Category Archives: Conservatives
Posted on | June 13, 2013 | 41 Comments and 0 Reactions
Everything you need to know about the so-called “Gang of 8″ Senate immigration bill is this: Obama supports it.
If this bill was good for America, Obama would be against it.
If this was a bill that any conservative could honestly support, Harry Reid would have killed it in committee and Chuck Schumer would not bebegging people to support it, and the fact that 30 Republicans voted for cloture is profoundly disturbing.
Supporters of the Senate bill are lying, because if they told the truth about it, there would be a firestorm of outrage. And because we know that they are lying about it, as Michelle Malkin explains, it’s important not to listen to what they say, but to watch what they do:
The official White House operating policy is: No illegal alien left behind. “Smarter enforcement” means no enforcement.
Remember: Exactly one year ago this week, the president announced he would halt all deportations and start granting work permits to an estimated 2.1 million illegal aliens who entered the country as children.
This blanket amnesty through administrative non-enforcement has been plagued by questions of fraud from the get-go.
Read the whole thing. Every word spoken or written in favor of this wretched legislative monstrosity is a lie, including any claim that it would require immigrants to learn English:
[ProEnglish Executive Director, Bob Vandervoort said:] “Contrary to what the Gang of 8 says, S. 744 has no requirement for illegal immigrants to learn English to get work permits or amnesty. They can renew their work permits indefinitely. They only have to show some knowledge of English IF they apply for green cards after 10 and a half years of residency! In the meantime, taxpayers will be paying for translations and interpreters. It’s time for the Gang of 8 to stop the lies.”
“For at least ten years and perhaps for their entire lives, this huge new group of predominantly non-English speaking, former illegal immigrants will create a huge new demand for costly government services in their native language, further exacerbating the dangerous and growing division of the United States into separate cultural and linguistic communities,” Vandervoort elaborates. “This would be an unprecedented calamity for our nation’s unity,” he said.
What part of “NO AMNESTY” is so hard to understand?
On Tuesday, the Senate voted 84-15 — with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell among 30 Republican senators voting “yes” — to bring the bill to the floor for debate. Tea Party favorite, Sen. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire, was among the GOP senators declaring support for the controversial legislation. . . .
Rubio told David Drucker of the Washington Examiner that he is working with fellow Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah to craft an amendment that would strengthen border enforcement provisions in the bill. However, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, has already signaled that he will oppose stronger enforcement.
The “Gang of Eight” bill was slammed this week by two influential conservative columnists.
“If the GOP Is This Stupid, It Deserves to Die,” Ann Coulter headlined her Wednesday column, saying Republican supporters of the legislation “are devoting all their energy to slightly increasing their share of the Hispanic vote while alienating everyone else in America.” And the bill was also criticized by Michelle Malkin.
“Suicidal Republicans have supported illegal alien amnesties dating back to the Reagan era,” Malkin said in her Thursday syndicated column, which concluded: “Trust them? Hell, no. There’s only one course for citizens who believe in upholding the Constitution and protecting the American dream: Stop them.”
From The Other McCain: http://theothermccain.com/
From American Digest
“I am not here as a serf or vassal. I am not begging my lords for mercy. I’m a born free American woman, wife, mother and citizen. And I’m telling my government that you’ve forgotten your place. It’s not your responsibility to look out for my well-being, and to monitor my speech. It’s not your right to assert an agenda. Your post, the post that you occupy, exists to preserve American liberty. You’ve sworn to perform that duty. And you have faltered.” — Becky Gerritson of the Wetumpka Tea Party, testifying today before the House Ways and Means Committee about abuse by the IRS.
Howso’ great their clamour, whatsoe’er their claim, Suffer not the old King under any name!
Here is naught unproven—here is naught to learn. It is written what shall fall if the King return.
He shall mark our goings, question whence we came, Set his guards about us, as in Freedom’s name.
He shall take a tribute, toll of all our ware; He shall change our gold for arms—arms we may not bear.
He shall break his judges if they cross his word; He shall rule above the Law calling on the Lord.
He shall peep and mutter; and the night shall bring Watchers ‘neath our window, lest we mock the King—
Hate and all division; hosts of hurrying spies; Money poured in secret, carrion breeding flies.
Strangers of his counsel, hirelings of his pay, These shall deal our Justice: sell—deny—delay.
From American Digest
QUINN HILLYER – RUNNING FOR CONGRESS
By Quin Hillyer on 5.23.13 @ 11:18PM
I’m putting journalism on hold and running for Congress. A fond farewell to The American Spectator.
When an opportunity comes to do something good, one must grab it.
At 2 p.m. central time Thursday afternoon in Mobile, word spread that U.S. Rep. Jo Bonner, a six-term Republican from a dark red district, would announce that he is resigning mid-term (Aug. 15) to take a big job with the University of Alabama system of colleges. He made the announcement at 4 p.m.
On the local 5 p.m. news, I announced that I intend to form a committee and expect to run for his seat.
I am a constitutional conservative—and an “opportunity society”conservative as well, hearkening back to the Reagan-Kemp era of prosperity and liberty. Free men and women, with free minds, in a free market, produce abundance and a vibrant society.
Readers of this site know I am a full spectrum conservative. Mostly libertarian on economics, firmly for a strong defense, and for traditional values.
I abhor racism and was a founding board member of the Louisiana Coalition Against Racism and Nazism, which defeated David Duke in the 1990s. I have a long record of volunteer service through churches and with educational foundations.
I am a movement conservative, with a Madisonian love of our constitutional system. And I love my adopted home of southern Alabama, which is developing into one of the greatest areas of growth in the country.
There will be much more to say in the coming weeks, and major endorsements to announce. But now I must set aside my cyber-pen forThe American Spectator, which has hosted me for seven years. I am honored to have been a part of this publication, which has enlightened and entertained the world of American letters for nearly half a century—and my thanks go to Bob and Wlady and to the whole team that does such a good job here. I also thank the readers for making this not just a magazine, but a conversation.
This is going to be a great adventure.
From The American Spectator: http://spectator.org/archives/2013/05/23/laying-down-my-pen
The Internal Revenue Service scandal just gets bigger and bigger. No ordinary scandal, this is the very definition of an un-American, Joe McCarthy-style persecution. This is Gambino crime family criminal behavior. We now officially know America is being run by a gangster government, the Obama crime family.
The real question is: Will the same IRS (or IRS-like bureaucracy) that targeted and persecuted conservatives, GOP donors, Tea Party groups, pro-Israel Jewish groups, Christian groups, pro-life groups and outspoken critics of the President (like me), now use Obamacare to deny us medical care?
From Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
From Moonbattery: http://moonbattery.com/
The Tea Party invested its energy into electing the right people, but as Rick Scott and Marco Rubio showed us, there may be no such thing as the right people. Politicians are in the business of selling out. The difference between Marco Rubio and Charlie Crist was that Rubio hadn’t really been tested.
But that doesn’t mean politics is hopeless. It means politicians are hopeless. People however can still force politicians to do the right thing.
The NRA won its fight against gun control even though all the odds, political, financial and emotional, were stacked against it. Politicians had every reason to defect and evolve into a new understanding. And some did. But the ground held because enough of them knew that the NRA was in it for the long term and they would have to deal with it long after Bloomberg had moved on.
In 2012, amnesty and gun control both appeared to be equally unacceptable and were shunned by Republican politicians. If anything they shunned amnesty even harder than gun control. But one election loss later and most of the stalwarts, including Marco Rubio, Rand Paul and Paul Ryan have jumped on the amnesty train.
Victor Davis Hanson observes that, “in these divided times ideology and politics can easily trump considerations about character.” But accepting that character doesn’t matter may just be practical politics.
There may be leaders of good character out there who firmly resolve to do the right thing and never waver from their course, but they are the exception and the political system is designed to weed them out.
The self-motivated politician who never wavers is a lot to ask of any man. Even Churchill eventually buckled to Stalin. What can one expect of the senator from Idaho or Virginia?
Politics is not about politicians. It’s about people. Politicians are just the brokers in the political process. The real lesson of the Tea Party is not that you can intervene in a primary for the most conservative candidate and then sit back while he does the right thing, it’s that the only way to get the right thing done is to have an organization that is constantly involved in the political process.
Prohibition, an insane policy, was largely rammed through by a clever and relentless organization that built alliances and forced the issue down the throats of politicians who didn’t agree with it. The same tactics have been used for a variety of causes, including, most recently, gay marriage. In each case, most politicians who did not agree with a cause, came around on it because it was smart politics.
The politician who evolves concedes that he is up for grabs. Evolutionary announcements should be met with contempt, but they also signal that a politician who flips can be made to flop back again. Treating him as if he were an intelligent thinking individual with principles may be a mistake. It may be easier to assume that he has neither principles nor character and that he will go whichever way seems easiest. And the trick then is to reshape his environment so that he evolves into another shape.
For all the complaints that we need leaders, leaders may be the one thing that we do not need. The sort of people that we associate with leaders tend to be self-willed men with their own agendas. Christie and Bloomberg are both leaders, but their version of leadership is to pursue their private agendas without any accountability or regard for anyone else. What we need are not leaders, but organizations that are better at holding politicians accountable.
Hunting for principled politicians is like searching for buried treasure. It’s nice if we find some, but we can’t assume that we will.
The professional politician excels at pretending to have principles and then selling them out. Finding an honest one is like trying to buy a Rolex watch at a folding card table near Times Square. You may get the real deal, but the odds are that you will be ripped off because the people you are dealing with are trained con artists. They have pulled the same scam a thousand times. They are better at reading you than you are at reading them.
What politicians really do is move money around. They push pork for their friends and supporters who then reward them by making sure that they get reelected. It’s a simple financial transaction and any principles can only get in the way of it. They are salesmen for government spending and like all salesmen, they need a pitch strategy because “I’m going to give 10 million dollars of your money to the people who contribute to my campaign and organize groups that support me” is not a winner.
We may have reached the point where it’s smarter to ignore the pitch strategy, the stories, the speaking style, the declaration of principles, the Heritage approved reading list, and reduce everything back to a simple business transaction free of any hero worship or commitments.
It’s not smart for small government conservatives to believe in politicians anyway. If politicians were worth believing in, then one of the main arguments against small government trickles away. If there were a breed of politicians that weren’t hungry for power and able to find the balance between rights and regulations, why shouldn’t we trust them to run things? Such a breed of philosopher-kings doesn’t exist. And will never exist.
Most people, of all factions, rightly hold politicians in contempt and are suspicious of governments. The Tea Party would have done better to keep its distance from politicians, instead of allowing too many of them to wrap themselves in the Tea Party brand. Too much energy was wasted in getting behind politicians, instead of getting on top of them.
“Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?”was the old Roman question. Who watches the watchmen? Politicians are a poor accountability method. They aren’t going to hold themselves accountable. Trying to play Diogenes hunting for an honest politician in Washington D.C. is an even bigger waste of time. There are hardly any and they may not be the ones you think are.
Politicians are tools. They were meant to be wielded by the people. A good politician understands that he is being held accountable. A bad politician doesn’t. Politicians don’t pay attention to people. They pay attention to organizations. The only way to lock in good behavior by a politician is to lock them into an organization that is capable of rewarding or punishing him.
The organization can’t just be money. There is an entire political class built around activism that consumes money and does nothing. The 2012 campaign should have been an education in that.
The left isn’t just successful because it has billionaires, but because it successfully organizes people. The successful organization of people is the difference between 2010 and 2012. If 2014 and 2016 are going to be any different, it will come down to building organizations that can transform the process.
Single-issue organizations like the NRA can be very effective. So can larger scale organizations. Many of them exist, but what they really require is ground level organizing. Money is cheap. People are hard to come by.
If conservative policies are going to win out, the decentralized conservative presence of the internet is going to have to be more directly leveraged in the real world. The people already exist. Bringing them into play in a structured way is what is missing.
The 2010 elections showed what is possible when the people get involved. And the 2012 elections showed what happens when the political class leaves the people behind. Sometimes the people class can win on its own, but even when it does, its victory, like all political class agendas, is a prelude to another sellout.
Principles can’t come from politicians because politics is now largely an economic transaction. They can only come from people who do not benefit from those government class transactions. The left has built a shadow government of organizations, but it has done so while linking those organizations to small, but sizable numbers of organizers and activists, who can rally the base. The right will have to duplicate its accomplishments if it doesn’t want to see the politicians that it wastes money and energy electing constantly “evolve” to the left.
Some readers have complained that this blog is too hostile or negative toward Republican politicians. If anything it’s not nearly negative enough. Cheerleading for favorite politicians is a waste of time. The solutions will not come from messiahs in suits. It will come when the number of conservative issues that politicians come to see as the third rail expands beyond gun control. It will come when the professional political infrastructure is contained by a conservative activist infrastructure that is as least as effective and powerful as its counterpart on the left.
It will come when we stop believing in electing the right man and accept that the honest politician is the one who stays bought. It may not be romantic or idealistic, but it is far more practical than waiting for the next Marco Rubio to come around.
Found at The Daley Gator
From Mad Medic: http://maddmedic.wordpress.com/
Found at American Power
Found at American Digest
Words can’t describe the hatred I have for McRINO.
Via Washington Secrets:
Elder Sen. John McCain, who this week engaged in friendly fire when he launched his “maverick” missiles at fellow Republicans seeking clarification on the administration’s drone policies, has upped the ante, deriding Tea Party-backed GOP lawmakers as “wacko birds.”
McCain, who hit the Senate floor Thursday to belittle Sen. Rand Paul’s filibuster, which succeeded in getting an answer from President Obama that drones won’t be used to kill Americans on U.S. soil, even suggested that the Kentucky senator and his allies, like Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and Michigan Rep. Justin Amash, don’t represent the GOP mainstream.
“It’s always the wacko birds on right and left that get the media megaphone,” McCain told Huffington Post’s Jon Ward in a story titled “John McCain: Getting Back To Maverick, With An Eye On Retirement.”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Republicans Too Scared To Stand Up For The Traditional American Family – Bring Back a Horrendous Bill in Congress
IN ANOTHER decided triumph for anti-family feminism, the Republican-controlled House reauthorized the Violence Against Women Act today, expanding the draconian domestic violence bill to cover homosexuals and prosecution of non-native men on Indian reservations. This marks the third time since December that House Speaker John Boehner has moved a bill off the floor without majority support from his party.
VAWA expired last year and underwent serious and vocal opposition. But the “war against women” threats prevailed. Though the majority of House Republicans voted against the bill, eighty-eight members joined 199 Democrats to approve it.
The bill authorizes $660 million a year in funding for battered women’s shelters, domestic violence programs and victims’ advocates. Here is Phyllis Schlafly on the bill, first enacted in 1994:
In its 17 years of operation, [VAWA] has done little or no good for real victims of domestic violence, while its funds have been used to fill feminist coffers and to lobby for feminist objectives and laws. Although every spending bill should be subject to rigorous auditing procedures in order to curb waste and fraud, VAWA has somehow ducked accountability for the nearly a billion dollars a year it doles out to radical feminist organizations. (Continued)
From The Thinking Housewife: http://www.thinkinghousewife.com/wp/
Well…At Least a Few Senators Manned Up and Supported Rand Paul…My God…Where Was Everyone Else? Killing Americans is Ok With The Rest of Them?
Here Are All The GOP Senators That Participated In Rand Paul’s 12+ Hour Filibuster… And The Ones Who Didn’t
Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) on Wednesday staged an incredible nearly 13 hour filibuster to block President Barack Obama’s CIA nominee John Brennan, but mostly to bring attention to potential drone strikes against Americans in the U.S.
Attorney General Eric Holder, in a letter to Paul, said in an emergency the federal government could execute a drone strike on U.S. soil. The revelation resulted in Wednesday’s filibuster, the senator’s way of ringing the alarm bell. Paul made it clear repeatedly throughout the filibuster that he would end it once the White House admitted that drone strikes against Americans on U.S. soil are “unconstitutional.”
The White House had nothing to say on Wednesday.
Several GOP senators joined Paul in his crusade, however, many others didn’t and were not in attendance. Further, very few Democrats participated.
The Republican senators who participated in the filibuster with Paul include, Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Pat Toomey (R-Penn.), John Thune (R-S.D.), John Barrasso (R-Wy.), Tim Scott (R-S.C.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.).
There are a total of 47 Republican members of the U.S. Senate, meaning 33 other GOP senators sat out the filibuster protesting the federal government’s controversial drone program. To find out who those senators are, comb through the full list here.
Just one Democrat joined in the filibuster, Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.). Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) spoke but only asked questions of Paul and didn’t officially speak as part of the filibuster.
Meanwhile, President Barack Obama invited rank-and-file Republican senators to dinner Wednesday. His efforts are “aimed at jumpstarting budget talks and rallying support for his proposals on immigration and gun control,” according to the Associated Press.
The GOP lawmakers at Wednesday’s dinner were Sens. John McCain, Lindsey Graham, Tom Coburn, Kelly Ayotte, Pat Toomey, Bob Corker, Ron Johnson, Saxby Chambliss, John Hoeven, Dan Coats, Richard Burr and Mike Johanns. Toomey, Johnson and Chambliss headed to the Senate floor later that night.
Millions of Americans and others around the world participated via Twitter Wednesday night, making #StandWithRand the number one trending topic worldwide on the social network.
From The Daley gator: http://thedaleygator.wordpress.com/
Rand Paul ended the filibuster about 20 minutes ago after 12 hours and 52 minutes. All of the filibuster argument is being uploaded here. From quoting Reagan, we are “the last best hope on earth” to Marco Rubio quoting the Godfather, they put on quite a study in the Constitution.
We should tip our hats tonight to Sens. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Mike Lee (R-Utah), Pat Toomey (R-Penn.), John Thune (R-S.D.), John Barrasso (R-Wy.), Tim Scott (R-S.C.), John Cornyn (R-Texas), Jerry Moran (R-Kan.), Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) and Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.).
The question was simple-do you, Mr. President, believe you and your administration have the authority to kill by drone an American citizen without due process on American soil?
If a President cannot immediately answer that question “no” , there is a deep problem.
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Found at Mad Medic
Question For Conservatives: Why Are Your Children Still In Public School?
Written on Wednesday, February 27, 2013 by David L. Goetsch
I am sure conservative Americans love their children and want the best for them. Since this is the case, I have a question for conservatives: Why are your children still in public school? You would not let your little children play in a busy street, jump off the roof of a ten-story building, or drive a car at the age of five. You would not do these things because doing so would put the lives of the children you love in peril. With this said, why then do the majority of conservative Americans turn their children over to public schools that put their children’s lives in peril by subjecting them to twelve years of leftwing indoctrination and mind control.
What is at risk may not be the physical well-being of your children—although with school shootings becoming more and more common their physical well-being is certainly a consideration—but their ability to think for themselves, develop the academic skills necessary for success in a global world, and internalize the values their parents are trying to teach them. If you think I exaggerate, consider the latest trend in public schools nationwide: replacing great works of fiction with non-fiction books that might include such inspiring works of literature as EPA manuals.
In 46 states, students in the public schools will soon be reading an EPA manual on levels of insulation required in buildings or a treatise on invasive plant species in California instead of literary classics such as To Kill a Mockingbird, The Scarlet Letter, and Silas Marner. The plan in these 46 states is to require that 70 percent of the books children read in the K-12 system be works of non-fiction. That in itself is not a major reason for alarm. After all, the best book ever written is non-fiction.
The problem is that not only are the public schools moving away from classic fiction to non-fiction, the states in question are providing teachers a list of “approved” non-fiction books from which they must select the ones they will teach. The list will be comprised not of great works of non-fiction, but of books that are supposed to help prepare students for the workplace. What a nonsensical claim. What this move will really do is create an easier pathway for introducing leftwing indoctrination into the classroom.
Preparing students for the workplace—the supposed purpose of the move away from classic literature—is certainly a worthy goal and one that needs more attention in schools and colleges. I spent 36 years as a professor of business preparing students for rewarding careers in the workplace. However, I never lost sight of the fact that we were preparing students first for life and second for the workplace. Part of the rationale for providing a well-rounded education is to ensure that not only can graduates secure rewarding, responsible positions in their chosen fields of endeavor, but they can also be good citizens who are able to deal with the eternal verities of life, propagate the values of a civilized society, and think for themselves rather than being led by the nose like sheep.
I suspect that the real rationale behind the move away from classic fiction to non-fiction can be found in the attitudes of liberals toward these two just-mentioned aspects of a well-rounded education: eternal truths and the values of a civilized society. First, liberals do not even subscribe to the concept of eternal truth. The holy grail of the left is moral relativism. Heaven forbid that students learn from the study of classic fiction that there are actually eternal truths, truths that have been with us for all time and are still with us. For liberals to allow children in the public schools to eat the forbidden fruit of the tree of knowledge is to allow them to learn that eternal truths not only exist, but must exist if we are to have a civilized society.
Speaking of a civilized society, to have one we, its members, must subscribe to a set of broad values that govern our behavior and how we interact with each other. Once again, the last thing liberals want school children to learn is the values that grow out of the Ten Commandments, the very values that have undergirded western society for all time. It is the steady erosion of these values that have made ours such a coarse and uncaring society, a society in which innocent unborn babies are murdered for the sake of convenience, homosexuality is openly endorsed, elderly people are warehoused like so much unwanted baggage, and corruption in business and government is rampant.
Public school officials who advocated for the move away from teaching classic literature attempted to disguise their nefarious motives by claiming that: 1) children do not enjoy reading classic fiction, and 2) reading fiction does not prepare students for jobs. As to whether children enjoy reading fictional literature or not, who cares? Children enjoy very little of what they must do and learn to become responsible adults who contribute something positive to society. As to whether reading classic literature prepares students for the workplace, that is not its purpose. However, students who dislike reading fiction but are required to do so anyway will learn one of the most valuable lessons that can be taught in preparing people for the workplace: People in the workplace often have to do things they do not enjoy and, hence, do not want to do. Work is not always fun—that’s why it is called “work” and people get paid to do it. If it was fun it would be called “play” and people would do it for free.
My final comment on this move away from teaching classic fiction—the latest in a long list of steps taken by liberals to control the minds of students and turn them into the radical leftwingers of tomorrow—is this: if you are a conservative and still have your children in public school, take them out. Find a private school, Christian school, or charter school for your children and if these options do not work, homeschool them. Whatever the reasons are for sending your children to public school, they are vastly outweighed by the damage that will be done to them after 12 years in such an environment. You would not loan the family car to someone who was determined to destroy it. Surely your children are more important than the family car.
It is by studying good literature that students learn the power of words and the critical lesson that words have meaning. Graduates who understand the power and proper use of words are more difficult to lead down the garden path of liberal orthodoxy with false but persuasive rhetoric. The study of classic literature helps students become critical thinkers, not something one will learn reading an insulation handbook from the EPA or a treatise on invasive plant species in California. Of course, the fact that critical thinking can be learned by studying classic literature is one of the reasons liberals who long ago took control of public education in America would rather have students read non-fiction works off of their approved booklist.
Today is the awful anniversary of the death of Andrew Breitbart. Awful for all the obvious reasons when a young man dies and a wife loses her love and their children, their father. But more than that, Andrew’s death was a profound loss for this country, more specifically for freedom lovers, patriots and the rational. He knew what was at stake. He understood how vicious and ugly the enemy was. And he fought fiercely. He was the example.
We have not recovered from the void left in his wake. No one on the right has followed in those fabulous footsteps or led by his example. Just the opposite. The right shrunk in the wake of his death. Withered. Even the organization that bears his name is a big yawn and has abandoned the guerrilla media warfare Andrew was famous (and infamous) for.
With so much at stake, this is the time to fly without a net, to be bold and daring. Everything we hold dear is on the line and our enemies are playing for keeps and take no prisoners. Now is not the time for the weak and unprincipled.
What follows is a look back at what I wrote in the wake of his untimely death. One year later and the right has learned nothing from his death and our failures.
DEFENDING THE WESTGeneral Patton leaves the field March 6, 2012, WND
Exclusive: Pamela Geller says the world’s a scarier place without Andrew Breitbart
Gen. Patton in the information battle-space leaves the battlefield.
Andrew Breitbart was our warrior, our leader. Fearless, unapologetic, brilliant. I admire few people, but I admired him. He was in a league of his own. The herculean contribution he made to the war against the left and the enemedia cannot be calculated.
I just loved him. He was the only one on the right with fierce spine and courage. So many in the big right blogosphere and media are so afraid of tackling certain issues. They are weak. They are insipid. Andrew Breitbart was anything but weak or insipid. He loved to confront the lies, the corruption, the evil. He was the happy warrior indeed.
The world is a scarier place without him. I do not overstate his influence. The left and its organ grinder’s monkey, the enemedia, feared him. He terrified them. It’s why they despised him so.
He was a fearless champion.
When I was organizing the protests against the Ground Zero mosque in 2010, so many prominent conservatives, including some who are famous for their “fearlessness,” were afraid to speak. Some even agreed to speak and then backed out because they feared media or GOP establishment backlash – but not Andrew Breitbart. Breitbart, unlike today’s establishment conservatives and RINOs, feared no one. He spoke, and he was brilliant. Watch it here.
Even in death, Andrew Breitbart continues to unmask the murdering monsters on the left. Friday, there was for a brief fleeting moment a small hope that perhaps Andrew hadn’t died at all, and that he had pranked the media just to show how vile, depraved and evil the left in America really was. I prayed for it. For there is no doubt that the ugliness and pure evil of the open glee that the left displayed when they heard about Andrew’s death best illustrates what he had brilliantly been exposing to us for years.
Most notorious, of course, was Rolling Stone’s disgusting piece: “Andrew Breitbart: Death of a Douche.” But Rolling Stone was by no means alone. I retweeted a couple of monstrous profane tweets from leftists celebrating Andrew’s death. This was something Andrew did often: He frequently retweeted the monstrous abuse leftists would send him, as do I when Islamic supremacists or their leftist apologists tweet me their extreme hate and threats. Breitbart was criticized for doing that by weak and limp-wristed effetes on the right. To do this was bad form, they would say, doncha know?
But Andrew was right. Simply by repeating their own words, sending out what they had sent to him, he exposed the left more devastatingly and accurately than anything any of us could ever do.
And this kind of thing is what made Andrew Breitbart so bloody brilliant. He understood the fight, he understood the enemy, and above all, he knew how to win. And he knew that no victory for the right would come from playing footsie with an enemy that was desperate and evil.
I related to Andrew Breitbart because he was fearless on the information battlefield. The weak elites on the right today routinely give aid and comfort to the destroyers. But not Breitbart. He took them out. As a New Yorker, I propose a day in his honor for saving us from that debased and utterly corrupt pervert, Anthony Weiner. And I promise you that Breitbart will continue to haunt these cretins long into the future, from a place where his allies are … more formidable.
When I saw him at CPAC, he was full of talk about his new Big project, to complement his existing Big Government, Big Journalism and Big Hollywood sites that have already begun to take the initiative in setting the terms of the public discourse away from the left.
Nonetheless, when I was speaking in Florida last Friday evening, someone asked me who would fill Breitbart’s shoes. No one. No one could. But all of us must.
From Atlas Shrugs: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/
Thursday, February 28, 2013
At Hot Dish Politics, “Gruenhagen: Homosexuality is a ‘sexual addiction’“:
One of the [Minnesota] Legislature’s most vocal opponents of same-sex marriage says homosexuality is a choice and form of sexual addiction.
“It’s an unhealthy, sexual addiction,” state Rep. Glenn Gruenhagen said Wednesday.
The Glencoe Republican said he has a friend who ran a sexual addiction clinic. “He helped many homosexuals and other people come out of the lifestyle.”
Gruenhagen made the statements after advocates unveiled their proposal to legalize same-sex marriage, which would make Minnesota among nearly a dozen states that allow gays and lesbians to wed.
“When we talk about gay marriage, we are not talking about an immutable characteristic, like the color of your skin.” Gruenhagen said. Referencing a decade- old genome study, he added: “There is no gay gene. The concept that there is a gay gene is an unscientific lie.”
More at that top link.
PREVIOUSLY: “Yes, Homosexuality’s a Lifestyle Choice.”
Posted on | February 24, 2013
Senator Joseph McCarthy, a courageous and patriotic American.
“Senator Cruz’s substantive point was absolutely correct: in the mid-1990s, the Harvard Law School faculty included numerous self-described proponents of ‘critical legal studies’ — a school of thought explicitly derived from Marxism – and they far outnumbered Republicans.”
– Catherine Frazier, spokeswoman for Sen. Ted Cruz
Democrats and the major news media — but I repeat myself – have decided that Texas Sen. Ted Cruz’s opposition to the Chuck Hagel nomination makes him the “New McCarthy.”
And they say that like it’s a bad thing.
Sen. Joseph McCarthy has been unjustly and dishonestly maligned for so long that even many conservative Republicans nowadays use “McCarthyism” as a slur, without any real understanding of who the man was, or what he was trying to accomplish.
Intellectuals who today think of themselves as the rightful heirs of William F. Buckley Jr. often seem to forget that the second book Buckley wrote, after God and Man at Yale, was McCarthy and His Enemies, which Buckley co-authored with his brother-in-law Brent Bozell (father of Brent Bozell III, who is today head of the Media Research Center). Buckley knew, as do all honest and intelligent students of the Cold War era, that even if one stipulates McCarthy made mistakes and had unfortunate personality traits, he was really a better man than his vindictive critics, and certainly more sincerely patriotic than the Communist enemies he sought to expose.
To truly understand this history, it is necessary at the outset for any student to make two crucial distinctions:
- McCarthy vs. ‘McCarthyism’ — Propagandists of the Left, including journalists and academics, have made Joe McCarthy a symbol of things for which he was not even remotely responsible. Joe McCarthy did not create a “Red Scare.” Concerns about Communist penetration of the federal government, and about Soviet espionage, existed before anyone outside Wisconsin had ever heard of Joe McCarthy. He was not repsonsible for “blacklisting” anyone in Hollywood or getting Communist teachers fired from public schools. Investigations of Communist subversion undertaken by the FBI and the House Committee on Un-American Activities preceded Joe McCarthy’s arrival in the Senate and continued for years after McCarthy was dead and buried in a Wisconsin grave. However, by demonizing McCarthy, and making him a scarecrow symbol for alleged wrongs that he had nothing to do with, leftists have attached to McCarthy’s name a radioactive taint that makes it difficult for people to separate the complex Man from the simplistic Myth.
- Espionage vs. Subversion — This is arguably the greatest stumbling block to understanding the dangerous Soviet-backed conspiracy that Joe McCarthy sought to expose. Many people erroneously believe that McCarthy was hunting for “spies,” but this is a gross misconception, both of what the Communist Party (CPUSA) was about and of what McCarthy was investigating. As was clearly evident to investigators at the time, and as has since been documented by information from Soviet archives and from declassified U.S. government sources, the CPUSA was at all times an instrument of Soviet policy. This was especially so during the era of Stalin’s dictatorship, when deviation from the Party line could be quite literally fatal. Beyond the (very real) spying conducted by CPUSA members – including clandestine “underground” members — there were also American Communists who sought to influence U.S. policy in a pro-Soviet direction, at a time when Stalin’s reign of terror extended across Eastern Europe and when Communists were actively advocating a violent worldwide Marxist-Leninist revolution. It was the network of pro-Soviet influencers, as agents of subversion, that was the real target of McCarthy’s investigations.
Years ago, I interviewed M. Stanton Evans, author of the definitive biography, Blacklisted by History: The Untold Story of Senator Joe McCarthy and His Fight Against America’s Enemies. Evans is a man who knew Bill Buckley well, and who helped draft the famous “Sharon Statement” that was in effect the charter of the modern American conservative movement. No living person knows more about Joe McCarthy than does Stan Evans.
After listening to Evans describe his research, during our interview I pointed out the distinction between espionage and subversion and Evans’s eyes lit up with excitement: “Yes! Exactly! You get it!”
What McCarthy was trying to uncover was the mystery of how and why Soviet agents inside the U.S. government had gone undetected for so long. Once anyone begins to seek answers to that question — even today, more than two decades after the Evil Empire imploded under the weight of its own folly — certain conclusions quickly become obvious: There were people in government who did not want these secret Soviet agents exposed, people who saw no need for caution toward employing CPUSA members (or members of Communist-backed front groups) in key government positions.
The atmosphere of suspicion for which McCarthy is blamed was actually the fault of Communists themselves, and of their misguided liberal defenders who either failed to understand the danger or else were inspired by political or ideological motives to be (as it was commonly said) “soft on Communism.” And, in point of fact, it was the attitude of these liberals — derided in Cold War slang as “dupes,” or “pinkos,” or “Commie symps” — that did so much to anesthetize America, to foster the idea that Soviet aggression and domestic subversion were exaggerated dangers, thus creating a stuporous indifference that made this subversion possible.
Communists created suspicion by the intense secrecy of their underground agents, and their sympathizers or “dupes” heightened this suspicion by celebrating those who pleaded the Fifth Amendment in refusing to testify to Congress about their involvement with the CPUSA and the Party’s various front groups.
Keep in mind that the U.S. fought a bloody war against Communist aggression in Korea and that, with the aid of traitorous spies, the Soviets had obtained atomic secrets, so that America was locked in a deadly nuclear standoff with Stalin’s paranoid regime.
Under such circumstances, weren’t Americans entirely right to be outraged at seeing witnesses, who were charged with no crime, hide behind the Fifth Amendment and refuse to tell Congress about what they did and who they knew during their involvement with the Communist Party. And if responsible authorities had failed to investigate whether persons employed by the federal government were affiliated with the CPUSA — and they quite clearly had so failed — wasn’t it important to determine whether these security failures were the result of incompetence? Furthermore, isn’t it unfair to say that McCarthy, in trying to identify the persons responsible for these lapses, was engaged in mere demagoguery or pursuing an irrational “witch hunt”?
The witches were real!
There were indeed Communists who had infiltrated the federal government. And there was every reason to believe that the officials responsible for the lapses of security that had permitted this infiltration were engaged in a cover-up intended to prevent anyone from learning whether these lapses were mere incompetence or rather, as many suspected, something far more sinister.
Don’t lecture me about the “civil rights” of dishonest villains who were willing stooges of the murderous totalitarian Josef Stalin, and don’t tell me that the faults or errors of Joseph McCarthy made him worse than the Communists he sought to expose.
Ted Cruz’s critics now seem to be pursuing an inventory of the Harvard Law School faculty to determine whether Cruz exaggerated the ratio of Marxists to Republicans, as if this would discredit Cruz more than it does Harvard. Any patriotic American would say that if Harvard Law employed even one Marxist professor, that was one Marxist too many.
There may be some people who would say that patriotism and Marxism are not contradictory. Such people are fools — or worse.
And if anyone wants to compare Sen. Ted Cruz to Sen. Joseph McCarthy, I hope Senator Cruz will thank them for the compliment.
From The Other McCain: http://theothermccain.com/
From 90 miles: http://ninetymilesfromtyranny.blogspot.com/
With breathtaking candor and honesty, Pat Robertson describes Islam as a demonic political system with a religious facade that “drives people to kill, to maim, and to blow things up…”
From Bare Naked islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
Two years ago, on Election day, Oklahoma voters overwhelmingly approved a state bill in support of anti-sharia legislation. But the Islamofascists at CAIR (Council on Anti-American Islamic Relations) and their Commie pals at the ACLU sued to block the anti-sharia bill and were able to convince a few Obama dhimmi judges to overturn the will of the people on appeal. Hopefully, this time, the patriotic citizens of Oklahoma will succeed in their crusade to have barbaric sharia law banned from their state courts forever.
Associated Press Once again, Oklahoma lawmakers are considering banning judges in the state from basing any rulings on foreign laws, including Islamic Sharia law.
A Senate panel on Tuesday overwhelmingly approved the bill, which has broad support in the Republican-controlled Legislature. The bill would specifically make void and unenforceable any court, arbitration or administrative agency decision that doesn’t grant the parties affected by the ruling “the same fundamental liberties, rights and privileges granted under the U.S. and Oklahoma constitutions.”
Muslim groups will start buying billboards condemning the people of Oklahoma who want to outlaw sharia in their state:
“This is a way to protect American citizens … where somebody may try to use any kind of foreign law or religious law to affect the outcome of a trial,” said Sen. Ralph Shortey, R-Oklahoma City, who sponsored the bill. Shortey described it as “American Law for American Courts.”
A handful of other states have laws aimed at keeping courts from basing decision on foreign legal codes, including Islamic law. Oklahoma voters approved a constitutional amendment in 2010 that would have specifically prohibited courts from considering Sharia law, but a federal judge blocked its implementation after a Muslim community leader alleged it discriminates against his religion.
CAIR uses social media to disparage criticism of Islamic sharia law as bigotry and lies:
Shortey said he didn’t know of an instance in Oklahoma where a judge has relied on foreign laws, but he said there have been cases in other states. That prompted state Sen. Brian Crain, R-Tulsa, to describe the measure as a “solution that’s looking for a problem.” Crain was the only member of the Senate committee to vote against the bill.
The panel approved the bill 8-1. It now heads to the full Senate for a vote. A similar measure has been introduced in the Oklahoma House.
CAIR Islamists gather their fellow jihadists to try to intimidate opponents and interfere with hearings:
The executive director of the Oklahoma chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union said Oklahoma courts already are required to enforce state and federal laws when they conflict with foreign law that violates public policy.
“This bill is entirely unnecessary and creates significant uncertainty for Oklahomans married abroad as well as those Oklahomans who have adopted a child from another country or are seeking to do so,” Executive Director Ryan Kiesel said in a statement. “These Oklahoma families don’t deserve to have this type of doubt cast over them. ”It also creates an atmosphere of uncertainty for foreign businesses seeking to do business with Oklahoma businesses.”
From bare naked Islam: http://www.barenakedislam.com/
As one of the founding fathers of progressivism said,
When an opponent declares, “I will not come over to your side,” I calmly say, “Your child belongs to us already… What are you? You will pass on. Your descendants, however, now stand in the new camp. In a short time they will know nothing else but this new community.”
This is why liberals like Obama mentor Bill Ayers made a point of establishing total hegemony in the education establishment. A review of A Is for Activist by Innosanto Nagara gives an idea of what they are teaching the next generation:
Nagara produced an ABC book with a decidedly un-Disney outlook.
D is for democracy.
G is for Grassroots.
L- G- B – T – Q
Love who you Choose!
The alliteration and rhymes have the rhythm and fun of standard ABC books, burrowing into little ears and prompting memorization and spontaneous recitation.
“It’s pretty awesome to hear a three year old saying ‘union power,’” Nagara says.
Throughout the alphabet, topics ignored by most toddler tomes at last get their due. Cooperative workplaces. Unions. Feminism. Immigrant rights.
If a generation raised on Dr. Seuss could produce Barack Hussein Obama, imagine what sort of leadership kids brought up on a monotonous diet of ultra-left demagoguery will willingly submit to.
On a tip from Muddypaw.
(click image for video)
Damn right it is.
Via Red Alert Politics:
Dr. Benjamin Carson drew nation-wide criticism when he disapproved of President Barack Obama’s healthcare policies during the National Prayer Breakfast while standing only a couple feet away from the first black Commander in Chief. Now Carson has another African-American ally in his corner – former Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.).
In an interview with Greta Van Susteren on Fox News “On the Record” West said Carson’s remarks are garnering unnecessary attention.
“He violated the unwritten rule of being an African American male, and he criticized some of the policies of President Obama,” Rep. Allen West (R-Fla.) snarkily pointed out.“I don’t think it should cause any controversy whatsoever.
“I believe that the doctor gave his assessment of some of the policies that involve his profession, the healthcare profession.”
West also pointed out that most mainstream media rarely criticize President Obama for how he runs the country and that behavior needs to stop.
“I think that we cannot continue to go on believing that all we can do is ask the President what his favorite color is and continue to have these softball interviews,” West said. “Well, I think he felt for the first time someone has stood up to me because pretty much he’s been given a free pass.”
From Weasel Zippers: http://weaselzippers.us/
Foun at FIJAW: http://maddmedic.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/realfake.jpg
Found at FIJAW: http://maddmedic.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/toughashell.jpg