On Hiatus

Hi folks,

I'm on the tail-end of a recovery from knee surgery, and now we've discovered that my wife has a vertically torn tendon in her ankle that may reach up her calf. She goes in for surgery early Tuesday morning. The doctor tells us she must be off of it for six weeks, minimum.

I'm going to put the blog on hiatus for at least the next month, and perhaps as long as the next two months while I tend to my family.

I hope to find you all well when I return.

Respectfully,

Bob

Yes, Obama Was a Muslim

I don't feel this is a big deal by any stretch of the imagination, but a lot of folks in the blogosphere and newsrooms seemed to freak out yesterday because of a poll that indicates a substantial and rising number of Americans think Barack Obama is a Muslim.

Apologists everywhere were quick to lash out and claim he is a Christian, and some claim he was never a Muslim.

That isn't true.

As a boy in Indonesia, Barack Obama crisscrossed the religious divide. At the local primary school, he prayed in thanks to a Catholic saint. In the neighborhood mosque, he bowed to Allah.

Having a personal background in both Christianity and Islam might seem useful for an aspiring U.S. president in an age when Islamic nations and radical groups are key national security and foreign policy issues. But a connection with Islam is untrod territory for presidential politics...

[snip]

...His former Roman Catholic and Muslim teachers, along with two people who were identified by Obama's grade-school teacher as childhood friends, say Obama was registered by his family as a Muslim at both of the schools he attended.

That registration meant that during the third and fourth grades, Obama learned about Islam for two hours each week in religion class.

The childhood friends say Obama sometimes went to Friday prayers at the local mosque. "We prayed but not really seriously, just following actions done by older people in the mosque. But as kids, we loved to meet our friends and went to the mosque together and played," said Zulfin Adi, who describes himself as among Obama's closest childhood friends.

The campaign's national press secretary, Bill Burton, said Wednesday that the friends were recalling events "that are 40 years old and subject to four decades of other information." Obama's younger sister, Maya Soetoro, said in a statement released by the campaign that the family attended the mosque only "for big communal events," not every Friday.

A little later in the same L.A. Times article:

Neighborhood Muslims worshiped in a nearby house, which has since been replaced by a larger mosque. Sometimes, when the muezzin sounded the call to prayer, Lolo and Barry would walk to the makeshift mosque together, Adi said.

"His mother often went to the church, but Barry was Muslim. He went to the mosque," Adi said. "I remember him wearing a sarong."

Barack Obama was born the son of a non-practicing Muslim father, and had a barely-practicing Muslim stepfather. Was a Barack Obama a devout Muslim? There is no evidence of that at all.

But Barack Obama was a Muslim as a child, and prayed (at least occasionally) at the local mosque in Indonesia, as confirmed by family and friends.

I don't think he is a Muslim now, any more than he is a Christian (the black liberation theology he exposed himself to at Trinity under Rev. Jeremiah Wright is hybrid of Marxist political beliefs and black nationalism cloaked in Christian trappings). If he were honest, Barack Obama would identify himself as non-religious.

But he lies when he claims he was never a Muslim.

Issa Report Forces Administration's Propaganda Retreat

Via email:

In a letter to Oversight and Government Reform Committee Ranking Member Darrell Issa, Department of Transportation Inspector General Calvin L. Scovel III stated that the Federal Railroad Administration and the Federal Transit Administration, "have relaxed their original ARRA signage requirements" and DOT agencies no longer require ARRA (American Recovery and Reinvestment Act) signage. Despite this change, Rep. Issa remains concerned about inappropriate propaganda efforts pushed by the Department of Transportation and a lack of focus on creating private sector jobs.

"Despite eliminating requirements to post signs, Department of Transportation agencies are still improperly focused on pushing projects to display signs crediting President Obama and the so-called 'stimulus' for earmarked funding handouts," said Issa. "The Administration's obsession with using taxpayer money to get political credit for projects adds unnecessary expenses and bureaucracy to a spending package that's failing to spur promised job creation in the private sector."

The Federal Railroad Administration's decision to eliminate requirements for posting stimulus signs took effect on July 15, 2010 and follows questions and criticism by Republican Members of Congress, including Rep. Issa and Rep. Aaron Schock, about the improper use of stimulus funds for politically motivated signage.

The stimulus is a failure, and the propaganda efforts the DOT is (slowly) backing away from only existed to fluff for the Administration.

This isn't much, and isn't the GAO investigation Issa is calling for to go after the illegal propaganda being generated from from White House.

Still, it is a start.

Unsigned WaPo Op-Ed: Where are the Republicans who will reject pandering and prejudice?

It is more than a little bit fascinating to see liberal "conventional wisdom" on display, especially when it is unsupported by reality.

This editorial, for example, is rife with deception and ignorance.

BROADLY SPEAKING, there seem to be three strands of argument against building a mosque or Muslim community center two blocks from Ground Zero in Lower Manhattan.

The first is that the terrorists who destroyed the World Trade Center and killed almost 3,000 people there in 2001 really did represent Islam and that to pretend otherwise is a dangerous delusion. The second is that, no, al-Qaeda does not speak for Islam, but many people -- including survivors and relatives of the victims -- naturally associate the two, and therefore it would be insensitive to locate anything Islamic so close to the scene of the crime. The third, for many politicians, seems to be that most Americans oppose construction of the mosque, and therefore opposition is useful (for Republicans on the attack) or safe (for Democrats cowering in a corner).

All three of these are objectionable. It is true that more Muslims around the world than one might wish sympathize with some of Osama bin Laden's thinking, view America as an aggressor nation and accept as justified some of what Americans view as terrorism.

The writer of this unsigned piece provides little in the way of qualification here... "more Muslims around the world than one might wish" sympathize with the bin Laden's thinking. The writer might be interested to know that bin Laden's thinking is firmly rooted at the very core of Islamic theology, and his calls to wage jihad perfectly reflect that of his religions' primary prophet, Mohammed, who warred, killed, and took as slaves entire tribes during his lifetime as he spread his newly-created faith at the point of a sword.

The writer also seems to have forgotten the celebratory mood that erupted in many, if not most parts of the Arab world to the news that that thousands of Americans had been killed on 9/11. The fabled "Islamic street" was thrilled.

Almost a decade later, even our so-called Islamic allies are anything but. A clear super-majority of Pakistanis view the United States as the enemy. That view holds sway across Arab Islamic cultures.

But it's also true that many more Muslims reject such thinking, see Islam as a fundamentally peaceful religion and view al-Qaeda as foreign and repugnant.

Anyone who holds the view that Islam is a fundamentally peaceful religion simply choses to ignore the faith's origins, history, religious texts, and modern practitioners.

Islam is intractably linked to violence, as violence is the primary way the faith has been spread for the 1,400 years since it was founded. From early skirmishes to the Battle of Badr onward to today's wars and terrorists, Islam is rooted in forcing itself upon others. It it true that some Muslim cultures have declining support for al Qaeda and the Taliban, but that is only because fellow Muslims are the bulk of their victims. When al Qaeda and the Taliban kill non-Muslims, even those Muslims who disapprove of the groups as a whole find joy in the deaths of infidels.

As Muslims struggle with how to adapt their religion to the challenges of modernity, Americans should be showing respect for those in the second camp, not lumping them together with the terrorists and their supporters.

Here the writer either chooses to ignore key tenants of Islamic religion, or simply professes ignorance. Islam cannot be modernized. That is it based upon the unshakable and un-editable word of Allah is a key tenant of the faith. Author Salman Rushdie has had a fatwa (death sentence) on his head for decades for challenging that belief, by basing the title of his book The Satanic Verses on verses said to have been edited out of the early Koran. Islam cannot be modernized. It was designed from the outset to hold anyone attempting to modernize or change it as a blasphemer, worthy only of immediate and violent death. Islam requires philosophical stasis as a key element of it's controlling philosophy.

And if the Muslims who want to build a community center are no more responsible for, or supportive of, the attacks of Sept. 11 than any other Americans, how can their plans be "insensitive"? The hurt feelings must reflect misunderstanding or prejudice on the part of the objectors, and the right response to misunderstanding and prejudice is education, not appeasement.

This, like so much elitist pap, is based up self-congratulatory mental masturbation, as the writer congratulates him or herself for their tolerance. The imam pushing this project holds Americans to blame for the 9/11 terror attacks. Like many other mosques raised around the world, it would be purposefully constructed as a victory symbol, as Muslims have done at the sites of their conquests since the very beginning. It is no accident that many of the most revered mosques in Islam were once Christian churches or Jewish synagogues. Islam literally means "submission," and it demands that from all, whether they are Muslims or not.

The many Republicans and Democrats who have come out against the mosque—including the presiding Senate Majority leader and the recently retired Democratic National Committee chairman—are not bigots. They are realists. Opponents of this victory mosque are not prejudiced, but instead terribly aware of precisely what the mosque is meant to symbolize to the Islamic faith in every nation in which it is practiced.

This Washington Post op-ed serves only to expose the historical and theological ignorance of this declining newspaper's editorial board.

None of us should apologize for rejecting intolerance, especially intolerance in the guise of a suicidal multiculturalism.

Thanks Democrats: Insurance Costs for Large Companies to Skyrocket Because of Obamacare

And if you're and employee of a smaller company, you stand to get reamed as well.

The deficit will continue to balloon, the quality of care will decline, employers will necessarily slow hiring and pass along the insurance cost increases to their customers in the form of higher prices, and to their employees in the form of higher rates/lower salary to keep compensation packages reasonable.

What's not to love?

If I were a Republican or Independent candidate hoping to win in November, I'd build off the cascading series of failures Obamacare promises to bring, and make it's repeal a key part of my platform, making it understood that getting the federal government out of health care is the key to making it affordable to all. If my opponent voted for Obamacare, I'd hammer them for it, repeatedly asking them if they read and understand the bill before voting for it (they didn't). I'd repeatedly ask how they can justify voting for something they didn't understand, that added so much expense, and created so much uncertainty.

It needs to be made clear: Democrats who voted for Obamacare didn't vote for the best interests of their constituents. They can't even pretend that is the case, having voted for a bill none of them even understood. They cast their votes out of lockstep conformity, and because they lack leadership. The only Democrats who can claim to have exercised leadership in the debacle known as Obamacare are those that voted against it.

And how many of those were there?

I Confess... It's Me

Let me make things easy for Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi.

I funded all the opposition to the Ground Zero Mosque.

Contributions sent to my Paypal account, along with Adsense revenue from this blog, are the cash cows that have bribed almost 3 of every 4 Americans into oppressing the freedom of this aggrieved Muslim minority (those sources also fund my eBay purchases... but don't let my wife know).

Now that I have taken responsibility for my actions, Madam Speaker, I invite you to now move on to pressing charges against me and suggesting a suitable sentence for what I have done.

[idea for taking credit shamelessly stolen from fgmorley in the comments of this previous post.]

Pelosi Wants GZM Opponents Investigated

Nancy Pelosi wants an investigation of the majority of Americans opposed to the so-called Ground Zero mosque.

"There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how is this opposition to the mosque being funded," she said.

It's revealing to hear elitists like the Speaker admit that they believe the majority of Americans are their opposition. And it should be noted that they tend to view opposition to their desires as not just illegitimate, but worth of being subjected to inquiry and suppression.

November can't get here fast enough.

Faith No More

It may go up. It may go down. But right now the President's job disapproval is polling at 51%. Despite attempts my his media allies to spin it, this isn't about messaging.

This is about the public's rejection of incompetence.

The Campaign Against Obama's Propaganda War Heats Up

Ranking member Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) and the minority members of the House Oversight and Government Reform and Judiciary Committee continue to hammer the Obama Administration's unlawful use of propaganda using taxpayer funds.

This time, they've created a video hammering the Administration for bullying states into costly spending on roadside signs that promoted the failed stimulus.

The Administration was blasted for their unprecedented and unlawful use of propaganda yesterday in a Congressional report, and Issa had asked that the GAO investigate based upon those findings.

And Roger Simon of the Politico thought he was joking about Obama maybe being a half-term president...

Those Voices Don't Speak for the Rest of Us

Yeah, I'm sure you've probably seen it elsewhere.

But it's worth watching again.

Fake Tea Party Candidate Angling to Upset Nevada Senate Race

I wrote about Scott Ashjian's spoiler candidacy back in early March:

Unpopular nationally for being thin-skinned and surly, Reid is foundering in his home state of Nevada, where he faces reelection in November. Reid has consistently trailed Republican challengers in his reelection bid; he trails all four in recent polls. Without a major shift, Reid's political career would seem to be on the cusp of drawing to an ignoble end.

And then in walked Scott Ashjian.

Scott who?

You can be forgiven if you don't know who Scott Ashjian is, or where he came from, or if he's even a serious candidate. Even local journalists haven't had much luck figuring that out. All we know for certain is that Ashjian seems poised to jump into the 2010 Nevada Senate race as a third-party candidate representing the newly formed Tea Party of Nevada.

The group, established merely weeks ago, is attempting to trade on the name of the grassroots tea party movement. Though while tea party protests arose organically and simultaneously over the past year, the founding officers of the Tea Party of Nevada don't seem to have been active in any local or regional tea party events. In fact, they don't have any ties to the movement at all. If anything, they seem to be an odd mix of cranks and conspiracy theorists, fronted by a registered Democrat who once represented a reattached John Wayne Bobbit. And the perspective candidate Ashjian may as well be Nessie for his reclusiveness and unwillingness to give interviews or make public appearances.

The Tea Party of Nevada doesn’t seem to be a serious attempt at a third party, but instead seems intent on siphoning off enough support from Republican candidates leading in the polls to put Reid back in contention. Whether or not the Democrat-led Tea Party of Nevada is successful will likely depend on how well Republicans and real tea party activists do in exposing the group attempting to co-opt the votes of their more casual supporters.

Ashjian disappeared as a candidate for a while, but has just announced his intention to re-emerge.

His role is simple: siphon just a couple of percentage points away from Republican candidate Sharon Angle by exploiting the Tea Party name (he affiliated with no actual Tea Party groups in Nevada, other than the group that was created to support his candidacy) on the ballot. Ashjain, Reid and their supporters hope that the dirty trick will be enough to throw the election to the embattled Democrat.

Whether or not the plot succeeds depends upon Nevada's voters.

It's On: Issa Calls on GAO to Investigate Obama's Propaganda Mill

He actually phrases it a bit more delicately than that in his letter (PDF) to the Acting Comptroller General, but not by much.

Die Quietly, Ladies

The Washington Post reports this morning that the Food and Drug Administration is considering revoking the approval of the anti-breast cancer drug Avastin. Some are already identifying this as an attempt by the Obama Administration to use the FDA to give political cover for "Death Panel" Donald Berwick, Barack Obama's controversial recess appointment for the director of Administrator of the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS).

Berwick is a staunch advocate of the flawed and failing British Health Care system, including their care rationing schemes. Ace makes a very compelling argument that this is "the Chicago way" at its very worst. Obama continues to cravenly hide from the public the unarguable fact that under Obamacare, services and treatments will be rationed.

Call it a death panel. Call it whatever you will.

The fact remains that under Obamacare, a bureaucrat, not a doctor, will ultimately decide whether or not you life is worth the price of medications and procedures that could prolong your life, and/or the quality of your life.

Our friends on the left seem willing to sacrifice their mothers, wives, daughters and even themselves to this barbaric and deceptive practice.

Die quietly, ladies. It's for the good of the Party.

The Propaganda Presidency

I was afforded an embargoed copy of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform's report, "Analysis of the First Year of the Obama Administration: Public Relations and Propaganda Initiatives" this weekend, and it made for an interesting read.

You can ready all about it at Pajamas Media.

I'd also recommend Ed Morrissey's take on it at Hot Air.

Prevent It... Because They Want It, Too

[The following essay is a guest post from CY commenter Mike McDaniel, following up The Ground Zero Mosque: Prevent It, Because They Want It]

Among the advantages of adulthood are experience and perspective. If we pay attention, have good teachers—not only in classrooms--and an active conscience, we can put aside childish things like self-delusion, doing the same things over and over while expecting different results and hubris. If not, we become leftists, and if we're really impaired, President of the United States. We also learn--and it's interesting that these lessons appear to be most easily grasped and applied by God and gun clingers--that aphorisms that sounded remarkably profound when we were young are in reality, pretty stupid, and easily recognizably so, when we're adults. Thus is "love means never having to say you're sorry," transformed by experience, the ability to recognize and act upon reality and adult morality into "love means being able and willing to say you're sorry, and meaning it."

Not long ago I wrote about the Ground Zero Mosque and concluded that we should deny those who want to build the mosque primarily because they want it. The point was that those who want it are our intractable enemies, people who accept and honor no separation of church and state, who are using the First Amendment against us to conquer and destroy us. Experience and reason informed by reality should convince us that when our enemies repeatedly express their ardent desire to kill us, we should take them at their word and know that whatever they want is not in our best interests. Gun and God clinging adults understand this; those who inhabit a more exalted moral and intellectual plane of existence--such as Mayor Bloomberg and President Obama--do not and cannot. When our enemies use the Constitution--a document whose principles they neither recognize nor respect--against us, actual adults see it as a cynical, insulting bit of rhetorical propaganda. The morally and intellectual superior see it as an opportunity, and under the Rahm Emmanuel Doctrine, such opportunities are not to be wasted.

So Mr. Obama produced this bit of multi-culti, diverse tripe: "But let me be clear: as a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country. That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center…in lower Manhattan…This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are. The writ of our Founders must endure."

What are we to make of this? At best, these comments reveal a stunningly unsophisticated, surface misunderstanding of the First Amendment. And to suggest that the Founders would approve of such shallow, foolish rhetoric must certainly have Mr. Jefferson spinning in his grave like a piece of stock turning on a lathe. But for a man who is everything to everyone, a blank slate upon which anything may be projected, yet stands for nothing, such is hardly surprising.

Consider that everything that Mr. Obama has done in the field of foreign relations has been a failure, but not merely a failure, serial failures that benefit our enemies and harm America. Smart diplomacy? Muslim outreach? Speechifying to Muslims in Cairo? An open hand to the Iranians? To the Palestinians? Bowing to despots? Apologizing to those who wish us ill? Not so successful; not so smart. In fact, Obama has been successful only in undermining American interests and the interests of America's historic allies. Insulting England? Insulting Israel? Backstabbing the Czechs and Poles? Letting the North Koreans get away with murder? Telling our enemies exactly when we'll be cutting and running from war zones? All stunningly successful—for our enemies.

Mr. Obama, if his followers are to be believed, is one of the most brilliant minds mankind has yet produced. Constitutional law professor, community organizer, Nobel Peace Prize Winner, a man who will unite the world, sweep aside all division, hatred and racism, heal the planet and reduce the oceans. Yet reality reveals that he was merely an adjunct teacher, never a professor. His brilliance appears, more and more, limited to teleprompter reading. Even he cannot explain what a community organizer is or does. Even he admitted that he doesn't deserve the Nobel Prize, not that he allowed that fact to get in the way of accepting it. He has, in less than two years, driven Americans farther apart than at any time in memory, inciting rather than calming racial tribulation. The planet remains in need of healing and the seas are as restless and flush as ever.

Mr. Obama's greatest failure, one that his words reveal, is his inability and unwillingness to recognize that we are at war. He cannot accept that we have been at war since at least the Carter administration and its Iranian hostage crisis. He cannot understand that even before 9-11, some 800 Americans were killed by our enemies around the world. A president who willfully refuses to identify our enemy surely cannot accept that we are engaged in a war for survival. It is, to be sure, a war the Democrats prefer to ignore, focused like a laser on domestic affairs as they always are (with the exception of adopting foreign policies that harm American interests). And until 9-11, we had the luxury, in terms of economics, world influence and power, to more or less ignore the fact that we were fighting a war that would determine the future of western civilization, and that may well plunge humanity into another dark age from which no Renaissance may be possible.

Even by Democrat standards, Mr. Obama is unique in his obtuseness, in his stubborn refusal not only to accept the reality of the war that is very interested in him despite his determination to ignore it, but in his utter disdain for the greatness of America and the greatness of the Constitution and the fundamental freedoms it reflects. Such behavior does not indicate intelligence, experience and adult responsibility, but a petulantly childish stubbornness, and a refusal to accept that doing things the same way over and over again does not yield better results, results favorable to American interests and the survival of civilization. But Mr. Obama's comments do reflect his default beliefs, shallow and destructive though they are.

What, then, do we make of these comments, hastily flung at the public when his original comments didn't work as intended? "I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding." Right. Apparently Mr. Obama's original comments, which seemed pretty profound, at least to him and those who write for his teleprompter, seemed pretty stupid to the semi-adults among his advisors only hours after their utterance. One can only imagine the volume and intensity of the outcry reaching the White House that would cause such a rapid and clumsy "clarification."

The facts remain, whether Mr. Obama and his followers can understand or accept them: Those who wish to build the mosque are our enemies who plan to use it as a propaganda tool, a victory in a war that they expect to fight for a very long time to eventual victory. They know that they can never defeat us on the battlefield, but that they can defeat us in the propaganda war at home and around the world, just as the North Vietnamese did, with substantial help from Democrat politicians and the news media. The Koran gives Muslims Allah's blessing to lie to infidels in the furtherance of Jihad. The First Amendment does not empower the followers of any religion to build anything they want wherever they want it. The Constitution, according not only to the Founders, about whom Mr. Obama knows so little, but to the Supreme Court, cannot be read as a suicide pact.

When a President of the United States actively supports a propaganda victory by our enemy, particularly during a period of open, declared warfare, it is reasonable to inquire as to exactly whom that President represents and why. Has he grown up and put away childish beliefs and reasoning? Tragically, a slight alteration of my original point is now required. We must deny the mosque because they, the Mayor of New York City, many Democrats, and the President of the United States, want it.

Obama Backs Away On Manhattan Mosque Defense

Barack Obama came out as being supportive of the so-called Ground Zero mosque proposal, but quickly revised his phrasing yesterday in the wake of immediate public criticism.

Speaking to reporters today, President Obama drew a sharp line under his comments last night, insisting that his defense of the right to build a mosque does not mean he supports the project.

"I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding," he said.

And with that, Sir Robin bravely ran away.

An Affront from Now to 9/11, to the Shores of Tripoli

Remember when Air Force One buzzed Manhattan for a photo op and spread terror among New York City, still (understandably) sensitive of careening airliners because of 9/11?

The Prince of Snides shows that kind of sensitivity again.

But let me be clear: as a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country. That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances. This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country, and will not be treated differently by their government, is essential to who we are. The writ of our Founders must endure.

The Won cites Jefferson's views of religious tolerance... accidentally underscoring the fact that the United States has been fighting against militant Islam since the very founding of our nation.

This is also the same Thomas Jefferson who said:

"[a] strict observance of the written law is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to the written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property and all those who are enjoying them with us; thus absurdly sacrificing the ends to the means."

We are led—and I use that term with all due reservation—by a would-be ruling class that repeatedly bows in supplication instead of celebrating American exceptionalism. Our current President is just the latest feckless example of that spineless mold.

There are rights, and there are rights. Mass murderers never have the right to prance and pose over the remains of their victims. If Barack Obama doesn't understand that, he simply is not fit to be President, and is barely worthy of being called a citizen.

Kossack: 9/11 was "More About Optics than Actual Harm."

A blogger at the popular progressive blog Daily Kos has attempted to smear many Americans with a very wide brush of anti-Islamic bigotry, while at the same time espousing a decidedly bizarre progressive view of the worst terror attack in this nation's history.

...a new CNN poll that shows that 68% of the nation opposes the construction of the community center in Manhattan. The question asked was about a mosque which I find a little misleading, and it used the inflammatory "Ground Zero" name for the site of the Twin Towers, but that is not really the point. This new data shows a couple of things that we know already to be true. First off, the majority when asked their opinion will almost always be against the rights of a minority. This is a particular hot issue because of the 9/11 attacks where carried out by Muslims, but it is to be expected even if that were not the case.

Muslims are only a small minority in the United States, with somewhere between 1.3 million and 7 million of our citizens being practitioners of this faith. This makes Muslims between .3% and 2.1% of the over all population. However world wide the followers of Islam are closer to 25% of the planetary population.

Given that they are such a small minority in this nation, it is odd that so many of our fellow citizens see them as such a threat. Yes, the 9/11 attacks were horrific, but they were more about optics than actual harm. The economy was already taking a hit before the Twin Towers fell. The reaction of the nation to seeing two major buildings in New York fall on T.V. has boosted the attack out of proportion. While the loss of even a single life is to be condemned and the devastation these deaths caused the families of those killed, more than this number of teens are killed every year in car crashes. These are also tragic losses but we do not make the kind of high profile issue of it that the 9/11 attacks are.

It is this sort of disconnected, community-based reality that these elitists have fabricated for themselves that had led the majority of the nation to find these elitists not just out of touch, but dangerously out of step with the rest of the nation.

There is certainly plenty of room to debate whether or not the contested Islamic community center and mosque being proposed in lower Manhattan is appropriate. There is room to debate whether or not whether Islam, as a oppressive and intractably conjoined mixture of religion and a totalitarian political movement, is what the Founders meant to extend unlimited protections to under the First Amendment.

Trivializing the losses of 9/11, both personal and cultural, is not a way to win your argument.

Dear America: Liberals Want You to Know How They Feel About You

The Coffee Party was a flop. The Other 95% bombed. Crash the Tea Party made progressives a laughingstock. So can they make it any worse for themselves?

Yes they can!

Dem group launches 'F*ck Tea' campaign

Last summer, Democrats argued that the Tea Party movement was the astroturf creation of corporate groups. Now that the grass-roots conservative resurgence has emerged as a clear force on the right, the left is making a different case: That tea parties are simply the enemy.

To that end, the Agenda Project, a new, progressive group with roots in New York's fundraising scene and a goal of strengthening the progressive movement, has launched the "F.*.c.k. Tea project," which is aimed, the group's founder Erica Payne wrote in an e-mail this morning, "to dismiss the Tea Party and promote the progressive cause."

The article goes on to say that Payne is a co-founder of a group of liberal mega-donors that ultimately fund the Center for American Progress, Media Matters and Think Progress. They also have a profane video (NSFW) that mocks Tea Party supporters and imagines liberals as clever and urbane.

You really must see it to believe it.

My advice? Distribute this far and wide, without distortion. Let America know what the would-be ruling class thinks about them in their quest for more and more power. Let our citizens know how Democratic elitists (and some Republicans as well) feel about their concerns about our economy, our sovereignty, and our nation's future.

I expected this kind of "let them eat tapas" attitude from Michelle Antoinette in private, but never expected her palace guard to be so open about their disdain for the concerns of the majority of America in public.

Another Debunking of the Laredo Invasion

Regular reader Bill Smith forwarded me this story from Texas GOP Vote that continues to blow gaping holes in the claims of the sensationalists I've dubbed the "Laredo Truthers."

Just like the people they were named after, the complete lack of evidence supporting their argument only deepens their suspicions that a cover-up must have occurred, and the less evidence there is, the higher the conspiracy must go.

The probability that there never was an incident, or there was a hoax, or minor infraction embellished to the point of being unrecognizable is far less fun to promote, and at this point, several of the key promoters of this story have bet all their credibility on it being true.

I'll let you pick who to trust.

The Laredo Truthers Ride Again

The same folks that bought San Diego-based rumors of a Texas invasion by drug cartels several weeks ago are standing by their stories, and now attempting to claim vindication.

Kimberly Dvorak, the San Diego County Political Buzz Examiner that started the story, now claims to have evidence that her story is true.

Her evidence? An image that she claims is a a screen from a police blotter report.

Digger's Realm is now trumpeting this as absolution, as is Mondo Frazier from Death by an Thousand Papercuts and Big Journalism.

They choose to believe that a supposed computer screen, obtained (or fabricated) by unrevealed sources, that cites neither the name or address of the ranch or the person making the call to law enforcement, proves their case.

The want us to believe that the police officers and sheriffs units that weren't ID'd were deployed, and that the lack of any report of contact or observation by these unknown LEOs is justification for the claims that the various law enforcement agencies and named officials cited in the story who said it didn't happen, are lying.

We still don't have an address. We still don't have a victim. We still don't have anyone with any eyewitness accounts, or physical evidence that such an event took place.

People will believe what they want, regardless of facts. That is the only evidence of anything I've even been able to discern regarding this story.

Another Corruptocrat Dies

Another corrupt member of the would-be ruling class goes to meet his eternal judge.

Former Rep. Dan Rostenkowski, the Chicago Democrat who became the leading architect of congressional tax policy in the Reagan era but later went to federal prison for corruption, died Wednesday, a family friend said. He was 82.

The Ground Zero Mosque: Prevent It, Because the Want It

[The following essay is a guest post from CY commenter Mike McDaniel]

"The capitalists will sell us the rope which we will use to hang them!" Vladimir Ilyich Lenin was fond of saying.  While there was a kernel of truth in his observation, not only did Lenin and his successors fail to understand their enemy, ultimately the Soviets couldn't afford to build the gallows.  Cultural misunderstanding and self delusion have been the downfall of more than one nation.

And so we find ourselves contemplating the construction of a mosque overshadowing Ground Zero.  Many Muslims and a great many leftists are speaking with one voice and using the same propaganda techniques.  Foremost among them is a sort of constitutional Ju-Jitsu whereby the freedoms and tolerance inherent in the Constitution and the Judeo-Christian ethic are used against America.

"Tolerance demands that we allow Muslims to build a Mosque wherever they want but particularly here!  Freedom of religion!  Freedom of speech!  Freedom of assembly and association!  Tolerance!  Muslims around the world will see that we like them and they in turn will like us!  Muslims have legitimate grievances and building the mosque will address them!  They want to build it there to establish a dialogue!  It's a community center where we can all come together and build, you know, like, a bridge or a community or something!"  They cry, boldly thrusting their receding chins fractions of an inch forward.

There is one reason to prevent the construction of this mosque that is compelling and self evident.  It is the only reason we need:  We should prevent it because they want it.

Among the primary concerns of any faith congregation building a house of worship is the cost of land. Location is an associated concern, of course, but we are to believe that the particular Muslim congregation (does such a congregation exist?) behind this mosque thinks it, first and foremost, a good idea to build on some of the most expensive real estate on the planet? Are NYC area Muslims forced to worship exposed to the cruel elements? Are there no other mosques in NYC? Are there no other landowners who would be delighted to sell land elsewhere in the area for millions, perhaps tens of millions less?

While we justly revere the First Amendment, Muslims cannot, not if they are strictly observant Muslims. The Constitution establishes no right to build a church wherever one wishes, nor does a church have any overarching moral claim (absent compelling historical issues) to a particular plot of land. Zoning laws can and do prevail. The democratic, secular law takes precedence.

Islam, which means "submission," makes no distinction between church and state. In fact, under Sharia, the church is the super state. Let us keep in mind that Islam is not, in fact, a religion of peace, but a violent, expansionist creed whose holy text spells out in substantial detail exactly how to conquer and treat the conquered who have the choice of converting to Islam, accepting slavery (dhimmitude), or death. In fact, when various islamist lunatics issue mandates, they commonly demand that the infidels (all non-Muslims) they wish to attack (that's us, folks) convert to Islam. Americans tend to think they're just engaging in silly rhetoric, but they are scrupulously following their scripture, which requires them to make that very offer. If the offer is rejected they may slaughter the infidels with Allah's blessing.

While it is undeniably true that most Muslims do practice cultural and religious tolerance and have no intention of undertaking Jihad against infidels, this speaks only to their individual humanity and/or lack of bloodlust. It certainly does not reflect the undeniable, historic dictates of their faith and the tens of millions of Muslims who have taken or will take the path of Jihad. In short, Islam, at its core, is not compatible with democracy, freedom of religion, or tolerance. It does require that all faithful Muslims labor to take over the world for Islam and to establish Sharia everywhere. And where Sharia rules, democracy and western civilization are, of necessity, obliterated. The self deluded may imagine that Sharia and individual freedom can peacefully coexist in mutually tolerant bliss, but Islamists have no such misapprehensions.

Ah, tolerance! Tolerance is a luxury that is affordable only in advanced, democratic civilizations that share the same political and cultural assumptions. We can be sure that the Methodist congregation building a new church down the street will not be plotting to kill Catholics, or anyone else for that matter. We can tolerate them because we know that they will play by the rules, and will, in return, tolerate us. Should one member of that church decide to reject all religion or to become a Lutheran, no religious hit will be issued by the Methodists because freedom of religion, in conscience and practice, is fundamental to America. And should a Baptist minister suspect that a member of his congregation is homosexual or having an affair, he will not order their torture, mutilation or death because he has no such power or inclination. All know that should they decide to visit another church, they will be welcomed.

Sadly, none of this is true with Islam, and this is where so many well intentioned Christians and Americans make a fundamental mistake: They assume that Muslims, that people raised in other nations and cultures, are just like us. They believe that our reasoning, our traditions, our arguments will be convincing to peoples who may as well be from another planet in their ability and inclination to accept American values and culture. They know, intellectually, that many Muslims murder their wives, sisters, mothers and daughters for real or imagined offenses against family honor. They know that many Muslim men consider it their religious, manly duty to beat women. They know that in many Muslim nations, livestock are treated better than women. They know that under Sharia, there is no such thing as due process, and punishments are medieval. They know that homosexuals are routinely slaughtered. They may even be willing to admit that Islam is murderously hostile to virtually every social and political cause they hold dear. They may even admit that tens of millions of Muslims are actively training and plotting to kill all infidels, and particularly Israelis and Americans. They know that the idea of a Muslim "community center" in a mosque is an oxymoron because no infidel is allowed to set foot in a mosque, where Muslim men and women are strictly segregated. Yet in the same breath, they earnestly say "but," and continue to believe that this time, this gesture, this appeasement, their individual force of personality, will prevail and magically turn Martians into Americans. If only the American president, The One, he of the Muslim middle name, which must never be spoken to or by infidels, only reaches out to the Muslim world from a Muslim capital, his rhetoric will transform Islam as it is attempting to transform America. As Sarah Palin might say, "how's that hope and change and outreach working out for you?"

Let us not forget too the power of symbolism for Muslims, specifically, the Bin Laden "strong horse" symbolism. For Americans, extending mercy and practicing tolerance are virtues, signs of strength, character and altruism. For traditional Muslims, mercy is extended only to other Muslims. Infidels who offer it during Jihad are weak horses. Historically, Muslims conquering other lands and faiths have razed the houses of worship of the conquered and erected mosques on their foundations. Could any symbolism be more obvious? Recall, if you will, how untold millions of Muslims around the world, most of whom will likely never undertake Jihad, danced in the streets with rapturous glee at the news of 9-11. Symbolism. Building a mosque on Ground Zero would be the ultimate expression of world wide jihadist triumphalism, akin to dancing on the grave of an enemy. That's not going to happen, so they're going for the next best thing. They believe that we will sell them the rope that they'll use to hang us, or in this case, the real estate.

Our Constitution does enshrine fundamental liberties such as the freedom to worship as conscience dictates, and that freedom is extended to any faith willing to reciprocate the liberty, the adherence to the rule of secular law and the tolerance that those freedoms promise and require. But the old axiom that the Constitution is not a suicide pact applies with unique strength here. Relatives of 9-11 victims opposing the mosque are not engaging in irrational expressions of emotion, but tapping into one of the fundamental truths of democracy: Allowing enemies to use our Constitution against us is itself un-American and undemocratic. This kind of cultural misunderstanding, this kind of conceit that places principle above reality can be deadly.

We should, we must, prevent the success of what is unmistakably vile propaganda in furtherance of a declared war against America and western civilization. Many leftists and their allies won't go so far as to admit that we are at war with Islamist forces determined to kill or enslave us all. They won't even speak the name of our enemy. The war proceeds apace nonetheless.

Denied a Ground Zero mosque, Muslims will not be in any way harmed. For a wide variety of reasons, plans to build churches are abandoned every day across the land. There are thousands of mosques wherein Muslims are free to worship, but not here, not on or near this hallowed ground, not now, not ever. This ultimate strong horse symbol, short of world Muslim domination, must be crushed, as Shakespeare put it in Julius Caesar, in the shell.

We should, we must, prevent it because they want it.

Otter Crash Kills Five, Including Former Senator

Via Fox News:

Former Alaska Sen. Ted Stevens, one of the longest-serving senators in U.S. history and a tireless advocate for his state, was killed in a plane crash southwest of Anchorage Monday.

A spokesman for the family, former chief of staff Mitch Rose, confirmed to Fox News that Stevens was among the five dead. He was 86. Colleagues of the veteran lawmaker, who had waited all day to learn of Stevens' condition, mourned his loss and described him as an Alaskan "hero."

Hero to some, example of entrenched corruption to others, Stevens was the third prominent and controversial old guard Senator to die in recent memory, with Ted Kennedy (D-MA) and Robert Byrd (D-WV) also passing away within the past year.

Defending Liberty

Now posted as well at Andrew Breitbart's Big Government.

Update: Greg at Rhymes with Right riffs of this in We Are The Revolution People.

Defending Liberty

Over the course of the past week I've written several entries that have infuriated the would-be tyrants among us.

• A Nation on the Edge of Revolt warned that "either the American people—not extremists, but good and decent patriots like your neighbors and yourselves—will revolt and destroy the ruling class and reform our government based upon first principles, or the United States we know as our forefather conceived it is dead."
• Closer to Midnight attempted to answer a veteran's question about why patriotic Americans that value our First Principles should prepare for a possible conflict if the corruption of our government cannot be tamed at the ballot box.
• We Get Letters! and We Get (More) Letters! chronicle the typical threats issued by followers when they cannot intellectually defend their unconstitutional actions with a reasoned justification for their behavior.
• The Edict-Makers notes the continued destructive path of the would-be ruling class, and the abuses they would heap upon the Constitution and citizens in their desperate quest to grab more power for themselves.
• Pre-Revolutionary, last but not least in this series of posts, highlights the revelations of experienced Democratic operative Pat Caddell as he notes the fracturing of his party and the attempt of the elites in the party to rule instead of serve the American people.

It will come as no surprise at all that those institutions and individuals that serve as adjuncts to the would-be ruling class have attacked this series of posts.

Media Matters attacked them twice. Conservative media figures openly discussing revolution...again places me among the company of Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, and Rush Limbaugh as some of the conservatives in the media that note well and understand this point in history... though they obviously offer their own spin to evoke a response from their readers.

Wash. Examiner's Owens suggests right-wing violence will be necessary, hopes we "feel threatened" is their same-day response to Closer to Midnight (link above), partnered with a none-too-subtle attempt to pressure the Washington Examiner into silencing me and others who would raise the alarm about the constitutional abuses and usurpations being orchestrated by their masters.

Other leftists have followed the lead of Media Matters, and continue down the path of disinformation they hope will help them divide and conquer this nation's citizens.

At left-wing Daily Kos, "bernardpliers" attempts to claim that I advocate " an explicitly racial war." The author selectively drops quotes from this blog in this entry, and of course, not one of them supports anything at all like a conflict driven by concerns over race. Only the left is concerned with race. Unsurprisingly, the rest of the post concerns itself with noting possible points of division within the various groups opposing their encroaching tyranny, instead of attempting to defend their actions and goals.

The "divide and conquer through race" strategy is nakedly on display at Balloon Juice as well, where "Dennis G." makes his attempt to claim that opposition to would-be ruling class machinations are nothing more or less than an attempt to revive his vision of the Confederacy of the Civil War.

This axis of weevils may be blatantly dishonest, but they have a clear agenda. They would like to portray opposition to their plans as racists. They would like to portray political and media figures (even admittedly minor ones such as myself) that stand in opposition to their usurpation of liberty as neo-confederates, attaching the stigma of slavery and defeat to their opposition. It is a clever rhetorical device and an emotional one. It will succeed in inflaming the easily led, but the primary goal of this attempt at labeling their opposition is to try to silence the good and decent people who recognize our present Constitutional crisis, and would stand against it.

So let us take on this attempt at division and deception as directly as possible.

Liberty is colorblind. It does not see in shades of yellow or beige or brown or black. Liberty speaks without accent, and with all of them. It cares not whether your ancestors hail from misty islands, verdant savannahs, frigid steppes, or tropical jungles. Liberty is liberty, freedom of men and women, freedom of thought, freedom of the spirit, and freedom from constriction and stasis, that all real men and women crave like water or air.

We care about liberty. We are devoted to our nation, because we acknowledge and weigh its faults and superlatives, and know that we represent the best hope for true freedom and equality mankind has to offer. We are not blind to the mistakes and evils of our collective past; we seek them out, and overcome them. We will not be guilted into becoming a second-class nation because some choose to cling to division as a method of control.

We are revolutionary. We are evolutionary. We look to restore the government to its proper role, as servant of the people. It must once again be made into a precision instrument that empowers, replacing this corrupting enterprise that seeks to punish and enslave the people for the enrichment of the self-styled elite.

Good men and women know that the story of these United States is far from over, and we will not accept the leftist trope that our nation's best days are behind us. We are a nation of incredible ingenuity, kindness, and hope. We are a nation of dreamers, but we are also a nation of action.

We will not be guilted into silence, nor bullied into becoming a lesser state.

We will not stand by and trade the bright future of our nation for the weight of oppression, and we will not be silenced or defined by those comfortable in their chains.

Feel pity for the poor souls who wallow in the misery of mediocrity and unrequited dreams, but refuse to be defined by them. We are Americans, citizens of the United States, defenders of liberty and represent the best this world has to offer.

And we will never accept being anything less.

Cop-Killing Leftist Terrorist Buck Dies

Marilyn Buck, another friend of Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn involved in left-wing terrorism with The Weather Underground and Black Liberation Army, has died:

On Oct. 20, 1981, she was part of a group of Weather Underground and Black Liberation Army members who ambushed a Brink's armored car carrying $1.6 million at a mall in Nanuet, N.Y.

One guard was killed at the scene. A second was badly wounded. Two police officers were subsequently killed after they pulled over one of the getaway cars.
Buck accidentally shot herself in the leg during the gun battle with police, but she escaped and remained free for four years.

During that time, she was involved in a series of bombings that included a 1983 nighttime blast at the Capitol that didn't hurt anyone but damaged Senate offices. The bomb was purportedly placed to protest the U.S. invasion of Grenada.

Liberals love to pretend that their terrorist acts were a relic of the 1960s, but Buck and her allies were committing murders, bombings, and armed robbery well into the 1980s. Buck was captured in 1984 and confessed to some of her crimes in 1988 to protect her co-conspirators.

Bernadine Dohrn was thought to be an accomplice during the Brinks robbery/murders in 1981, and did seven months for criminal obstruction of justice related to that case. Bill Ayers was at Banks College. Barack Obama was blocks away at nearby Columbia.

We Get (More) Letters!

Omar Little (omar.little2009@gmail.com) seems to have the same wonderful outlook on life that Omar Thorton does... and I think he's a fan!

Bring the revolution on you racist c**kscker.
If you like, I'll even let you take the first shot. At me. I'll send you my address. You can come to my house. Bring a nuclear bomb if you want. I'll take you weapon from your weak racist *ss, shove it up your *ss and pull the trigger until it goes click. Because it is obvious that you racist c**ksucker confederates need yet another *ss kicking.

You are a typical racist f**k - all loud talk, but a weak *ss p*ssy when someone tells you to jump.

You'll note that Omar uses the same reason and eloquence we've come to expect from the SEIU crowd. He speaks the language of violence well, and he certainly thinks it is intimidating.

But he isn't done yet.

Or maybe I'll come down to your house
And burn the flag of treason on your front lawn. I'll stand there, a symbol of all that liberalism you hate, your sworn enemy. I'll give you as long as it takes for your flag to burn to take your shot. But you're a p*ssy and probably don't even own a gun.

I'm amused. I told him as much.

We should expect more "love letters" from people like Omar, individuals that either imagine themselves to be part of the would-be ruling class, or who are content to subsist on the scraps of liberty that would remain if such tyranny is fully realized. You'll note that like our last letter writer he's full of vitriol... just not much else.

The Tone-Deaf Tour Continues

Michelle Obama's conspicuous consumption is even infuriating our allies, including the U.K.'s Daily Mail, which rips the free-spending First Lady and her entourage:

Michelle Obama today faced a fresh wave of attacks over her lavish break in Spain with 40 friends, which could easily cost U.S. taxpayers a staggering £50,000 a day.

The First Lady has been lambasted for her extravagance at a time when the economy is still struggling. One blogger went so far as to brand her a modern-day Marie Antoinette.

And her critics will be further annoyed when they learn that the president's wife had a Spanish beach closed off today so that she, her daughter and their entourage could go for a swim.

I'm sure if they made an effort they could find a way to plot a more tone-deaf public spectacle to reinforce the notion that the first family is grossly out of touch with the economic pains being experienced by so many Americans... but it might be tough.

Brady Center VP Assaulted

Verbally. By what should have been a receptive audience.

Poor Dennis Henigan... Even the Huffington Post audience knows better than to listen to him anymore, and they shred him in the comments for his ignoble effort.

When you lie for a living, don't be surprised when even the dimmer members of your audience eventually turn on you.

Howard Zinn, The Left's Darling Dead Propagandist

Howard Zinn has long been a darling of pseudo-intelligent leftists (Matt Damon and Ben Affleck come to mind) and his "People's History of the United States" has long been lauded by the progressive university. Because of his near rock star popularity and influence among the self-styled intelligensia it is a bit surprising that information recently declassified by the FBI showing that Zinn was an active communist has seen so little exposure.

Little, as in next to no media exposure at all.

While Google's search-bot is not the be-all, end-all of devices to ascertain whether or not a story has been buried, I think it is fair to say that the ruling class that suckled at Zinn's anti-American teat are more than a little embarrassed at his outing, and hope to keep his tale under wraps. Online news outlets such as Pajamas Media are publicizing the scandalous story, but you are seeing no reaction whatsoever to this discovery on cable or network news, in newspapers, or in political magazines like you would if it was discovered that a prominent conservative academic was a member of a radical right wing group that we were at ideological war with for half a century.

Why the silence?

It is simple, really.

Dead communist Zinn is still very much the hero for the left; they dare not tarnish his hallowed image. Further, his contemporaries still exist, and his students still carry great influence in the Democrat/Media complex... you may argue that thy are the Democrat/media complex. Rest assured, they are not silent to protect Zinn's legacy.

They are silent to protect themselves.

Remembering Omar Thorton, Thief, Murderer, and Would-be Media Victim

I'm still waiting for The Won to declare that Omar Thorton "acted stupidly" in going on a racist shooting spree after being caught on tape as a thief and fired, but you know that isn't going to happen. Not even after the murderer called 911 and confessed before killing himself.

Omar Thornton, 34, called 911 after shooting 10 co-workers -- eight fatally -- on Tuesday morning at Hartford Distributors. He introduced himself as "the shooter over in Manchester" and said he was hiding in the building, but would not say where.

"You probably want to know the reason why I shot this place up," he said, his voice steady. "This place is a racist place. They treat me bad over here. They treat all the black employees bad over here, too.

"So I took into my own hands and handled the problem," he said. "I wish I could have got more of the people."

Omar Thorton, Facebook fan of Barack Obama, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, beer theft and racism, is dead, but only after murdering eight others who weren't thieves.

The media wants to bend to his family's wishes to brand him a victim. No. Omar Thorton was a thief. Omar Thorton was a murder. Racism? A thug's petty excuse for mass murder.

Omar Thorton is going to rot in Hell.

I wonder how long it will be before the left puts him on a tee shirt.

Pre-Revolutionary

I was surfing by Ace's place and caught this extraordinary bit of video of Democrat Pat Caddell discussing the fracturing of his party, among far more ominous rumblings. Watch it all the way through. I'll wait.

Ace's reaction is dead on, as is Caddell's.

The Democratic Party has fractured (past tense), and the elitist extremists in the Democratic leadership are giddy at the thought of purging themselves of moderate Democrats. Waxman's admission is the symptom of a larger disease, an arrogant ruling class mentality that neither respects the will of the American people, nor the separation of powers, nor the Constitution.

Says Caddell:

The Democratic Party has essentially been hijacked by an educated—over-educated—elite group, who basically don't care about the people who constitute the Democratic Party...

[snip]
It's a much graver constitutional crisis. They believe we have a situation where 21% of the people believe that the government is operating with the consent of the governed, from the Declaration of Independence. 21. 68% say no. 57% of the people in a CNN poll a few months ago said they believe that the federal government is becoming a direct and immediate threat to their own freedom. Now, I'm telling you that is pre-revolutionary.

And in democratic—and what is happening is this sense of pushing people—'we're going to shove this down your throat, we're going to shove this, we know better for you,' the issue is very simple: who is sovereign in the country, the people, or the political class?

It is quite obvious that the elites believe that they are the sovereign powers and the arbiters of our fates. It is just as certain that they feel entitled to that power, are intent on keeping that power, and have shelved the Constitution in favor of making this a nation of men, not a nation of law. The have illusions of keeping that power to themselves, and have put only the thinnest of veneers over their attempt to create a nation where the people serve the ruling class.

Even more shocking? The don't seem to care and don't even try to hide their disdain for the people, the culture, or our shared history.

Ace vents:

When it was just a policy debate, it was intellectual.

But now they've gone and made it personal.

That was a mistake. Because you can sell people down the river if you can keep them asleep while you do it.

When you rouse them...? When you alert them...? When you incense them...?

Tougher.

And it's not just personal, but fundamental: Who decides in America? The people, as the books claim? Or the elite, as common practice seems to have it?

And so the rage.

And soon the fire.

What astounds me about our would be rulers is the utter contempt with which they hold their constituents. They act as if their power grab is complete and they don't even need to pay lip service to respecting the law or the people.

This will go badly for all concerned. It remains to be seen if it will go violently.

For the First Time In Her Life This Vacation, Michelle Obama is Proud to be an American Living Large On the Taxpayer's Dime

Let them eat flan:

While many of us are struggling, the First Lady is spending the next few days in a five-star hotel on the chic Costa del Sol in southern Spain with 40 of her "closest friends." According to CNN, the group is expected to occupy 60 to 70 rooms, more than a third of the lodgings at the 160-room resort. Not exactly what one would call cutting back in troubled times.

Reports are calling the lodgings of Obama's Spanish fiesta, the Hotel Villa Padierna in Marbella, "luxurious," "posh" and "a millionaires' playground." Estimated room rate per night? Up to a staggering $2,500. Method of transportation? Air Force Two.

To be clear, what the Obamas do with their money is one thing; what they do with ours is another. Transporting and housing the estimated 70 Secret Service agents who will flank the material girl will cost the taxpayers a pretty penny.

Andrea Tantaros compares Michelle Obama to a modern-day Marie Antoinette, but I suspect that comparison is unfair. There is no evidence Obama favors another country as Antoinette did Austria, just that she has so little "like" for this one.

The Edict-Makers

My inbox has been flooded with a stream of disturbing information overnight and this morning... and sadly, there seems to be a common theme.

The DNC Stimulus
James Pethokoukis warns of of a possible "August surprise" from President Obama. There are hints that the President may leverage the Bush-era HARP (Home Affordable Refinance Program) to forgive some mortgage debt for the millions of Americans that are upside down a total of $800 billion. The bailout would amount to a backdoor stimulus package, sidestepping bi-partisan opposition in the Senate to increasing the debt. The reason for the backdoor bailout? Utterly cynical.

The nascent recovery is already running out of steam. Wall Street economists just downgraded the government’s second-quarter GDP estimate of 2.4 percent to around 1.7 percent. And as even Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner is warning, the unemployment rate may well begin to rise back toward the politically toxic 10 percent level given such sluggish growth. Many in the White House thought the unemployment rate would be dropping sharply by this point in the recovery.

But that is not happening. What is happening is that the president's approval ratings are continuing to erode, as are Democratic election polls. Democrats are in real danger of losing the House and almost losing the Senate. The mortgage Hail Mary would be a last-gasp effort to prevent this from happening and to save the Obama agenda. The political calculation is that the number of grateful Americans would be greater than those offended that they — and their children and their grandchildren — would be paying for someone else's mortgage woes.

The purpose of the possible debt-increasing backdoor stimulus is to pay-off millions of banking industry donations to the Democratic Party, while hoping to limit the damage to Democrats in November.

It does nothing to help revive the economy.

Backdoor Amnesty
Keeping up the theme of ruling class abuse originating in the Oval Office is a warning that the White House may attempt to use "administrative alternatives" to bypass Congressional opposition and create a stealth amnesty for criminal aliens:

Addressed to U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services Director Alejandro Mayorkas and tellingly entitled "Administrative Alternatives to Comprehensive Immigration Reform," the 11-page memo proposes a nonlegislative amnesty that uses executive orders and other legally questionable methods as the basis to circumvent congressional intent.

"It is theoretically possible to grant deferred action (i.e. non enforcement) to an unrestricted number of unlawfully present individuals," the memo cheerfully points out. Its four authors include USCIS Chief Counsel Roxana Bacon and chief of policy and strategy Denise Vanison, two former immigration attorneys who in effect are urging a modern version of the antebellum Sen. John C. Calhoun's nullification theory.

You'll note that we're finding out about these attempts to subvert the rule of law and will of the people from the conservative media... not Congress, nor their allies in the MSM. Both of these schemes usurp Congressional power for a corrupt and abusive executive branch, but as they serve the will of the would-be ruling class as a whole, congressional leaders are silent.

They aren't going to stick their necks out and risk the wrath of the people if they can feign ignorance or blame the President for doing what they want.

A Widening Gulf
Fittingly, Mark Tapscott rounds out today's discoveries with an editorial pointing out the obvious and growing gulf between the political class of would-be rulers and the majority of Americans:

Big majorities of Mainstream America also think the Political Class couldn't care less about what regular folks think, and most mainstreamers are embarrassed by the behavior of the Political Class. Mainstream Americans think cutting government spending and reducing deficits are good for the economy, Political Class members think doing that will harm the economy.

That the gulf between these two Americas is growing wider is seen most disturbingly in Rasmussen's finding that less than a quarter of Mainstream America now believe the government has the consent of the governed. Washington has a profound credibility crisis.

That Rasmussen's results are far from unique or isolated is seen in the Gallup Poll's most recent finding that only 11 percent of those surveyed have confidence in Congress and only a third have confidence in the presidency.

So how do we explain these two Americas? Rasmussen says his data shows that "the American people don't want to be governed from the left, the right or the center. The American people want to govern themselves."

Americans are increasingly disenchanted with corrupt politicians, elitist media, and disconnected academics, precisely at a moment in history when these would-be rulers have chosen to become more overt in both their quest for power and their contempt of our culture, history, and laws.

A collision course seems imminent.

Judge Strikes Down Prop.8 in CA

The state's gay marriage ban is shot down... at least temporarily:

A federal judge in California ruled today that the state's same-sex marriage ban amounts to unconstitutional discrimination and should be immediately struck down.

"Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license," wrote U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker in a 136-page decision. "Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite-sex couples are superior to same-sex couples."

Yawn.

I'm not going to bother reading the opinion for the simple reason that doing so seems pointless; the ruling is sure to be appealed and will more than likely find it's way to the U.S. Supreme Court within a couple of years.

B. Daniel Blatt has read the opinion and finds that the judge's ruling is wanting, which just reinforces my thought that getting too excited about the ruling is pointless.

I find that the judge makes some good arguments for gay marriage, but doesn't succeed in relating them to the constitution. His legal analysis is sloppy at best and dismisses the sex-difference argument for traditional marriage by flippantly referring to what he calls "discredited notions of gender" as if the assumptions about a supposed social construction of gender had been proven true when, in fact, all serious psychological, sociological studies have shown the opposite. Not to mention studies of the human brain.

He fails to cite a provision of the federal constitution which prevents states from making distinctions based on sex difference, primarily because there isn't one.

I suspect this is only going to contribute to the feelings of anomie for social conservatives (Democrats and Republicans) that are increasingly feeling disenfranchised by legislators and the courts.

Oh, we live in interesting times...

Angle: Beware False Idols

I have a confession to make. I haven't paid that much attention to the Nevada Senate race between Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and his Republican challenger Sharon Angle. I've seen that from time to time she has made statements that can charitably be called "questionable" in nature, which you should translate as "what the heck is she thinking?"

Well, she's done it again, with an odd pronouncement that has driven the liberal bloggers on Memeorandum into an absolute hissy-fit.

Jon Ralston at the Las Vegas Sun found an April 21 interview Angle did with Rick Wiles of TruNews Christian Radio, and presented us with this gem (my emphasis below).

Wiles: Half of the country is working to produce and pay the taxes and pay the bills, the other half is living off the taxpayers -- they're living off the other 51 percent.

Angle: We're right to that point in the graph where it says, "government dependency." And we know that once we have a majority that are dependent upon the government, we will lose our freedom; it says we go into bondage. That's the next stage. Our Founders warned against this. They said don't... that your liberty is only as secure as the people are. Because once they, um, get the ability to vote themselves entitlements from the largesse of the government, liberty is done; freedom is over with. We were warned. We are there. We're right on the cusp of it, and you've identified those numbers. That's the war that we're in. You know, when I talk about a war and a battle and soldiers we have to take up our…our cry for freedom. And we can do it right now at the battle box… I mean at the ballot box. I'm not sure what continues on after 2010. I know people are very frightened about what's going on in this country. And these programs that you mentioned -- that Obama has going with Reid and Pelosi pushing them forward -- are all entitlement programs built to make government our God. And that's really what's happening in this country is a violation of the First Commandment. We have become a country entrenched in idolatry, and that idolatry is the dependency upon our government. We're supposed to depend upon God for our protection and our provision and for our daily bread, not for our government. And you've just identified the real crux of the problem. I've also been endorsed by a PAC out of Washington D.C. and the name of that PAC is Government is not God. And I thought that that was so appropriate because that is really what's happening in our society and we need to take our country back.

We have become a country entrenched in idolatry, and that idolatry is the dependency upon our government.

Very, very strong words... and very true.

Predictably, Greg Sargent, Alan Colmes and other progressives are promoting this with a "holy war" spin. As Angle was speaking to a Christian audience on a Christian radio show and is apparently herself a devout Christian, it may be a fair characterization of her feelings.

But the simple fact of the matter is that Angle is dead-on in accurate characterizing the mind-set of progressives. They do think that more government—not individuals, or God—is the solution to almost every problem. To be fair, this is also the mindset of many Republicans, and together, this would-be ruling class is responsible for our nation's addiction to big government.

Idolatry?

No doubt progressives are offended at being tarred with a religious term, but it does adequately reflect their fanatical devotion to ever-larger government as the solution to all the nation's ills. They even have hymns for their savior.

Yes, they did. And it's too bad he seems to have the governing skills of David Koresh.

Congressman: Execute Manning if Guilty

What else needs to be said?

Republican Rep. Mike Rogers, a member of the House Intelligence Committee, told a local radio station on Monday that the charges against Pvt. Bradley Manning are worthy of capital punishment.

"We know for a fact that people will likely be killed because of this information being disclosed," he told Michigan-based WHMI. "That's pretty serious. If they don't charge him with treason, they ought to charge him with murder.

"I argue the death penalty clearly should be considered here," he said. "He clearly aided the enemy to what may result in the death of U.S. soldiers . . . If that is not a capital offense, I don't know what is."

That Bradley Manning may have committed treason because of his politics (he's apparently a huge Rachel Maddow and Media Matters fan) just makes me hope he's given a longer rope at the gallows.

Missouri Tells Dems Where to Stick Obamacare

Show Me indeed:

Missouri voters on Tuesday overwhelmingly rejected a federal mandate to purchase health insurance, rebuking President Barack Obama's administration and giving Republicans their first political victory in a national campaign to overturn the controversial health care law passed by Congress in March.

"The citizens of the Show-Me State don't want Washington involved in their health care decisions," said Sen. Jane Cunningham, R-Chesterfield, one of the sponsors of the legislation that put Proposition C on the August ballot. She credited a grass-roots campaign involving Tea Party and patriot groups with building support for the anti-Washington proposition.

With most of the vote counted, Proposition C was winning by a ratio of nearly 3 to 1.

It remains to be seen if the referendum actually has any legal standing.

Do any of you lawyerly types want to hazard a guess?

"I killed the five racists that was there that was bothering me."

The other three he murdered, and the others he tried to kill? I guess they were just for fun.

After being presented video evidence that he stole beer from the company he worked at, Omar Thorton pulled a gun and murdered eight co-workers before holding authorities at bay. He spoke to his family, and then finally turned the gun on himself.

I wasn't there, and don't know all the details, but I suspect that Thorton wasn't fired because the company he worked for and the union he was a part of were a cabal of racists out to get him.

I suspect it had far more to do with him being a thief.

We Get Letters!

The deceptive efforts of Media Matters finally duped one of their gullible readers to respond. This gem comes from brian75752003@yahoo.com.

Subject: You Are a TRAITOR

I hope you chickenhawk cowards do try to revolt against our government. Please try it. I want to be the first in line to shoot the traitors of America. You think people are afraid of you??? You are a complete coward Owens. I hope you rot in f*cking hell you piece of sh*t TRAITOR. This veteran will defend his country to the end against traitorous pukes like you.

Eloquent, don't you think?

I responded:

Interesting.

The overwhelming majority of veterans I've talked to honor their oath to the Constitution, and look on the current elitists (Democrat and Republican) with sadness, for they know that these elitists and their continual power grabs represent the domestic enemies that our Founding Fathers and even later day Presidents have warned us as being the greatest threats to our republic.

I regret that conflict may be a possibility if the electoral process cannot purge the sickness from the system.

You, apparently, relish the thought of killing your fellow citizens, just as you misunderstand your oath and who the traitors to this republic actually are.

Somehow, I'm less than impressed.

Anonymous threats are easy to make on the Internet. Coming up with a compelling intellectual argument defending the attempts of the ruling class to usurp our rights is far more difficult.

Closer to Midnight

When I wrote A Nation on the Edge of Revolt Saturday morning, I knew that it would be taken out of context by some and well-received by others.

Perhaps the most interesting feedback I've received this far was in the comments of that blog entry, where a commenter calling himself TN_NamVolunteer wrote:

Bob/CY I would like to ask you a question and do not need/require a personal reply, just answer here or perhaps better a reply in new post.

I've read you for a number of months (years) primarily because you have been a 'level head' or a 'voice of reason' even re. other conservative blogs; and, here, once before - you said the time was not now.

the question: What has changed your mind? What event or piece of information has happened or transpired that has moved the hands of the clock of destiny closer to midnight? What has changed your mind that you now "advise" us to: "prepare for war"?

(for the vets here my oath was on 17JUL1968, my father's 31JAN1943)

What has changed my mind? What has transpired that makes me feel that patriots should gird for a possible revolution? What, as he asks, "has happened or transpired that has moved the hands of the clock of destiny closer to midnight?"

These are all fair questions, and I do not have a simple answer to any of them.

For example, I'm not sure that my mind has changed. We live in a nation with the longest continually-functioning government in the world. The Founders were brilliant men who set up a system of checks and balances that has kept any of our three branches of government from easily seizing power for themselves, and just as importantly, has made it difficult from them to collude with one another. It is a system that has worked better than any other for several hundred years.

But just as there are no perfect people, there are no perfect governments, and all governments over time seek to grow. Governments crave power and control the way plants seek light and nutrients. The more they grow, the more they need to survive, and the more they need to take.

Inexorably, this taking comes at the price of our individual liberties.

Angelo M. Codevilla's recent America's Ruling Class -- And the Perils of Revolution brings us nothing revolutionary in and of itself. What Codevilla does best is bring a bit of synergy to the fractured thoughts many of us have harbored in part or in whole as we witness our nation's perilous state and the megalomania of those who have both caused so many of our problems and who simultaneously claim to be our saviors.

The greatest disagreement I have with the author is that he thinks that Democrats represent the elitists and that Republicans, almost by default, represent the best hope for the rest of us.

I respectfully disagree, and suspect that many who read the Codevilla article will come away with the realization that there is very little difference between Democrats and many Republicans. I also think they will agree with the author that the elitists that are entrenched in both parties have far more in common and are far more driven by the desire to further their lots in life than they are to serve their fellow citizens. As a bipartisan group, this would-be ruling class exists to increase their power, at the expense of the rest of us, the so-called "country class."

But specific membership aside, the author correctly notes:

The ruling class's appetite for deference, power, and perks grows. The country class disrespects its rulers, wants to curtail their power and reduce their perks. The ruling class wears on its sleeve the view that the rest of Americans are racist, greedy, and above all stupid. The country class is ever more convinced that our rulers are corrupt, malevolent, and inept. The rulers want the ruled to shut up and obey. The ruled want self-governance. The clash between the two is about which side's vision of itself and of the other is right and which is wrong. Because each side -- especially the ruling class -- embodies its views on the issues, concessions by one side to another on any issue tend to discredit that side's view of itself. One side or the other will prevail. The clash is as sure and momentous as its outcome is unpredictable.

One side or the other will prevail. The clash is as sure and momentous as its outcome is unpredictable.

We have moved "closer to midnight" not because of any singular act , but because of inertia of a political class that does not respect or enforce the laws, or this nation's sovereignty. We have diametrically opposed views of how our nation can and should be run, and it appears that there is very little room left for negotiation.

Propagandists for the elitists at Media Matters seem troubled by A Nation on the Edge of Revolt. They portray it as a threat when "Conservative media figures openly discuss armed revolution."

I hope they do feel threatened. Attempts at peaceable protests have been met at turns by feigned ignorance, then mockery, then attacks on the character and motives of those would not sit quietly by. Perhaps it will take a serious review of our capacity for violence to get them to realize we shall not surrender our individual liberties to their lust for power.

I have not yet been swayed to the point of view that an armed conflict is inevitable, TN_NamVolunteer. But we are close enough that one would be wise to prepare for a possible conflict, just as one would prepare for any coming storm.

Update: Media Matters responds with the sort of "objectivity" you'd expect.

08/11/2010 Update: Brad Reid at the aptly named Crooks and Liars has joined the shrieking liberal chorus. I invite his readers, like those of Media Matters and Daily Kos, to read my response, Defending Liberty.

Worse Than the Klan: Exposing the Real Sherrods

Far from being an advocate for black farmers, Charles and Shirley Sherrod abused them mercilessly, treating them in ways that the most ardent racists would have found appalling (h/t/ Instapundit).

The swirling controversy over the racist dismissal of Shirley Sherrod from her USDA post has obscured her profoundly oppositional behavior toward black agricultural workers in the 1970s. What most of Mrs. Sherrod’s supporters are not aware of is the elitist and anti-black-labor role that she and fellow managers of New Communities Inc. (NCI) played. These individuals under-paid, mistreated and fired black laborers–many of them less than 16 years of age–in the same fields of southwest Georgia where their ancestors suffered under chattel slavery.

Read the entire article. It is short and to the point, and exposes Charles and Shirley Sherrod as monsters more than willing to play the race card to exploiting what they might have called "their own kind," for both power and profit.

No wonder she made such a perfect speaker for today's NAACP...