me that the next four years are going to be long and hard for the Conservative minded folk in America. If we’re even still alive and have not be shipped off to camps to be killed by then.
Update: Greetings Free Republic Readers! 
Yes, I am a moderate. (Well, somewhat… 
) I used run a Blog that went by a number of different names. But, why should I tell what the name was? What’s in the past is over. I’m on the right side of things now, to coin a phrase.
Technorati Tags: Antonia Zerbisias ,Conservatism ,Conservative ,Conservatives ,Democrats ,Liberals ,Media ,Michelle Malkin ,Opinion ,Politics ,Republican ,Republican Party ,Republicans
Quote of the Day
The Internet is the last best source of free and independent information left. Think where the liberty movement would be without the Internet. But even as we speak, President Obama and his allies in Congress are attempting to obtain the authority to censor information on–and curtail access to–the Internet. Plus, in the name of “cybersecurity,” they are plotting to obtain the authority to monitor and seize anyone’s personal computer at will.
Arlen Specter is switching to the Democratic Party
Hardly a surprise, considering the fact that he was always a moderate Republican.
A source involved in the talks confirms that Senator Arlen Specter will switch to the Democratic Party, a dramatic move putting the Democrats within reach of two votes in the Senate.
The move stands to put the White House’s agenda on a fast-track, and to renew hopes among organized labor for the Employee Free Choice Act.
Vice President Joe Biden was, I’m told, deeply involved in the talks with Specter.
The move also raises the stakes for the resolution of the Minnesota Senate race, and may tempt Republicans to drag that fight on further.
via Ben Smith’s Blog: Specter switching parties – POLITICO.com.
The statement via PoliticsPA:
I have been a Republican since 1966. I have been working extremely hard for the Party, for its candidates and for the ideals of a Republican Party whose tent is big enough to welcome diverse points of view. While I have been comfortable being a Republican, my Party has not defined who I am. I have taken each issue one at a time and have exercised independent judgment to do what I thought was best for Pennsylvania and the nation.
Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans.
When I supported the stimulus package, I knew that it would not be popular with the Republican Party. But, I saw the stimulus as necessary to lessen the risk of a far more serious recession than we are now experiencing.
Since then, I have traveled the State, talked to Republican leaders and office-holders and my supporters and I have carefully examined public opinion. It has become clear to me that the stimulus vote caused a schism which makes our differences irreconcilable. On this state of the record, I am unwilling to have my twenty-nine year Senate record judged by the Pennsylvania Republican primary electorate. I have not represented the Republican Party. I have represented the people of Pennsylvania.
I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary.
I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election.
I deeply regret that I will be disappointing many friends and supporters. I can understand their disappointment. I am also disappointed that so many in the Party I have worked for for more than four decades do not want me to be their candidate. It is very painful on both sides. I thank specially Senators McConnell and Cornyn for their forbearance.
I am not making this decision because there are no important and interesting opportunities outside the Senate. I take on this complicated run for re-election because I am deeply concerned about the future of our country and I believe I have a significant contribution to make on many of the key issues of the day, especially medical research. NIH funding has saved or lengthened thousands of lives, including mine, and much more needs to be done. And my seniority is very important to continue to bring important projects vital to Pennsylvania’s economy.
I am taking this action now because there are fewer than thirteen months to the 2010 Pennsylvania Primary and there is much to be done in preparation for that election. Upon request, I will return campaign contributions contributed during this cycle.
While each member of the Senate caucuses with his Party, what each of us hopes to accomplish is distinct from his party affiliation. The American people do not care which Party solves the problems confronting our nation. And no Senator, no matter how loyal he is to his Party, should or would put party loyalty above his duty to the state and nation.
My change in party affiliation does not mean that I will be a party-line voter any more for the Democrats that I have been for the Republicans. Unlike Senator Jeffords’ switch which changed party control, I will not be an automatic 60th vote for cloture. For example, my position on Employees Free Choice (Card Check) will not change.
Whatever my party affiliation, I will continue to be guided by President Kennedy’s statement that sometimes Party asks too much. When it does, I will continue my independent voting and follow my conscience on what I think is best for Pennsylvania and America.
Meanwhile, Michelle Malkin and the folks over at Human Events give him the classic Republican send off.
Again, to me, this is not a very big shock at all. Arlen Specter was always a moderate, someone who was against the Religious right. Someone who always fought against the Social Conservatives against their theocratic agenda.
Ed, that’s nothing new
Just a little reply to Ed Morrissey’s posting about unions invoking of Religious texts.
Ed, That’s nothing new at all. They’ve been doing that sort of stuff around here for years. Even going as far as to infiltrate Churches.
Notice how on that little photo that they went out of their way to put on there, “Blessings Be upon him” for the stuff that Mohammad said? But the Christian stuff was not even praised at all.
Countdown to outraged imams protesting in the streets for Mohammad’s writings being used for non-Muslim purposes. Oh, Wait, the liberals are in bed with the Muslims and the terrorists. My Bad. 🙄