Sickening: Video shows local deputy ranting against Christians

The Video:

Greg Hengler over at Townhall says:

Substitute these Christians with Mexican protesters and replace the anti-Christian opinions from the Sheriff’s Deputy with anti-Mexican ones. Would you not see this clip run for the umpteenth time on MSNBC and CNN today? I repeat the sentiments of our Commander in Chief: “The police acted stupidly.

The Story via KRQE-TV:

ALBUQUERQUE (KRQE) – A Bernalillo County Sheriff’s deputy was caught on video erupting with personal comments while escorting a religious group away from a recent concert.

BCSO Deputy Jim Goff is a veteran of the department and years away from retirement.

The religious group was protesting outside a Rob Zombie concert on July 17th at the Pavilion. Deputies were called to escort them out. Goff was among them.

The religious group recorded the entire ordeal and put it on YouTube. It started with Goff asking the protestors to leave the property but the group was not taking the orders well.

“This is private property, leave you can go or you can go to jail,” Goff said.

“It’s against my constitutional right, these people are free right here are fee to be out here? Why cant we,” said one protestor.

That’s when Goff got the crowd involved and asked what they wanted the group to do.

“You guys, do you want them to stay or go,” Goff said.

The protestors eventually started to leave as they continued preaching to the crowd and the deputies. Goff responded.

“There is only one way to heaven and that’s through Jesus Christ the Lord,” said a protestor.

“I am a non-believer, there is no God, there is no Jesus, there is no Satan,” Goff said.

Through all the shouting, arguing and antagonizing the other deputies kept their cool. Goff, however, had one more questionable comment.

“You must have a crush on me, man are you like a gay homosexual, you keep filming me,” Goff said.

The attacks against Christians and on the first amendment in the United States of America continue under the Obama Administration. Further proof that we are truly in the last days. Remember that folks. Remember that also come 2010 and 2012 and vote accordingly.

But, of course:

Sheriff Manny Gonzales called the deputy’s comments very inappropriate.

“I watched the video and it’s an edited version. We’re going to make a request from our internal affairs unit to get a full, a full copy so we can make the right responses,” Gonzales said.

The video is on at least three different websites including YouTube, where more than 7,000 viewers have already seen it.

Gonzales said he will not comment on if Goff will be reprimanded until they conduct a complete investigation.

The sheriff also said he did not know about the concert confrontation until News 13 called and asked about it.

In other words, he will be back to work today and nothing will happen. 😡

Paul Ryan and Chris Matthews holler at each other about spending

(H/T HotAir)

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

The Psychotic ramblings of Andrew Sullivan about Sarah Palin

The man is just plain crazy. Now why do I say this? This is why:

Because the people that were on that thing called the Journalist, decided that they would show some morals and NOT touch the Palin Trig false rumor:

Ezra Klein:

Seriously, folks? Best case scenario, what’s your outcome here: Her daughter, hounded by the tabloids, breaks down that it was her child, and her mother heroically took on the burden and welcomed the disabled boy as one of her own? Palin’s relationship with her children — however they may have come to her — strikes me as pretty far out of bounds. By all accounts she’s a wonderful mother, and devoted to her fifth son. Leave this be.

Katha Pollitt:

I like what you said about this possibly being a dirty trick, intended to blow up in our faces. so let’s just leave it alone…

Unlike Andrew Sullivan; these liberals actually had some morals, once again our favorite Faux Conservative  descends into madness:

Remember all those liberals and lefties huffily denouncing this blog’s attempts to make sense of Sarah Palin’s bizarre stories about the pregnancy and birth of her alleged fifth child? I was nuts, crazy, vile, disgusting, etc etc to indulge in what Dave Weigel, with no working knowledge of the story, calls “nonsense.” You may also recall that the liberal media didn’t touch this with a barge-pole  – and still hasn’t (apart from a NYT puff-piece that I found utterly credulous at the time). Newsweek has even put its entire reputation behind the details of the story as outlined in Going Rogue, without doing any independent reporting on the subject.

Well, we now know, that, for some at least, I wasn’t crazy. I was just not disciplined enough to curtail what this blog airs in order to conform with what many Journo-listers believed were the interests of the Obama campaign. Any delusions that Journo-List was not, in part, a collusory venture to shape the media narrative in ways to benefit Obama, above and beyond ferreting out the truth about any and all candidates, must now be abandoned. Ezra Klein has already been caught in a bald-faced lie about his discretion in picking members; and the notion that this was simply a water-cooler collection of journalistic thoughts is also belied by the emails now published by the Daily Caller.

One should say this, however: I have no way of knowing what the DC has omitted, and how it has shaped this information. The thread stops rather abruptly. Maybe there is context that adds to what we know. I do not trust in any way the ethics of the Daily Caller. Nonetheless, I was obviously not alone in those August days, when I was pilloried for saying out loud what the entire chattering class was saying in private.

[..]

If you want to know why the allegedly liberal media didn’t touch – and still won’t touch – this story, look no further. It has nothing to do with the facts, and everything to do with their politics. Notice the core modus operandi of the political operative, not the journalist. When dealing with a story: first ask yourself not if it is true but whether the outcome benefits your side. Second, write things in defense of this that you cannot possibly know. Palin a “wonderful mother”? How on earth did Klein know that?

[…]

This is your liberal media, ladies and gentlemen: totally partisan, interested in the truth only if it advances their agenda, and devoid of any balls whatsoever. And people wonder how this farce of a candidate now controls one major political party and could well be our next president. One reason is that we do not have a functioning adversarial media uncorrupted by partisan loyalty and tactics.

The man is totally insane. That is correct; I happen to believe that Andrew Sullivan is mentally unstable, should be considered a security risk and deported from the United States of American immediately back to Great Britain; where he can get the care he needs from the British nationalized heath-care system —– If that is even possible.

The reason why the Liberal media did not run with this story, is because there was not an ounce of truth to it. Because the is such a thing as journalistic standards. You simply do not report something that you cannot prove. You would think that Sullivan and his years of college education would have taught him that. However, I believe that this is a sign of something more deep. I believe it is sign that the man has an inbred hatred of Conservative Christians and more specifically women in general. I really wonder if the man was sexually abused as a child by a female family member of his or something. (His Mom?) Because this man’s unrelenting stalking and obsessing of Sarah Palin has been quite a disturbing things to watch, especially this long after the election.

Of course, we all know that Andrew Sullivan was already busted on drug charges for trying to buy pot, and should have been deported then. But because the man has connections, he was able to beat the deportation charge and is still in the Country. That, in itself, is a story there. However,  because Sullivan is well-connected within the liberal media, they would not touch the story. I believe this would be a good time for the liberal media to do its job, when it comes to Andrew Sullivan. However, Because I know that Andrew Sullivan is among the liberal elite, he will, as always, avoid the scrutiny that was placed upon Sarah Palin and the John McCain campaign.

Such a twisted world we live in.

Others: Taylor Marsh, Mediaite, Zandar Versus The Stupid, Conservatives4Palin.com and POWIP (Via Memeorandum)

Jeffery Lord should not be allowed to write for anyone ever again

For writing absolutely asinine crap like this here. I agree with Charles Johnson, this story is just outright racist, wrong, and should be pulled.

Hell even Reason doesn’t like it, and when Reason says, “Whoa, wait a minute!”, then something is horribly wrong.

Not to mention AmSpec’s own people:

John Tobin writes in The American Spectator:

What on Earth is Jeffrey Lord talking about on the mainpage? He says that the sentence “Claude Screws lynched a black man” is untrue. Lynching is defined as an extrajudicial killing by a mob (which can be as few as two people). The fatal beating of Bobby Hall most certainly qualifies.

Philip Klein writes in The American Spectator:

I am rendered speechless by a 4,000-word article that is based around the suggestion that somebody is a liar for saying that a black man was lynched, when he was merely beaten to death by a white sheriff who evidence suggests had previously threatened to “get him.”

Here is hoping that AmSpec does the right thing and yanks this, now….

Others: Little Green Footballs, Daily Kos, Left Coast Rebel, Media Research Center, Talking Points Memo, The Inverse Square Blog, Alas, a blog, Politics Daily, Hit & Run, Sadly, No!, Balloon Juice, INSTAPUTZ and AmSpecBlog and more via Memeorandum

Grrrrrr: BP chief executive Tony Hayward to get $930,000 annually, while people in the gulf cannot work due to drilling ban

I realize that I am not going to win any friends on the right for pointing this out. But, I think this is just straight up BULLCRAP:

BP chief executive Tony Hayward will get an immediate annual pension worth about £600,000 ($930,000) when he leaves in October, the BBC has learned.

Mr Hayward is to stand down after sustained criticism of his handling of the Gulf of Mexico oil leak.

However, a BP source said he would be nominated for a non-executive position at the firm’s Russian joint venture.

BBC business editor Robert Peston said that the pension entitlement was “bound to be hugely controversial”.

BP pension scheme rules say that those who joined before April 2006 can take the pension at any point from age 50. Mr Hayward is 53.

He will also receive a year’s salary plus benefits worth more than £1m.

Mr Hayward’s pension pot is valued at about £11m and he will keep his rights to shares under a long-term performance scheme which could – depending on BP’s stock market recovery – eventually be worth several million pounds.

Our business editor said that because Mr Hayward was leaving by mutual agreement rather than being sacked, the BP board felt it had “to honour the terms of its contract with him”.

via BBC News – BP boss Hayward to get immediate £600,000 pension.

This jerk off, who was at the helm, when the oil rig, which was owned by BP, exploded killing eight people —- is going to get $930.000 a month. Meanwhile, there thousands of people, who live in the gulf; that cannot work because of the oil spill down there…. and what does the U.S. Government tell them? “Oh, let them collect an unemployment check.” Memo to the Obama Administration: Like Governor Bobby Jindal said; those people would rather work, than collect a check from the Government, and Unemployment does not pay as much as, you know, actually working?

Anyhow, I do not really fault the man for collecting that money. I mean, he did work for it. It just looks horrible and does give BP a bad image. Kudos to the BBC for pointing this out. I noticed the Stateside papers really did not point this fact out. I wonder if it was intentional? It is to wonder.

Others: The Atlantic Online, Washington Post, Wonk Room, PostPartisan and Climate Progress

The Obligatory Wikileaks Posting

The short and the sweet is that this stuff is old news.

Ed Morrissey says he read the stuff and was “Underwhelmed”; please take note, Ed Morrissey has an incredible way of putting stuff extremely nicely. If Ed Morrissey says it is “Underwhelming”, then the stuff was most likely about as exciting as a Calvinist prayer meeting! (That is, of course, Sarcasm, if any of you 5 pointers happen to be reading here!)

So, put this one in the “Nice, but we kinda already knew about that…” stack…

Just about every blogger in the world and his brother have written about this. You can read all that stuff in one spot. By clicking here.

Hablando de pendejos!

There’s this guy:

Hablando de pendejos!

Director Oliver Stone belittled the Holocaust during a shocking interview with the Sunday Times today, claiming that America’s focus on the Jewish massacre was a product of the “Jewish domination of the media.”

The director also defended Hitler and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and railed against the “powerful lobby” of Jews in America.

Stone said that his upcoming Showtime documentary series “Secret History of America,” seeks to put Hitler and Communist dictator Joseph Stalin “in context.”

“Hitler was a Frankenstein but there was also a Dr Frankenstein. German industrialists, the Americans and the British. He had a lot of support,” Stone told reporter Camilla Long during the interview, which can be found behind the paywall on the Sunday Times’ website.

via Oliver Stone: ‘Jewish-Dominated Media’ Prevents Hitler from Being Portrayed ‘in Context’ | NewsBusters.org.

Hitler in context. I just….wow. I have no words on this one. I really don’t. I’m just gobsmacked. I was not aware that Pat Buchanan was hard up for help. 😯

Others: The Moderate Voice, The Volokh Conspiracy, Pajamas Media, DaTechguy’s Blog, The Other McCain, Big Hollywood and Weasel Zippers

Hmmmm: Looks like racism does run in the Sharrod Family

I happen to think that Dan Riehl is a bit of a prick. But this is a pretty damned good find:

Go read the full story over on Dan’s Blog. Again, Dan’s an asshole. But a pretty sharp asshole here as of late. 😉

Others: The Other McCain, Blogs and Stories, Gateway Pundit, Confederate Yankee, Newsalert and Cubachi

To clear something up

I never thought in a million years that I would need to post something like this. But, if I must, I must.

As you all know, earlier this morning, I posted a entry basically letting the right know, that if they wanted to pursue an agenda of hate; to basically count me out.

Well, it appears the somebody somewhere is digging through my archives and is bringing up a posting, where I called the man, Scott Roeder, who killed Dr. George Tiller, the man who was performing partial-birth abortions; an American patriot. I will link to that old posting; but let me warn you. That posting contains EXTREMELY GRAPHIC PHOTOS of DEAD ABORTED BABIES, I ADVISE YOU, IF YOU ARE EASILY OFFENDED, DON’T CLICK THE LINK! Otherwise, Click here to read it.

Anyhow, if they had actually read the stupid entry, they would have read this:

UPDATE: I feel the need to post this as a disclaimer. I do not encourage ANYONE to take this sort of drastic measure to stop abortion. Nor would I EVER do it myself. However, I do believe that someone like this who decides that they must take a stand, should be honored, not convicted.

I wrote that then, and I still feel that way. What Scott Roeder did was extreme, what Scott Roeder did was a crime and he is in prison for it. Looking at it now, perhaps I should have worded it differently. Scott Roeder is a criminal and he does belong in a prison cell. However, I believe among those who are pro-life, as I am; I believe the Scott Roeder should be seen as someone who took a extreme stand and took matters into his own hands. Now, do I believe that Pro-lifers should be committing murder? No, I don’t. The problem is, that when someone chooses to take this path, the very people that claim to be pro-life, condemn that person for taking a stand. I believe that this is hypocrisy.

The reason I say that, is this right here. Dr. George Tiller was, in fact, himself a murder. He knew exactly what he was doing and he employed every damned legal tactic to continue doing what he was doing; and he succeeded in getting a State judge to side with him.  There was also evidence that George Tiller was tricking women into aborting their babies for frivolous reasons as well. That, in my mind, makes Tiller a straight up cold blooded killer. Now do I advocate anyone killing George Tiller? No, I do not. No sane person would do that. But I do say this; unfortunately, we live in a society, where killers are protected and yes, even rewarded for their actions, all in the name of progress. We live in a society, where people who decide that killer is wrong and dare to take a extreme stand, are jailed and condemned. Again, all in the name of progress. It is a sad thing to see, but it is the reality that we live in today.

Now having said all the above, I will say this. Listen, I do not condone murder of any sort. But there are times, when a homicide of another human being is justified. George Tiller was a murderer and the law in Kansas was not keen on stopping him. So, a man by the name of Scott Roeder decided to take matters into his own hands; in the name of Pro-Life. The problem is, the pro-life crowd wants to condemn someone who decided to take a stand and pay for it with his own freedom, to protect the lives of the unborn…. and the very people that supposedly condemn the murder of the unborn, condemned Mr. Roeder. That is straight up hypocrisy in my book.

Now, if whomever is roaming through my archives wants to bring this posting up and then bring up the one, where I am ripping on the right for their stupidity and call me a hypocrite; fine, do it, I could honestly care less about that. Because I believe these are two totally different issues. I am not preaching hate, when I call George Tiller a murder, nor am I preaching hate, when I say his killer ought to be respected and honored and not condemned, that is my personal feelings, and I am not fudging facts, nor am I being a racist about it. I am expressing my personal opinion, which, the last time I checked is not a federal crime. At least not yet, the progressives have not outlawed freedom of speech. As much as they would like to, the damn communist bastards.

Bottom Line: I made a statement, of which, I could have worded a bit better. But, I stand by it 100%. If the liberal left wants to distort that and call me a hate-monger, feel free. But I still stand behind what I said. Because I believe that Abortion is murder, and I believe that the pro-life crowds needs to get abortion stopped at the STATE level and NOT the federal.

That’s my opinion and I welcome yours.

Now this here is the nonsense that I will not side with at all

As you all know, I did have a bit of fit over what I thought was the internet lynching of a black woman by a far-right wing propagandist.  I did also walk my statement back, as I did not want people believing that I had become a liberal. I haven’t. I just will not side with racism and stupidity; and I will never, ever, condone hate at all.

I was over reading a blog, that has become the scourge of the far-right; mainly because he saw things for what they were on the right. Please, keep in mind. I do not agree with with everything that this guy writes. But there are just times when the man makes sense and when he does, I tend to agree with him. (Is that even allowed?!?! :shock:)

Anyhow, here is is three examples of some of the stupidity and utter crap on the far right, that you will not catch this blogger writing about or even supporting:

First up, posting half truths:

Seems that Blogger Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs caught one of the all-stars of the far right fudging the truth a bit, I will let Charles pick it up from here:

What I was wondering as I read this clumsy opening: why First Things hired such a witless hack as a “writer,” and what kind of ludicrous, easily debunked “link” he was going to dredge up from his feverish imagination. So I read on, got to the end, and … where the hell was the “link?”

Hoft never gets around to covering that little detail. Instead, he links to a couple of far right blogs (ranting about “reparations,” of course) that mention in passing that in the 1960s, Sherrod’s husband was a member of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee. So I read on through the muck, looking for the link to Ayers.

I should have known better than to think there would be an actual “link” in there somewhere.

It turns out that in Hoft’s bizarre world of blind hatred, Sherrod’s husband’s membership in the SNCC is the link, because Bill Ayers was also in the SNCC. Yes, that’s it. That’s the link. I hope you were sitting down for that bombshell revelation.

Earlier the same day, Hoft was claiming that NAACP CEO Ben Jealous was at the meeting where Shirley Sherrod gave her now-famous speech. It’s completely untrue, but Hoft never posted a correction, of course.

Which is, of course, the entire guilt by association thing. Which Mr. Johnson did himself with Pamela Geller; he also retracted it later. I find it very interesting that those who ballyhooed Johnson for that whole incident with Pamela Geller; do the same very thing themselves. It is, of course, a form of collectivism.  Which, I thought, liberals were known to do; not Conservatives. Hmmm.. Maybe the Paleo-Conservatives are right. That Neo-Conservatives are just Democrat lite people. As they do seem to employ the same tactics as the left.

Another example is the ever increasing rise in Anti-Muslim Bigotry in this Country. Charles Johnson notes:

Anti-Muslim bloggers Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller used to frequently cite stories about radical Islamists forwarded to them by Jeffrey Imm; you’ll find hundreds of posts at their sites that refer to Mr. Imm.

Well, their increasingly open bigotry and their outrageously paranoid, un-American group “Stop the Islamization of America” have caused Jeffrey Imm to reevaluate what Spencer and Geller stand for — and he doesn’t like what he sees.

From the Website RealCourage.org:

While the American SIOA movement seeks to be portrayed in the media as merely “conservative,” the SIOA supporters have recently called for the “criminalization of Islam,” as well as promoting the “Burn A Koran Day.” The SIOA Facebook website is replete with vulgar and obscene images and cartoons of calls for nuclear bombs on Mecca, urination on the Qur’an, and most vulgar images possible of Muhammad. SIOA supporters have called for violence and promote hatred. SIOA supporters have made vulgar and obscene comments against specific Muslims, which the SIOA supporters defend tolerating as their defense of “free expression.”

On Sunday, July 18, 2010, SIOA Executive Director Pamela Geller made yet another appeal for support for the violent extremist group “English Defence League” (EDL) which has been involved in multiple riots, and whose members were recently arrested after throwing bricks at riot police officers during their protest of a potential mosque in Dudley (that had already been canceled.) One of the SIOA supporters has darkly claimed that a group like the violent “English Defence League” is being created in America today!

The transatlantic effort of “Islamophobia united” is only bringing an organized effort to channel and fan the flames of hate and violence that Europe has been seeing against mosques and Muslims here now to America.

[…]

Islamophobia United: Stop Islamization of Europe (SIOE) – right and Stop Islamization of America – left – Unite in Protest against Park Place Mosque in NYC

A Voice of Reason from a Muslim for Freedom and Democracy

Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, leader of the American Islamic Forum for Democracy, is a conservative activist that seeks to challenge the extreme views of “political Islam.”   Dr. Jasser believes that a patriotic, pro-America approach to challenging religious extremism is essential.

Dr. Jasser disagreed with Imam Rauf over the style and the form of the planned Park Place mosque in Manhattan, and wrote an article on this for the New York Post.   Sadly and ironically, some of the web readers of the NY Post column used the “reader comments” part of the column to call for bombing the mosque and killing Muslims.

While I have nothing but contempt for those who would want to commit acts of terrorism in this Country. I have even more contempt for those who would use terrorism, performed in the name of Allah; as a platform to promote Hatred against Muslims and Arabs. That is what these people are doing. Essentially these two are basically committing collectivism;  as in stirring up hatred and fear of ALL Muslims and Arabs and convincing Americans that ALL Arabs and Muslims are terrorists, and that my friends, I am afraid, is just morally wrong. Not to mention, it is not even remotely a Conservative trait. But rather a liberal one; and the real sick part is, it is the same collectivist mindset of the Jim Crow racists of the South, prior to 1964.

The last and final one, is just straight up racism. This is a statement from a James Edwards, who hosts a White Nationalist Radio program called the “Political Cesspool”, he  writes the following: (H/T LGF)

Of course the Tea Party is racist, crowed a blog post on the Council of Conservative Citizens website yesterday — and it would be proud of its racism if it weren’t wussy.

The post was written by James Edwards, a radio show host and author of Racism Schmacism. His website, the Political Cesspool, declares as its motto: “Conservatism is dead. Liberalism has no answers. What comes next? The rise of ethnopolitics.”

After the NAACP passed a recent resolution condemning the Tea Party as a bunch of bigots, the ragtag band of would-be American revolutionaries launched into denials. That’s because they’re week-kneed, lily-livered racists whose instinct is to “bend over and grab their ankles”, wrote Edwards, who suggested they connect with their inner-cackling villains:

“Instead of replying with a loud BWAHAHAHA! or a ‘Yeah? What’s your point?’ or ‘So what?’ or ‘Of course we’re racists – we’re white people. That’s what “racist” means’ or ‘Can any of you race hustlers even spell “racist”?’ The Tea Party predictably went into their usual bend over and grab their ankles mode. They protested that oh no, we’re not racists at all, we don’t tolerate racists at our rallies which are really huge rainbow coalitions.”

Edwards is right. The Tea Party is hiding the truth about itself: Racist groups are quietly welcomed at its starchy street fairs, even right here in Florida.

Last January, a state chapter of the Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) set up shop at a Tea Party rally in Invernness, Citrus County. Senate candidate and Tea-Party darling Marco Rubio headlined the event, while the CCC handed out pamphlets and swag.

They wrote a proud blog entry about it: “Florida CofCC works crowd at TEA party.” The Anti-Defamation League warned of the group’s attendance a day ahead of time.

Here’s Edward’s Entire posting:

Oh, man…if only they had read my book! Racism, Schmacism. All of this unpleasantness could’ve been avoided. This thing is such a mess I don’t even know where to start, and it’s pathetic and hilarious at the same time. I wanted to write about it last week, but I was just swamped, and now things have gotten even crazier with the whole NAACP/Tea Party brouhaha, so I might as well go for it.

Well, let’s just start at the beginning. Last week, the NAACP passed a resolution condemning the “racism” of the Tea Party movement, and demanding that the movement purge itself of those hideous “racists” in their grass roots movement. Yes, the very same mental midgets who just a few weeks ago were condemning a Hallmark greeting card with an outer space theme because they think “black holes” means “black hos”, an organization which is explicitly organized for the exclusive benefit of one race of people, and whose name contains the words “Colored People”, actually had the gall to pass this resolution.

This was a great opportunity for the Tea Party movement to show some backbone by laughing in the face of the imbeciles at the NAACP. But did they? Of course not. Predictably, they responded in the same tired, pusillanimous manner with which they always respond to these never ending accusations. Instead of replying with a loud BWAHAHAHA! or a “Yeah? What’s your point?” or “So what?” or “Of course we’re racists -we’re white people.

That’s what “racist” means or “Can any of you race hustlers even spell “racist”?”, they predictably went into their usual bend over and grab their ankles mode. They protested that oh no, we’re not racists at all, we don’t tolerate racists at our rallies which are really huge rainbow coalitions, and it’s the NAACP and the liberals who are the real racists, etc., etc. You know, the lame “Bull Connor was a Democrat!” defense. It never works, but they just keep trotting it out like some lucky charm in the vain hope that this time it will work.

Racist means white person. Period. Until the Tea Partiers get that through their heads, nothing’s going to change, and they’re never going to be an effective political force. They really, really need to read Racism, Schmacism.

The reason why I mention this, is because Jim Hoft, whom I mentioned above, has linked to the Council of Conservative Citizens website. This group, for what it is worth, was called at one point, “The White Council” and was believed to be responsible for the murder of four civil rights workers in Mississippi.  Anyhow, when I brought this up, Hoft moved the link to the posting previous to that one. I noticed it and brought it up; he choose to do nothing. So, that tells me, that Hoft just does not care, because with him, it is all about “the cause…”

Now, let me end this by saying this: I am all for being against Socialism. I am all for being against big Government, I am all for being against Identity Politics, I am all for being against Terrorism and Islamic fascism and Muslim Intolerance; which really is just another form of hate. But, what I am NOT for, is combating Hate…with Hate. That my friends, is what these people are doing. Quite honestly, if these is all what there is,to being a Republican or someone of the right. Then, by all means, count me the hell out. I really am not one to hate, based upon race, color, creed and yes, even religion.

If the right does not change that image, which I just described above; they are going to have an image problem for a LONG time to come.

Young people are turning on Obama

(H/T Doug Powers @ Michelle Malkin)

Young people are beginning to realize that the “Magic Negro” was never really magical at all.

Via the New York Post:

Young voters who had been enthralled by Barack Obama’s “Yes, we can” message are now saying “Maybe not” — and are backing away from the president in a worrisome new poll for the White House.

Obama is losing in a match-up against a generic Republican challenger by 37 percent to 34 percent among voters in the 18-34 age group, according to a stunning Quinnipiac University poll released yesterday.

In March, voters in this group approved of Obama by 54 percent to 37 percent.

“The youngest age group may be the most impatient and the most easily disillusioned among all age groups,” said Molly Andolina, a youth-vote expert and DePaul University political-science professor.

For many young voters in 2008, “it was the first time they’d been really been involved, really paying attention. This is someone telling them, ‘Yes, you can,’ ” she said.

Two years later, with a prolonged Gulf oil spill, “watching how slow it is to respond may be a little disillusioning,” she added.

I could use this space to be snarky or whatever. But, I really will just speak the truth. This is what happens when the person that you are trying to elect is oversold. It is a classic case of Democratic Party overreach. Have the Republicans ever done this? Absolutely; They did it with Reagan to a point, but it was nowhere near the scale and size of what the Democratic Party did with Barack Obama. Not only that, but the Reagan campaign and Presidency did not engage in the Chicago-style of political thuggery that the Obama campaign was notorious for.

There is also a more broader and finer point to be made as well. That point is that as a political candidate, you get one chance to capture the hearts and minds of the American people. Just one chance! If you are able to do it and you louse it up; you are, as they say, screwed. Barack Obama rode in on the promise of “Hope and Change”, and it turned out that he is just another Chicago thug politician. Further more, it became very clear to the most devoted of Obama supporters that now President Obama was just not much of a political leader, but rather a thinker. This became very apparent when the oil spill happened. In fact, Obama still has this attitude of being above it all, even after it has happened.

So, this poll should not be a shock to anyone. Least of all to us who knew what the man was really all about.

Zo on the BreitBart Sherrod issue

Please Note: I don’t entirely agree with all of this. But I give Zo props for saying it.

Funniest Political Ad evah

AllahPundit says, “Dude” on this one. I was thinking more like, “Dude WTF?!?!?” myself.

Turns out this dude is for real. He even has a website...and so does his son.

Best part is the comments over at HotAir. Warning! If you were drinking coffee while watching this or reading the comments at HotAir, you will end with coffee on the monitor or on your laptop; and possible even up your nose. 😀

Walking it back a bit

As those of you who read this blog on a daily basis know, in a fit of anger the other day, I decided to tell the World that I was no longer a “Right of Center.”

I tend to say many things when I am ticked off.

Listen folks, I am an American.  I am also someone who believes that America is a great place and that we have it good here and last thing we need is a bunch of idiots from California, New York, and other such liberal bastions lousing it up for us.  They have already done this to a point, however, I believe that we can still reverse course and make things right, if we get the right leadership in the White House and in Congress.

Another point that I would like to make is this; Centrists, for all their good points also have issues as well. They tend to be accepting to far left socialism.  I just cannot find that acceptable, socialism and Democratic policy has been the ruin of many a good State; Michigan included.  I ought to know this, as I live only about 15 miles from Downtown Detroit.  Detroit, before the rise of black liberalism in the Detroit area, was an industrial Mecca, people came for all around the Country, just to get a good job in the auto plants.  What happened?  Well, if I were a partisan hack, I would simply blame the unions.  They are easy, but there is much more to it than this.  The international auto industry changed; and the big three here did not and as a result; the hiring days ended.

Now my statement about black liberalism is not a racist one, but rather a political one — simply put, black liberals just were not able to run this city like their white predecessors. Why was this?  Because of the identity politics of the city, this goes back to the first black mayor of Detroit.  The election of the first black Mayor of Detroit was widely seen as a defeat of the white Democratic power structure in Detroit.  Another reason was the corruption in the City of Detroit.  Mayor Coleman Young was the most corrupt Mayor ever.  The reason why he was never caught is that he was just that good.  Another reason is that it is believed that Mayor Young was bribing investigators as well.  Nothing says leave me alone better than a case full of money.  It does tend to work.

As I have said on this blog many times.  I will always tell you what I think; not what some partisan talking point says.  I will tell you what I, personally, think about politics and policy.  If I feel something is wrong, I will tell you about it.  If I like something, I will tell you that as well — Having said that, I personally believe that Andrew BreitBart is a vile, disgusting excuse for a human being.  Andrew Breitbart knowingly released a video that portrayed a woman in a dishonest manner.  That, together with the things that this disgusting excuse for a Jew said about Ted Kennedy the DAY he died, just proved to me what sort of a vile, disgusting, piece of human excrement that this man really is.  Now, if anyone wants to play the Semite card because I brought up the fact that Breitbart is a Jew, feel free, I would give two flips about that, I would have said that about him if he were White, Black, or Latino. The issue here is not Breitbart’s Semite status, it is his morals; and quite bluntly, they suck.

Now as for my politics, I still consider myself a Classic Liberal, a libertarian-minded individual, a right of center, a Goldwater type;  someone who believes in the individual rather than the collective.  I am someone that believes that a person has the right to succeed and a right to fail.  I have not changed; I was simply angered by what I saw as an opportunist smearing someone to make a cheap political point.  There should be no place for that sort of nonsense in the discourse of politics; however, in this age of unfiltered new media it does happen.  The question is, will we as Bloggers, and Americans continue to give a platform to the vile disgusting likes of this morally depraved fool?  That is the question that all of us in this thing we call the Blogosphere should be asking ourselves this day — and not whether this woman is a socialist; of course she is, that really is not the point.  The point was, she was smeared as a racist and is not; THAT is the point my dear friends.  Until we can get to that place of realizing that, the Blogosphere of the right, will be seen as nothing more than a child’s playground and propaganda mill; and that my friends is the sad thing about this, it has destroyed us as a whole.

The real sick and sadistic part of this whole mess is this.  A little while back, the controversial Louis Farrakhan said that Jews have caused damage to blacks for years.  At the time, I thought that to be an outrageous statement, not to mention Anti-Semitic; now it seems that the people like Andrew Breitbart and many others on the right are trying their damnedest to prove Farrakhan right.  I think we as a whole, on the right, need to work on that little image very quick.  Because frankly at this point, we are giving people like Farrakhan and the many people on the left, that think like him; black, White, Latino, and whatever else, the talking point they need to further that “gospel” of hatred.

That is my opinion and I welcome yours.

Stop the presses: Andrew Sullivan actually writes something I agree with

Yes, I know. Andrew Sullivan is a bit more liberal than most Conservatives here in America. Yes, I know that most people here in America, that call themselves Conservative, utterly despise the man. Yes, I know most of my blogging friends; if I still have any, hate the ground that this man walks on. But, damn it, when he is right, he is right.

Sully writes:

It seems to me simply wrong to ascribe the bile of flocks of angry commenters that appear on any site that tackles contentious topics to the blogger himself. You can criticize him or her for not deleting them and providing a platform to hate (Ann Althouse’s readers routinely mock me for having HIV, for example, and she does nothing) but you can’t criticize someone for attracting such creatures on the internet – let alone convict him of the same views. To further convict him on the basis of anti-Semitic emails sent entirely independently of him to a third party – and to describe them as “Stephen Walt’s Mailbag” when in fact, it’s Jeffrey Goldberg’s in-tray – strikes me as deeply unfair. But that’s what my colleague Jeffrey Goldberg has done with Stephen Walt in his latest post. He has every right to lambaste Walt for things he writes and has written (although I think “Jew-baiter” is an ugly and absurd excess) – but this guilt-by-association is perverse.

I must agree with the above. This is what Charles Johnson of little green footballs fame does all the damned time; and it is stupid. It is collectivism and it is wrong and flies in the face of what Conservatives everywhere believe.

Sully continues:

And if raising questions about Israel’s policies inflames anti-Semitism (and how can it not among the fever swamps of hate out there?), should that therefore prevent us from airing such questions? The chilling implications of this kind of argument are profound – and inimical to free discourse. Look: I know it’s awful to read bigoted emails. And relatively new bloggers may be unused to the routine bile. But you need to accept it as part of a new media with no filters.

My feelings on both points:

  • One of the worst things with having to debate or even discuss Israel and foreign policy of the United States is the Semite card playing buffoons of the Wilsonian crowd. Sadly, there are Jews out there that use their identity to tag anyone who dare challenge their foreign policy position a Jew-Hater, an Anti-Semite, and so on.
  • On the issue of the unfiltered New Media; I highly disagree with Sully’s conclusion. This is why I have strict moderation in place on this Blog. I also have a set of rules in place. You violate my rules; you do not comment here; Period. This also why I always keep moderation enabled here. I review every comment, if something does not pass muster, it is deleted. I wish I had a dollar for every time some moron pass through here and made a stupid comment about blacks, Jews and even liberals. Sometimes, I will post the stupid stuff, with the IP address, e-mail address and real name showing; just to show everyone how dumb this person is. But there are some that are so vile and nasty that I will not publish them. Those are the one that are why I have moderation enabled. I just will not give a open platform to hate, period.

Local Stupidity: Ann Arbor Michigan spends $850,000 on art, while firefighters are laid off

Finally, something worthy of a blog post!

This has to be the MOST tone deaf things that I have read since the election of Barack Obama…:

The debate in Ann Arbor, where firefighters are being laid off due to a multimillion dollar budget deficit, is over an $850,000 piece of art.

That’s how much the city has agreed to pay German artist Herbert Dreiseitl for a three-piece water sculpture that would go in front of the new police and courts building right by the City Hall.

The city has the money to do it because in 2007, it agreed to set aside for public art 1 percent of money that went into capital improvement projects that were $100,000 or larger. Most capital projects involve streets, sewers and water.

Ann Arbor City Council member Stephen Kunselman, a Democrat, opposed the art deal.

“I think it is incredibly insensitive,” Kunselman said. “It is insensitive to the staff and their morale. It is insensitive to the community. There are people out there struggling financially, and here we are spending a large amount of money on a piece of art.”

Kunselman said the city is also eliminating the solid waste coordinator from the budget, which oversees trash pickup, and hiring an art coordinator.

City Administrator Roger Fraser wrote in an e-mail that the solid waste coordinator position was eliminated as a cost-cutting measure because the solid waste millage had decreased. Fraser wrote that the art coordinator position would be paid for by the public art fund.

Fraser noted that the public art dollars did not come from the city’s general fund, which is used to pay salaries and benefits, and that less than $6,000 of the art money came from the general fund.

The art projects also must have a “thematic connection” to the source of funding, Fraser wrote. The $850,000 art project is water-themed, because the money came from storm water funds.

But some critics say that a city creative enough to fund art from storm water projects should be able to find money to cover essential city services.

“That’s the classic argument,” said Glenn Thompson, an Ann Arbor resident and longtime critic of city spending. “But the city has become very, very good at shuffling money in and out of the general fund when they want. These people are very good at putting it in and out of the general fund when they wish.”

Michael LaFaive, the director of the Mackinac Center for Public Policy’s Morey Fiscal Policy Initiative said nonessential services are being funded throughout the state.

“Administrators cry poverty while lavishing money on the beautiful people,” LaFaive said. “The threat to dismiss firefighters often comes while officials protect golf courses, wave pools and art. No city can cry poverty while it defends recreation and aesthetics such as art.”

LaFaive said administrators get creative with budgets to fund pet projects.

via The Art of the Ann Arbor City Budget [Mackinac Center].

I would say that I am shocked about this; but hey, it is Ann Arbor. Ann Arbor, for those who are not from these parts; is a bastion of Liberalism. Basically, it is San Francisco in Michigan. Yeah, it is that liberal. 🙄

True Story: When I actually worked for a living; back in the mid 90’s, I made a delivery to that city, I mean, right downtown; you talk about feeling like driving into an alternative universe. 😯 There were people…..everywhere. I was near, as in like a block away, from the local university there. It was quite the interesting experience. I remember getting my package signed for, and scrambling to find the entrance to the freeway and getting the heck out of dodge!  I went back to the shop and said in my most pitiful, mournful, voice, “PLEASE, DON’T SEND ME TO ANN ARBOR ANYMORE!” I thought the secretary at the office was going to fall out of her chair laughing at me. 😀

A man can only handle so many weird looking people in one place! 😀

Others: Classical Values, American Spectator, Questions and Observations, The New Editor, Wizbang, theblogprof and Moonbattery

Why I left the Right: Exhibit C for Conspiracy

As you already know there is a HUGE story about the USDA workers firing.

…and what is wing-nut Andrew Breitbart now saying, that he has been exposed?

Think Progress reports:

Two white farmers who were supposedly discriminated against by former USDA official Shirley Sherrod spoke out on her behalf yesterday, saying “no way in the world” is she racist.

But last night, the right-wing blogger who instigated this faux controversy questioned the white farmers’ honesty and repeated his false racist charges. In interviews with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and CNN, the Iron City, GA couple Roger and Eloise Spooner described Sherrod as a “friend for life” and a “good person” who helped save their farm. Speaking with CNN’s John King, right-wing provocateur Andrew Breitbart challenged Eloise Spooner’s “purported” story, accusing King of trusting Sherrod “that the ‘farmer’s wife’ is the farmer’s wife…

The complete interview can be found Here and Here. But the money part is this right here:

Transcript:

You tell me as a reporter how CNN put on a person today who purported to be the farmer’s wife? What did you do to find out whether or not that was the actual farmer’s wife? I mean, if you’re going to accuse me of a falsehood, tell me where you’ve confirmed that had this incident happened 24 years ago. […]

You’re going off of her word that the farmer’s wife is the farmer’s wife?

Yeah, like CNN or anyone else for the matter is going to grab someone off of the street and put them on a farm and tell them, presumably at gunpoint or whatever is in Andrew Breitbart’s mind; and force them to say they were helped by this woman. Andrew Breitbart has lost all credibility in this situation and is now spinning like a top and has crossed over into WorldNetDaily territory. In short, the man is basically trying to save face and is failing badly.

Just another reason why I left the right.

Others, on the left covering this, and hell, who wouldn’t?!?!?!?!?!?:

Media Matters for America, Washington Wire, The Huffington Post, JONATHAN TURLEY, Wonk Room, Washington Monthly, Gawker, Wonkette, Media Matters for America, News Hounds, Rumproast and The Mahablog

WOW: Even Jonah Goldberg thinks that Andrew Breitbart should apologize to Shirley Sherrod

Now this is a surprise:

I think she should get her job back. I think she’s owed apologies from pretty much everyone, including my good friend Andrew Breitbart. I generally think Andrew is on the side of the angels and a great champion of the cause. He says he received the video in its edited form and I believe him. But the relevant question is, Would he have done the same thing over again if he had seen the full video from the outset? I’d like to think he wouldn’t have. Because to knowingly turn this woman into a racist in order to fight fire with fire with the NAACP is unacceptable. When it seemed that Sherrod was a racist who abused her power, exposing her and the NAACP’s hypocrisy was perfectly fair game. But now that we have the benefit of knowing the facts, the equation is completely different.

via Shirley Sherrod — My Take – Jonah Goldberg – The Corner on National Review Online.

Now that is a very big shock to see this guy make a turn like this. Very interesting…

From my Inbox: Environmental group and NYT cohorts?

From the inbox:

This story has yet to be fully exposed.  Please let me know if there is any other information you may need for a blog post!

In a memo recently cited by E&E news, communications firm Clean Energy Work (which can be found at www.scribd.com/doc/34382420/Clean-Energy-Works-Memo) outlines the possible method of using the New York Times as a centerpiece of a “tactical campaign” to reframe proposed tax increases on American consumers as “The Big Oil Welfare Tax”.

This is a left wing campaign strategy to use the New York Times as a tool to push a liberal agenda that would increase taxes on energy companies and consumers.

An actual article in the New York Times (“As Oil Industry Fights a Tax, It Reaps Billions From Subsidies”) seems to be one example of this strategy in action.  The article is riddled with inaccuracies and misrepresentations that are easily spotted by anyone with a basic understanding or background in tax policy.

Andrew Langer at the Institute for Liberty has responded to this misinformation in a point by point post at http://www.instituteforliberty.org/index.php?src=blog&category=Blog&submenu=media (original NYT article and CEW memo are also at this page)

Something worth looking at.

Believe it when I see it: Obama to Target CRA

WaPo Reports:

Responding to the collapse in home prices and the huge number of foreclosures, the Obama administration is pursuing an overhaul of government policy that could diverge from the emphasis on homeownership embraced by former administrations.

“In previous eras, we haven’t seen people question whether homeownership was the right decision. It was just assumed that’s where you want to go,” said Raphael Bostic, a senior official in the Department of Housing and Urban Development. “You’re not going to hear us say that.”

Bostic, who has published leading scholarship on homeownership, added that owning a home has a lot of value, but “what we’ve seen in the last four years is that there really is an underside to homeownership.”

The administration’s narrower view of who should own a home and what the government should to do to support them could have major implications for the economy as well as borrowers. Broadly, the administration may wind down some government backing for home loans, but increase the focus on affordable rentals.

The shift in approach could mean higher down payments and interest rates on loans, more barriers to lower-income people buying houses, and fewer homeowners overall, government officials said. But it could also pave the way for a more stable housing market, one with fewer taxpayer dollars on the line and less of a risk that homeowners will not be able to pay their mortgages. And it could spell changes throughout the financial markets, as investors choose new places to put their money if the government withdraws some incentives for investing in the U.S. mortgage market.

I don’t buy it. But, it could happen.

Ed Morrissey, who is one of the more honest right-wing bloggers out there, says:

Will the White House go through with it?  It’s one thing to leak this to the Post.  It’s another thing entirely to follow through with the necessary rulemaking and legislative effort needed to succeed in it.  The Post notes that La Raza, one of the groups that gains material benefit from participating in government programs for these home-ownership efforts, is already unhappy with the idea.  At a time when Obama’s approval ratings are sinking towards Bush levels, this could alienate his ideological base and leave him utterly abandoned in 2012.

Let’s hope Obama commits to this reform.  If he does, it will easily be the most significant economic reform of his tenure, and would represent a significant retreat from the government interventions and social engineering that have ruined the American economy, and could set the stage for even further constraints on federal power.  That would show actual leadership and strength.

Pardon me if I sound about as jaded as an atheist on Easter Sunday; but it would make no sense for President Obama to do this. As it was the Democrats that created this whole mess in the first place. Social engineering is what they do; so, I will not break out the pom poms just yet. I will believe it, when the speculation of the real estate market ends. I will believe when they stop trading mortgages on the stock market. I will believe it when the sub-prime mortgages are gone. I will believe it, when Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac are gone for good.

Until then, I remain unconvinced.

Holy Crap: Bell, Ca officials make a half a million a year

It’s good work when you can get it! 😯

Hundreds of residents of one of the poorest municipalities in Los Angeles County shouted in protest last night as tensions rose over a report that the city’s manager earns an annual salary of almost $800,000.

An overflow crowd packed a City Council meeting in Bell, a mostly Hispanic city of 38,000 about 10 miles (16 kilometers) southeast of Los Angeles, to call for the resignation of Mayor Oscar Hernandez and other city officials. Residents left standing outside the chamber banged on the doors and shouted “fuera,” or “get out” in Spanish.

It was the first council meeting since the Los Angeles Times reported July 15 that Chief Administrative Officer Robert Rizzo earns $787,637 — with annual 12 percent raises — and that Bell pays its police chief $457,000, more than Los Angeles Police Chief Charlie Beck makes in a city of 3.8 million people. Bell council members earn almost $100,000 for part-time work.

via California Official’s $800,000 Salary in City of 38,000 Triggers Protests – Bloomberg.

Wow… They’re lucky the people didn’t burn the building to the ground! I can understand the rage, to a point.

Clean Streets? HA! For that kind of money, they should be paved with gold. 😀

Ousted USDA Official: I am not sure I even want my job back

Can you blame her? (via Today on NBC)

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

I mean, seriously. To me, this was nothing more than a high tech lynching. If I were a black person and I was in the White House or even remotely close to it in a Governmental position. I would be looking for another job really fast. Because who is to say that BreitBart is not holding onto something else that might damage someone? Of course, that is what the far right wants, they want those “Dirty Niggers” out of the White House and out of the Government. Because of how it is poisoning the White House or whatever stupidity those people happen to believe.

Left Wing Stupidity: Left Wing Journalists want Fox News shut down by Government

Just to show you that I have not gone totally “around the bend”, so to speak. This struck me as just incredibly stupid:

This comes Via Tucker Carlson’s Daily Caller:

The very existence of Fox News, meanwhile, sends Journolisters into paroxysms of rage. When Howell Raines charged that the network had a conservative bias, the members of Journolist discussed whether the federal government should shut the channel down.

“I am genuinely scared” of Fox, wrote Guardian columnist Daniel Davies, because it “shows you that a genuinely shameless and unethical media organisation *cannot* be controlled by any form of peer pressure or self-regulation, and nor can it be successfully cold-shouldered or ostracised. In order to have even a semblance of control, you need a tough legal framework.” Davies, a Brit, frequently argued the United States needed stricter libel laws.

“I agree,” said Michael Scherer of Time Magazine. Roger “Ailes understands that his job is to build a tribal identity, not a news organization. You can’t hurt Fox by saying it gets it wrong, if Ailes just uses the criticism to deepen the tribal identity.”

Jonathan Zasloff, a law professor at UCLA, suggested that the federal government simply yank Fox off the air. “Do you really want the political parties/white house picking which media operations are news operations and which are a less respectable hybrid of news and political advocacy?”

But Zasloff stuck to his position. “I think that they are doing that anyway; they leak to whom they want to for political purposes,” he wrote. “If this means that some White House reporters don’t get a press pass for the press secretary’s daily briefing and that this means that they actually have to, you know, do some reporting and analysis instead of repeating press releases, then I’ll take that risk.”

Scherer seemed alarmed. “So we would have press briefings in which only media organizations that are deemed by the briefer to be acceptable are invited to attend?”

John Judis, a senior editor at the New Republic, came down on Zasloff’s side, the side of censorship. “Pre-Fox,” he wrote, “I’d say Scherer’s questions made sense as a question of principle. Now it is only tactical.

What you have just read above; is why I sided against the liberal left. Because Liberals believe in freedom of speech; as long as it matches up with their political ideologies. Conservatives, for all their faults, do embrace true freedom of speech. Liberals, I am afraid, do not. This is a perfect example of that. The very idea of the FCC pulling Fox News’s broadcast license, because of their political stance, is absolutely asinine. Not to mention it smacks of communism and yes, even Nazi fascism.

For what it is worth and as horrible as it sounds; Nazi Germany and Communist Russia BOTH did control their press and even had a Government-controlled press. This sounds like what these guys want, a controlled press that only exposes their ideals. That is a true definition of fascism; government control over every aspect of people’s lives —- including the privately owned press.

Why I left the right: Exhibit C for Common Sense

…or a lack of it, by people on the right, that is….

Seems that now that Sen. Lindsey Graham decided to stand up against the bigotry, hatred towards gays and yes, Antisemitism in the GOP. Because this, he is now a lame-duck in the ranks of the GOP.

Chris Cillizza, who is about the only political reporter is has any kind of integrity anymore, has the story:

South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham’s (R) announcement that he will vote in favor of Elena Kagan’s nomination to the Supreme Court is likely to further incite conservatives already unhappy with him and, according to close observers of the state’s politics, ensures he will face a serious primary challenge in 2014.

“I think there’s a good reason for a conservative to vote yes,” Graham said this morning.

Graham’s apostasy on Kagan comes after other high profile breaks with conservatives in his state (and nationally) over climate change and immigration reform and will likely make him a central target of those tea party Republicans who helped oust Utah Sen. Bob Bennett in his bid for renomination earlier this year.

“It’s no longer a question of ‘if’ but ‘who’ and ‘how many’,” said one South Carolina Republican operative about a Graham primary challenge. The source added that Graham’s approach on high profile issues of late is “putting Lindsey’s friends and supporters in a really tough place.”

Richard Quinn, a Graham consultant, defended his client — noting that the Senator is “not a demagogue”. Added Quinn: “He’s a thinking person’s conservative. I expect him to do well among voters with IQ’s in triple digits.”

Quinn also noted that it’s more than four years before Graham faces voters again; “There will be many battles fought, lost and won between now and then,” he said.

And, Graham has proven himself to be a very able politician — running what was widely regarded as the best campaign of the 2002 election cycle and easily beating back a primary challenge in 2008 when there was already some conservative unrest directed toward him. He ended June with $2.8 million in the bank.

via The Fix – Lindsey Graham’s vote on Elena Kagan ensures primary challenge.

Because nothing says RINO louder, than voting for a suspected Lesbian Jew Liberal Woman in the Supreme Court of the United States! Just ask Pat Buchanan.