"Obama must choose between support of Hosni Mubarak and protesters' cause"

"President Obama must choose between support of Hosni Mubarak and protesters' cause," says one Mohamad Bazzi, writing in the New York Daily News. He writes:

As protests spread against the regime of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, the Obama administration faces a choice: which side of history does it want to be on?

Does the United States want to support a dictator to the end, or does it stand with protesters demanding relief from decades of emergency rule, police torture, corruption and economic stagnation?

The whole argument is BUNK.  It is not imperative that the United States support either side.  The US has nothing to gain by interfering and nothing to lose by staying completely out of it.  Shall we pick between an oppressive dictator or oppressive Muslim Imams?  Great choice.  Hey Egyptians, it's your country, YOU deal with it.

Barack Obama as Ronald Reagan? (Photoshop)

Distribute Freely

Bury Vladimir Lenin and Do It Now!!

Donald Douglas at American Power had an interesting post yesterday.  It seems a majority of Russians would prefer to remove Lenin's corpse from his mausoleum in Red Square and bury it.

Vladimir did the world a favor when he kicked the bucket back in 1924, where no doubt he descended to the netherworld where he was greeted by the millions he had executed or starved during his reign as Communist dictator.  Hopefully, they tore him apart bit by bit before casting his soul into Hell.

Whither his soul notwithstanding, Lenin's corpse stayed in Russia where it was gutted and embalmed and placed on permanent display in a stone mausoleum in Red Square, where it remains to this day, no pun intended.

Intrigued by the macabre story, I searched the internet and learned these facts:
1.  The body in the mausoleum is indeed that of Vladimir Lenin.  It has been 87 years since the old Red died, and his corpse is still remarkably preserved.
2.  Every 18 months the body is stripped naked and bathed for 30 days or so in a preserving solution of formaldehyde, methanol, ethanol and other chemicals.
3.  The body is a bit green after 87 years, but is made to look lifelike with filtered lighting.
4.  The history of the preservation efforts is a story in itself and quite interesting.  Read it here.

See photos of Lenin's naked corpse taking a bath here.

Note:  Lenin apologists like to say that Lenin wasn't a murderer, that the mass murders occurred after his regime.  According to one website, This is one of the greatest lies in history:

 Lenin and Trotsky killed 4 million people - men, women and children - by mass executions, death camps, and state-caused famine.

What's Going On in Egypt, Tunisia and the Middle East?

Egyptian Unrest

Lots of people are rioting, demonstrating, yelling, screaming, throwing and breaking things in Egypt.  Photos show lots of people in the streets, amidst clouds of tear gas and smoke.  I have searched the internet for information, but I still don't have a clue:  what are the demonstrations all about?  What do the Egyptian protesters want?  Do they even know themselves?

I glean from the jumble of half facts available, that the Egyptians (and Tunisians) became fed up with the dictators for life who rule their countries with the proverbial iron hand.  They want fair and free elections and a government that is accountable.  That sounds great, which is why I don't trust it as accurate analysis.

Maybe the Egyptians, like the Iranians in 1979, simply want a stronger Islamic government, more Sharia law, more intolerance to Christians, Jews and others, more scimitars, turbans, burqas and beards, more screaming fanatics, more chopped-off limbs and heads, more public stonings and hangings, more hate and rage, until the country is awash in adrenaline, B.O., bodies and blood.

I really hope that Egyptians and Tunisians are simply sick of the suffocation of the human spirit by tyrants, whether of the religious or the secular variety.  I'd like to see their societies become more open, more tolerant, less violent and less batshit crazy.  But will they?  I'm not holding my breath.

Who is Frances Fox Piven?

Francis Fox Piven in Better Days, Shows Off Her Legs for the Camera

Frances Fox Piven is a far-left activist and a professor of political science and sociology at the City University of New York.  This past week a far left online publication, The Nation, strenuously objected to Glenn Beck's criticisms of Piven, stating that these criticisms had resulted in a flood of insulting and threatening email to Piven.

Leftwing pundits and propagandists then rushed to Piven's defense, describing her as a "frail, 78-year-old-knitting grandmother" who has been bullied by Glenn Beck fans.  Boo hoo!

The truth is that Piven is a long-time political radical who has sought to bankrupt the country in order to end capitalism and collapse the system, so that a socialist system can be built on the rubble.  According to Discover the Networks:

First proposed in 1966 and named after Columbia University sociologists Richard Andrew Cloward and Frances Fox Piven, the “Cloward-Piven Strategy” seeks to hasten the fall of capitalism by overloading the government bureaucracy with a flood of impossible demands, thus pushing society into crisis and economic collapse. 

 The Cloward-Piven strategy has been called one of "orchestrated crisis."  It was used to bankrupt the city of New York in 1975.  There have been a number of pundits who have theorized that Obama's destruction of the U.S. economy is deliberate.  The Cloward-Piven strategy of "orchestrated crisis" gives credence to this position.  In fact, David Horowitz has just published a pamphlet that alleges this is Obama's true goal.  It's called "Breaking the System" and can be purchased online for $3.00.

More recently, Frances Piven has called for nationwide strikes on the level of the violent demonstrations in Greece, and this was what annoyed Glenn Beck to publicly denounce Piven.  Piven wrote:

Local protests have to accumulate and spread—and become more disruptive— to create serious pressures on national politicians. An effective movement of the unemployed will have to look something like the strikes and riots that have spread across Greece in response to the austerity measures forced on the Greek government by the European Union, or like the student protests that recently spread with lightning speed across England in response to the prospect of greatly increased school fees.

Piven thus openly called for riots as a way to deal with our damaged economy.  She reveals herself as a radical who is profoundly divorced from reality.  Throwing temper tantrums may have gotten her goodies from her parents back in the day, but government is not your parent, and it has no income to redistribute except that which it takes from citizens through taxation.  And, if an economy is destroyed, there are no goodies to redistribute.

Piven is said to be a mentor of Obama as well as a follower of Saul Alinsky, the famous radical organizer who wrote "Rules for Radicals."

The Washington Examiner has its own article today on the question, "Who is Frances Fox Piven?"  Read it here.

Fred Phelps Comes Out, Admits His Fascination With Homosexuals

Well not really.  But here's some Photoshop revenge for this hateful group, posted here so they will now appear in Google search engines and spread far and wide.  These hate-freaks picket the funerals of American soldiers with signs that read "Thank God For Dead Soldiers," "Thank God for Crippled Soldiers" and "Thank God For IEDs."  They express their hatred and obsession with gays by hating their own country -- very sick.  Their contact information is as follows:

Westboro Baptist Church
3701 SW 12th St
Topeka, KS 66604
(785) 273-0325
www.godhatesfags.com

Fred Phelps Trolling for Gay Dates;
Note the Plastic Jacket, Simulating a Body Condom

Westboro Baptist Church Member
Advertising Her Wares

Abercrombie: There is No Obama Birth Certificate in the State of Hawaii

The news out this morning is that Governor Neil Abercrombie has scoured the birth records of Hawaii and can find no trace of a birth certificate for Barack Hussein Obama.  It simply does not exist in the State of Hawaii.

This confirms what former Hawaii state elections employee Tim Adams said.   When he was interviewed back in June of 2010, Adams stated:

"There is no birth certificate," said Tim Adams, a graduate assistant who teaches English at Western Kentucky University in Bowling Green, Ky. "It's like an open secret. There isn't one. Everyone in the government there knows this."

Adams also claims he tried to verify Obama's birth with two Hawaiian hospitals that had been identified as his probable birth site.  Both hospitals said they had no record of Obama having been born there.

Now we know why Obama has never released the long form of his Hawaiian birth certificate.  It does not exist.

Meanwhile, various states like Arizona and Texas are planning laws that require a presidential candidate to prove his eligibility to run before he can appear on the ballots in those states.

Michele Bachmann Delivers Tea Party Response to State of the Union Address

State of the Union Address (Photoshop)

Posting Will Be Light Due to Work Today

I have begun preparing tax returns and will be away from my computer until later this afternoon.

Steve Benson of Arizona Republic: Leftist Hater and Propagandist

Steve Benson's Hate Cartoon

Steven Benson, cartoonist for the liberal Arizona Republic newspaper, libels conservatives with a pencil rather than with the written word.  Benson is one of the most odious propagandists of the far-left; make no mistake, he is a hater extraordinare.  Of course, leftists always believe that their brand of hatred is justified and enlightened.

Take the cartoon at left that Benson published right after the Arizona shootings.  It is slanderous in the extreme and expresses the left's unhinged hatred of Sarah Palin.

Now let's take a look at my depiction of this smarmy little leftist using Photoshop (feel free to use and spread far and wide):

Oh yes, Steve Benson is a Pulitizer Prize winning cartoonist.  The Pulitzer Prize is always given to the far left, never to conservatives.  Even the extremist Ted Rall was a Pulitzer Prize finalist in 1996, and that tells you all you need to know about the Pulitzer Prize.

Moving On

Paul Krugman of the New York Times:
Author of the Blood-Libel Against Conservatives

The great sturm and drang following the Arizona tragedy is finally receding, but it leaves a very bad taste in my mouth.  I have never witnessed a worse case of liberal hatred and verbal violence in all my life.  The vicious lies that the Left unleashed against conservative pundits and personalities was truly unprecedented.  It made me realize that we on the Right do not share with the Left a common nationality, culture or tradition.  We only share the same continent, live within the borders of the same nation state.  We share little else.

The Left is more than ruthless, they are evil.  They seek to rule, not by persuasion or honest debate, but by any means necessary.  They revel in slander, character assassination and violence.  They are steeped in hatred for all who oppose them. They seek to create and hold a monopoly on news media and editorial opinion; they support voter fraud and stolen elections; they prosecute political opponents on trumped-up charges in kangaroo courts.  They have raised "the politics of personal destruction" to a high art form.  Fairness, civility and common decency are unknown to them.  I do not see the American Left as fellow citizens, I see them as sworn enemies for whom I feel little or no commonality or fraternity.

The Left has, however, finally convinced me of the truth of one of their key precepts:  Politics is war by other means.  They proved that in their orgy of hate and slander following the Arizona shootings.  I shall not forget again.

Did Gabrielle Giffords Inadvertently Target Herself? (Video)

Some time back Gabrielle Giffords herself helped propagate the script that she was in danger of being "targeted" as a result of Sarah Palin's "cross-hairs" map.  Giffords, therefore, is not blameless in this propaganda war, but was herself involved in the smear before the Arizona tragedy of a week ago.

Appearing on the far-left cable network MSNBC, Giffords decried the innocuous Palin map and implied that it somehow insinuated violence against Giffords herself.  It is a fair question then to ask: by propagating this political meme, did Giffords herself influence Jared Loughner to commit his heinous act?  Did he see the MSNBC episode and internalize Giffords' portrayal of herself as a target of violence?  Did her assertion become a self-fulfilling prophecy through subliminal suggestion to a sick and suggestible mind?

This is a point that Democrats ought to think about.  By painting themselves as targets of violence in order to score political points, do politicians  increase the chance that some nut will act upon that suggestion?  See the video embedded below.

Mark Levin Promises to Sue Liberal Pundits for Libel (Video)

Hat tip:  Nice Deb

MSNBC's New Propaganda Graphic

MSNBC created a new graphic to support its guilt-by-association meme.  It was just a bar of gray, with Loughner's face on the left, and the phrase POWER OF WORDS on the right.

I redesigned their graphic so that it is more honest and keeping with their true purpose.

Exposing The Democrat Smear Machine

During the past few days, the Democrat smear machine was exposed as never before.  Newspaper columnists, television pundits and leftist bloggers had engaged in a massive libel against the Tea Parties and conservatives.  Their Big Lie was that conservative thought and argumentation was a hateful inspiration to violence and was responsible for the shooting spree of a lunatic.

They were more than wrong:  they deliberately and purposely lied.  The Democrats have what J. Edgar Hoover once called "a transmission belt," a system of disseminating propaganda to the masses.  The idea is to poison the well of public opinion with massively repeated falsehoods.  If anyone out there is still politically neutral, they should ask themselves:  if the Democrats have such wonderful ideas and policies, why do they need to resort to such underhanded, dishonest and hateful means to gain power?

There are two very good posts today that further fisk the leftist meme of "conservative violence."  They are must-reads and are as follows:

The False Narrative of Tea Party Violence Attempts Suicide, by William Jacobson of Legal Insurrection; Jacobson writes:

The narrative that Tea Parties and conservatives and Sarah Palin are messengers of hate and violence has been exposed for what it always was, a lie concocted by a cabal of media elites, Democratic Party operatives and left-wing bloggers in order to stifle legitimate opposition to Obama's policies. 

Blame Righty:  A Condensed History, by Michelle Malkin; Malkin writes:

I agree with President Obama. When it comes to politicizing random violence, he and his supporters have been "far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than" they do. Recognition is the first step toward reconciliation. It's time to recognize the poisonous pervasiveness of the Blame Righty meme.

For the past two years, Democratic officials, liberal activists and journalists have jumped to libelous conclusions about individual shooting sprees committed by mentally unstable loners with incoherent delusions all over the ideological map. The White House now pledges to swear off "pointing fingers or assigning blame." Alas, the Obama administration's political and media foot soldiers have proved themselves incapable of such restraint.

Read both articles in their entirety at the links provided.

The Madness of the Mainstream Media: "They Are Owned by Their Hate"

Elizabeth Scalia at The Anchoress has written an excellent, very articulate post on the role of the mainstream media following the Arizona tragedy.  Scalia is spot on in describing the motivations of the mainstream media:  it is hate, pure and simple.  She writes:

Where Sarah Palin is concerned, the mainstream press and the political pundit class are like 14 year olds obsessing over the social order of the cafeteria, and especially that stupid new cootie girl, ewwww.

They are the spiteful, malevolent and immature teenagers in “Carrie,” armed with pig-blood and just looking for any opportunity to pour it.

They are repulsive in their clique; one wants to take them by their shoulders and shake them and say “grow up! GROW UP!”

They are also stupid. They are stupid because they favor instinctive damnation over intellectual discernment. If they had simply reported the horrific story of Arizona’s chaos, without passion, without prejudice, and followed its course, like professional journalists, Sarah Palin would not be on anyone’s mind today. She would not be garnering the sympathetic defenses of people like Chait, or Charles Krauthammer or Alan Derschowitz or even little old me. This event would have transcended Sarah Palin–and all of their hate–as it should have.

But they are owned by their hate. On the furled lip and malicious smear of one small man, the mainstream media let loose the dogs of their own hellish madness; they have exposed themselves, in a shocking way, as unthinking automatons, incapable of reason, interested only in establishing a framework or a narrative that will destroy those whom they hate, and uphold those they love, and there is no middle-ground for thoughtful wondering.

There is only the pig-blood in a bucket, ready to be released or stayed on instruction.

Read Scalia's entire post here.

Hat tip:  Da Tech Guy

Christina Taylor Green, 9, Laid to Rest in Arizona

Christina Taylor Green
September 11, 2001 - January 8, 2011

Christina Taylor Green was the youngest victim in the shooting rampage of the Arizona lunatic last Saturday.  She was laid to rest today in Tucson.

A flag recovered from the wreckage of the Twin Towers was flown at her funeral.  

Christina was born on a day of a violent attack, September 11, 2001, and left this world as the result of another, on January 8, 2011.

Read about it here.

Yaqui "Native American" Gives Strange Prayer at Arizona Memorial

There's been a lot of commentary on the web about this strange prayer given by a Yaqui descendant at the Arizona memorial service. This "Indian" blesses all the doors of the room, male and female energy, blah blah blah. This is so PC!

Actual Text of Sarah Palin's "Blood-Libel" Comment

MSNBC, The Washington Post, and other leftwing media are attempting to spin Sarah Palin's rebuttal of their attempts to link Palin to the Arizona shooting tragedy last Saturday.  As I noted earlier, they are focusing on her term "blood libel" in an attempt to discredit Palin's rebuttal.

So what did Palin say that was so horrible?  Decide for yourself.  Here is the exact wording that she used:

Vigorous and spirited public debates during elections are among our most cherished traditions. And after the election, we shake hands and get back to work, and often both sides find common ground back in D.C. and elsewhere. If you don’t like a person’s vision for the country, you’re free to debate that vision. If you don’t like their ideas, you’re free to propose better ideas. But, especially within hours of a tragedy unfolding, journalists and pundits should not manufacture a blood libel that serves only to incite the very hatred and violence they purport to condemn. That is reprehensible.

How is this statement untrue in any way?  It isn't.  See the complete text of her speech here.

Pajamas TV's "Trifecta" Discuss the Liberal Smear of Palin and the Right (Video)

Liberal Response to Palin's Speech: Obsess About the Term "Blood Libel"

Liberal media conspire and coordinate their response to current events like shady figures out of an Oliver Stone film.  You can tell this is true by the nearly identical response throughout the mainstream media and liberal blogosphere on any given topic.  This identical response is called "talking points" by Democrat strategists, and its purpose is to make the script seem legitimate and widespread.

The script to Sarah Palin's speech yesterday was to seize on her use of the term "blood libel."  Every chattering squirrel in the Democrat propaganda system began decrying the use of the term as wrong, inappropriate, antisemitic or outrageous.  The disingenuous and biased Washington Post claimed that "Sarah Palin's effort to defuse controversy backfires with 'blood libel' comment."  Her speech, of course, didn't "backfire," but the liberal media want the public to believe that it did.  The Washington Post, like most of the liberal media, are attempting to influence events rather than merely report on them.

True, the term "blood libel" like the word "pogrom" had its origins in antisemitism and the slander of Jews.  That, however, does not restrict its broader use in situations that are highly analogous.  In fact, I used the term "blood-libel" to describe the Left's smears before Sarah Palin did, here, in the second to the last paragraph.

 As Legal Insurrection points out:

In fact, as Jim Geraghty of National Review Online documents, the use of the term "blood libel" in political discourse is common both on the left and the right to describe incendiary false accusations which tend to blame a person for inciting violence and making the person a target of violence.

Much like the use of the term "holocaust" (e.g., nuclear holocaust) is not used in the strict sense of The Holocaust, the use of the term "blood libel" does not offend the traditional meaning of the term.

The looser, more modern usage of the term certainly seems to fit here.

The Anti-Defamation League has stated that the term "blood-libel" is now used in common parlance to refer to those who are falsely accused.  

So why is the Left trying so hard to make an issue out of Palin's legitimate use of the term?  Simple:
1.  To redirect attention away from what Palin said by focusing on an irrelevancy;
2.  To dilute the impact of Palin's charge that she was slandered by the Democrat Left;
3.  To support the long standing leftist meme that Palin is stupid, insensitive and uninformed (and thus reduce her effectiveness in future political endeavors).

There you have it, folks:  another Democrat propaganda effort in full swing.  Be ye not fooled.

Twitter Liberals Call for Death of Sarah Palin (Video)

From Powerline:  the foaming-at-the-mouth hatred of the liberal left is truly disgusting.  Someone collected their twitter tweets and put them into a video.  Update:  YouTube deleted the video when one of the death-wishers complained, but it is now on Vimeo.  Here it is again.


Palin Death Wish Tweets Re Tucson Shooting from Legal Insurrection on Vimeo.

FaceBook Page Calls For Death of Sarah Palin

From Moonbattery, the latest swill from the liberal hate machine:

The Facebook site "I hate it when I wake up and Sarah Palin is still alive" now has 2,200 likes. Here's an example of what you'll see if you wade into this cesspool:

Another Example of Liberal Hate Speech Advocating Death and Violence

Prior Democrat Slanders

Here are some of my previous posts on the Democrat smear machine:

1.  On Right-Wing "Hate":  Don't Take the Democrat Bait -- The leftist website Moveon.org held a rally to "condemn the hate."  Except that there was no "hate" to condemn.  I described why:

MoveOn.org's gambit is not to "condemn the hate," but to insinuate into the public mind that conservatives are dangerous crazies who are boiling with rage, ready to go postal at any minute. The falling popularity of Democrats and the success of the Tea Parties are not the result of widespread opposition to Obama's radical policies. No, they are the result of some baseless and inexplicable "hate."

When Democrat pundits and reporters ask GOP and Tea Party leaders to "condemn the hate," they are really asking for a tacit admission that the charge is true, that "hate" is a major problem on the Right. Conservatives cannot and should not give credence to the false charge. They must not become unwilling stooges in the Left's bogus drama.

2.  Rush Limbaugh slandered with false "racist" quotes -- This one is a good example of how reckless and ruthless the Democrats are with (1) the reputations of other people and (2) the truth.

3.  Democratic Underground Encourages Smear of Palin's Baby -- This one is particularly revealing of the Democrat mindset about using smear to win political fights.  A Democrat writer wrote:

NoodleyAppendage (1000+ posts) Sat Aug-30-08 10:26
122. What many here don't understand. It doesn't matter if it's true or not. RUMOR IS TRUTH.

The modern laws of media hype and political warfare have a useful tenet:
Repeat ANYTHING or raise false concern over ANYTHING and it is likely to be planted in the conscious/subconscious of many voters.

If people start to think that there might be something fishy with Palin's last kid (if hers), then that's FINE. One more doubt (whether tied to reality or not) is another hesitation at the ballot box.

GET WITH THE PROGRAM PEOPLE. The "rising above it" bullshit has served us so well in the past, hasn't it?

If you have problems with the story, then STFU and get out of the way of Dems who are engaged in MODERN POLITICAL WARFARE. Go tend your garden or some other pedestrian task, because the "concern trolls" are not helping shape the message.

4.  John Patrick Bedell: So Much in Common with Me! The Wing Nut Connection?  - A nut named John Patrick Bedell walked up to two police officers at an entrance to the Pentagon, drew a pistol and opened fire. He wounded the two police officers but they killed him with return fire. Then the mainstream media tried to connect Bedell with the Tea Party movement and/or "right wing extremists." Bedell, however, was a liberal.

5. Thoughts on the Great DC Tea Party of 9/11/2009 - This post is a good example of the various prior attempts by the Democrats to slander Republicans and conservatives.

6.  The Left's Tactics Against Sarah Palin Explained.  Why does the Left always attack Sarah Palin first?  The reason comes from Saul Alinksky's "Rules for Radicals" #13.

7. How the Left Punishes Conservatives -- A concerted program of hate and slander over a long period of time can wear down one's will to resist the forces of liberalism.  Some examples are given.  I like my conclusions:   Democrats believe that "politics is war by other means." And they are at war with America, with common sense and even common decency. Those who would mount an effective opposition had better have a high tolerance for slime, slander and abuse.

8.  Revolt and Reaction:  the Tax Day Tea Parties -- Janet Napolitano of Homeland Security released a politicized report disingenuously warning of "right wing extremism," i.e., anyone who opposed Obama's radical policies.

I notice a lot of site searching going on at Saber Point.  A lot of people are looking hard to find examples of "right wing hate" and vitriol.  They aren't finding much.

"Worst Sheriff in America": Sheriff Clarence Dupnik Must Go

This bitter partisan and incompetent sheriff must resign.

Atlas Shrugs: The Face of Hate

Moron With a Sign

Atlas Shrugs has a long collection of photos of liberals and leftists expressing hatred and advocating violence against Republicans.

See it here.

Violent and Hateful: Leftist T Shirt Features Rifle Scope on Sarah Palin

Surveyor Marks

Left Wing Hatred

Yesterday it was disclosed that the so-called "cross-hairs" in the Sarahpac map were actually a surveyor's mark, of the type that is often used on maps.  Today some leftists have posted the right side graphic as their response:  an image of Sarah Palin's head in a rifle scope, with the slogan, "Calm down!  It's just a surveyor's mark!"

Why do surveyor marks resemble the cross-hairs of a rifle scope?  Because surveyors use a scope of their own, with cross-hairs, as a tool for measuring the dimensions of land.  How do you tell which is which?  By the context in which it is used.  If such marks are on a map, it is likely they are a surveyor's mark.  If such a mark is on the face of a nationally known political figure, it is obvious the mark is intended to be a rifle's scope.  The image above right (used on a T shirt) is another leftist call for assassination, thinly disguised as a joke.  Who then are the purveyors of hatred and the advocates of violence?

Hat tip to Proof Positive.

Mark Levin Rebuts Chris Matthews; Describes MSNBC as a Failed Network

Chris Matthew, host of the TV program "Hard Ball," attributed the Arizona violence to the rhetoric of Mark Levin and Michael Savage.  In this audio file, Levin rebuts Matthews and calls his network "MSLSD."

Levin takes particular delight in describing MSNBC as an unprofitable and unpopular network whose ratings are in the tank.

Levin asks if anyone in the Loughner household ever listened to MSNBC or "Hard Ball."  If so, perhaps it was Chris Matthews himself who caused the Arizona tragedy.  Levin, of course, wasn't serious in proposing this possible scenario, but in demonstrating the utter subjectiveness of such self-serving allegations.

Listen to it here.

Sarah Palin Fights Back (Video); Answers Democrats' "Blood Libel"

Sarah Palin: "America's Enduring Strength" from Sarah Palin on Vimeo.

Democrats Use Arizona Tragedy to Restrict Freedoms

Democrats have long stacked the political deck in their favor.  They did this by attaining overwhelming representation in the mainstream media -- all of the largest newspapers and all of the television networks were solidly Democrat. They were the gatekeepers of public knowledge and news slant.  Stories that were inconvenient to the Democrat cause were killed, buried or just not published.  News that doesn't see the light of day isn't news at all.  The public could only read or view news that the liberals allowed, and that reporting was often editorials in disguise.

Another weapon the Democrats used was the so-called "fairness doctrine."  That meant that editorial opinion in public media had to provide a forum for opposing views.  Many radio and television stations didn't editorialize because of this.  When the "fairness doctrine" was ended, talk radio bloomed.  Rush Limbaugh created a huge radio audience for his show and took Democrats and liberals to task over their policies, vigorously refuting their arguments and assailing their assumptions.  Other talk radio shows soon followed, with Sean Hannity, Mark Levin, Michael Savage and others starting radio shows of their own.

With the coming of Fox News, the Democrat monopoly on news and opinion was finally ended and the Dems have been chafing ever since.  They want to bring back the "fairness doctrine," not because it was fair, but because it wasn't.  The fairness doctrine suppressed vigorous political debate, and vigorous debate is not helpful to the Democrat cause of big government and high taxes.

Politico states:

Today Rep. Jim Clyburn, D-SC, wants to bring back the Fairness Doctrine – a move aimed directly at talk radio – while Media Matters CEO David Brock asked Rupert Murdoch to rein in or possibly even fire Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin.

Other Democrat attacks on freedom were noted in my posts yesterday, on their planned curbs of gun ownership and restrictions on free speech.  Since a majority of Americans are opposed to such legislation, the Democrats hope to pass it during a moment of national angst, horror and grief over the Arizona shootings.  Never let a good tragedy go to waste.


Meanwhile, the odious left continues its blood libel:

While discussing Saturday's shooting in Tucson MSNBC host Chris Matthews specifically names Mark Levin and Michael Savage.

"Every time you listen to them, they are furious. Furious at the left. With anger that just builds and builds in their voice and by the time they go to commercial they are just in some rage every night with some ugly talk. Ugly sounding talk and it never changes," Matthews said.

Yes, I am furious at the left, too.  Furious over their assault on our constitutional freedoms, on their concerted effort to turn our nation into a bankrupt banana republic.  If we weren't furious, I suppose they could carry out their dismantling of America without opposition.  They'd like that, but it's not going to happen.

Fred Phelps, Secret Gay Seeking Sodomy? Plans to Picket Funeral of 9 Year Old Girl Killed in Arizona

Fred Phelps Hate Group Pickets Funerals

Fred Phelps, a Democrat and extreme hater, is the so-called pastor of Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas.  Phelps and his entourage hate gays with an unbridled passion.  They regularly picket the funerals of American soldiers killed in Iraq or Afghanistan, with signs denouncing homosexuality, and thanking God for killing soldiers and gays.  They see the soldiers' deaths as being God's payback for our non-persecution of homosexuals.

Now That's Some Real Vitriol: Phelps
Protester Prays for Soldier Deaths

Phelps appears to be nuts himself.  One can only wonder if his hatred of gays is his own reaction to his own incipient homosexuality, a way of suppressing his secret desires to be sodomized.  Why else would the man present himself to the public as a giant anus?  I rest my case.

Now Fred (Seeking Sodomy) Phelps has plans to picket the funeral of 9 year old Christina Green, a precious child who was killed by Loughner's hail of bullets in Arizona last Saturday.  Phelps seems to enjoy stoking widespread hatred of himself and this is the lowest yet he has descended into the cesspool.  Unfortunately, Phelps's atrocious behavior has been upheld by the courts as protected speech.

Michelle Malkin has a post about a group of "angels" who show up at funerals that are picketed by Phelps and his hate group.  The angels wear large white wings and form a circle around the funeral attendees, so they won't have to see the Phelps protesters.  Let's hope that there are many new angels to join the group and make that circle very large.

UPDATE:  Fred Phelps died March 19, 2014.  God decided to apply the Law of Karma on Phelps, and has reincarnated him as a condom in a gay San Francisco bath house.  Enjoy the afterlife, Fred.

Death of Responsible Journalism in Arizona (Cartoons)

Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik is Irresponsible and Extreme

Sheriff Clarence Dupnik

I believe that Pima County Sheriff Clarence Dupnik is a flaming jackass.

Oh I'm sorry, is my opinion about Sheriff Dupnik "vitriol"?

Well then, what about Dupnik's opinion that Rush Limbaugh caused the Arizona shootings?  Would that qualify as vitriol?  And if someone takes a shot at Rush Limbaugh, will Dupnik take the blame?

Dupnik is an irresponsible public official who is making reckless statements to the press.  He is a died-in-the-wool Democrat who is abusing his office for partisan political purposes.

Dupnik told ABC that Rush Limbaugh's radio commentary is "vitriol" that may have motivated the crazy Jared Loughner into shooting several people in Arizona on Saturday.  Dupnik offers not a single example of Limbaugh's alleged vitriol, because he can't.  I doubt if Dupnik has ever listened to Rush Limbaugh at all.  He is just repeating lies that he heard from other partisan Democrats.  Rush is rarely angry and sticks to facts, though those facts no doubt anger liberals very much.  Dupnik's slander of Limbaugh is false and irresponsible in the extreme.  It has no basis in fact.

Ever since the shootings, Dupnik has been using the tragedy to make partisan political points and slander Republicans.  There is a current in today's news, however, that suggests it may be Dupnik himself who is to blame for the killings.  Apparently, Dupnik ignored death threats by Loughner that were reported to him, preferring to take no preventative action at all.  Dupnik should resign.

UPDATE: an Arizona Republic editorial chastises Dupnik for his own vitriol and partisan, unprofessional behavior. They write:

Dupnik needs to recall that he is elected to be a lawman. With each additional comment, the Democratic sheriff of Pima County is revealing his agenda as partisan, and, as such, every bit as recklessly antagonistic as the talk-show hosts and politicians he chooses to decry.

My point exactly.

Jared Loughner as Uncle Fester

Jared Loughner

Uncle Fester

Jared Loughner, Arizona shooting suspect, was arraigned yesterday.  He had shaved his head and appeared in court bald.  I couldn't help but notice the odd resemblance to Uncle Fester of the mythical Addams Family, a family of ghouls and scary weirdos that appeared on television as a sitcom many years back.

Democrats Had Their Own "Target Map" Complete With Bulls Eyes (Image)

The Left has been trying to pin the Arizona shootings on Sarah Palin.  Yes, it is ridiculous and extreme.  They have showed a political map from Sarah PAC that shows Republican-leaning districts and those districts are marked with "gun sight cross-hairs."  See it here.

Fox News ran this image last night.  It shows that the Democrats had their own "targeting" map, complete with bulls-eyes, six years before Sarah Palin did.  The map below was released by the DNC for the 2004 elections.  Note the use of military metaphors, i.e. "behind enemy lines."  Such metaphors are often used in politics and mean absolutely nothing.  Once again, Democrat hypocrisy is on display.

Glenn Reynolds: Democrats Call Republicans "Accomplices to Murder"

The extremist rhetoric being disseminated by the Democrats following the Arizona murders is almost unprecedented.  However, Glenn Reynolds in the Wall Street Journal deflates the Left's hot air balloon in his article today:  The Arizona Tragedy and the Politics of Blood Libel.  He writes:

Shortly after November's electoral defeat for the Democrats, pollster Mark Penn appeared on Chris Matthews's TV show and remarked that what President Obama needed to reconnect with the American people was another Oklahoma City bombing. To judge from the reaction to Saturday's tragic shootings in Arizona, many on the left (and in the press) agree, and for a while hoped that Jared Lee Loughner's killing spree might fill the bill.

With only the barest outline of events available, pundits and reporters seemed to agree that the massacre had to be the fault of the tea party movement in general, and of Sarah Palin in particular. Why? Because they had created, in New York Times columnist Paul Krugman's words, a "climate of hate."

However, who has created the climate of hate, and who are its targets, is clearly open to debate. Reynolds concludes:

There's a climate of hate out there, all right, but it doesn't derive from the innocuous use of political clichés. And former Gov. Palin and the tea party movement are more the targets than the source.

If you read nothing else today, do read this article here.

Sarah Palin's "Cross-Hairs" Map: Much Ado About Nothing

The map on the left is from Sarah Palin's PAC, which designated Democrat-held districts that were targeted by Republican hopefuls.

Now the Democrat propaganda machine is broadcasting the notion that the "cross-hairs" on the map somehow inspired a 22 year old crazy into shooting Democrat Gabrielle Giffords.

Is this map really outlandish?  Does anyone seriously believe it implies or advocates violence?  Even more absurd, does anyone seriously believe that the shooter was motivated by this map?

RIDICULOUS.

The Democrats real purpose is to smear Sarah Palin and reduce her political influence through innuendo, character assassination and outright lies.

The Left cannot win in a fair debate of the issues.  They can only win through mind games, propaganda and smear tactics.


UPDATE: It appears that the symbols used on the Palin map are actually surveyor symbols, not rifle scopes.






















UPDATE:  The Democrats had their own "target" map before Sarah Palin did.  The map below was used by the Democrat National Committee in the 2004 elections.  Note the bulls eyes on the "targeted" districts.  Also note the use of war-like imagery, i.e. "behind enemy lines."  Such metaphors have long been used in politics and mean absolutely nothing.  Again, Democrat hypocrisy is on full display here. 

As One Democrat Goes After the Second Amendment, A Second Goes After the First

Another unscrupulous Democrat is taking advantage of the Arizona murders to attack the Constitution.  However, this Democrat is going after the First Amendment's protections for free speech.

Washington (CNN) - Rep. Robert Brady, D-Pennsylvania, said he will introduce legislation making it a federal crime for a person to use language or symbols that could be perceived as threatening or inciting violence against a Member of Congress or federal official.

Brady's decision to offer the legislation comes less than 24 hours after a gunman attempted to assassinate Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, D-Arizona, in a shooting that claimed the lives of a federal judge, and a nine year-old girl, among others.

"This is not a wake up call, this is major alarms going off," he said.

Brady is particularly incensed over a web posting by former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin during the 2010 election in which she targeted 20 House Democrats, including Giffords for political defeat. The posting showed a map of the United States with the 20 Democratic congressional districts identified by gun sights.

Brady is a flaming hypocrite.  He is "upset" by a map with gunsights on districts (not on people) but totally unmoved by brazen advocacy of presidential assassination as documented in my previous post.  That, however, is beside the point.  There is no connection between anything Sarah Palin said or did with the Arizona shootings.  Brady's disingenuous stand, therefore, is not designed to correct an actual condition, but to impugn Sarah Palin.

Such legislation, if passed, could be used in a highly subjective manner to persecute and prosecute political opponents by the party in power.  The left's relentless pursuit of censorship and suppression of free speech has a purpose:  they cannot win elections if their political opponents are allowed to speak.

Read the article here.  Hat tip to Moonbattery.

Must Read: the Left's Long Legacy of Hatred and Violence

Leftist Illustration Advocating Violence
Against Sarah Palin

Leftist T Shirt Advocating
Presidential Assassination

Michelle Malkin has documented the most recent examples of the Left's political hatred and advocacy of violence against Republicans and conservatives.  It is a long list and can be viewed here.

So-called "mainstream" newspapers like the New York Times continually impugn conservatives by insinuating conservative beliefs cause violence like the Arizona shootings; however, they offer no proof beyond insinuation and innuendo.  With the left, however, there is no insinuation, just the brazen advocacy of violence and hatred against those on the Right.  Graphic descriptions appear in leftist websites and rallies and are completely ignored by the leftwing "mainstream" press, most notably the New York Times, Washington Post, San Francisco Chronicle and Los Angeles Times.

Leftist Poster Advocating Presidential Assassination

Of course, the real reason for making false accusations against conservative politicos is not to arrive at any fair semblance of the truth.  The real goal is to suppress conservative thought and political arguments.  The purveryors of the Left's blood libel are hoping that conservatives will self-censor, refrain from rebutting leftist arguments or making vigorous counter-arguments, for fear of being accused of causing violence.

The transparent hypocrisy of the liberal left is breathtaking in its sheer audacity.

The Liberal "Script": Gun Violence Motivated by "Conservative Anger"

Lawrence Auster isn't always right.  I've been meaning to rebut his odd post regarding the term "Political Correctness," but the Arizona shootings pointed my attention towards more substantial fare.  However, Auster is usually right and is again this morning.  He writes:

EVEN AS THE LIBERALS' BIG LIE ABOUT CONSERVATIVES' RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE MASSACRE IS BEING RAPIDLY DISCREDITED BY THE FACTS, THE LIBERALS CAN'T LET GO OF IT 

As reported in this morning's New York Times, the FBI has found written statements in Jared Loughner's home showing that he planned to murder Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, but has found no indications as to why he targeted her. The article goes on to mention Loughner's repeated disruptive behavior, in five classroom incidents involving campus police, which led to his being suspended from Pima Community College.

Notwithstanding the complete absence of any knowledge of Loughner's motives for seeking to kill Giffords, the Times ends the story with this:

Nobody knew for sure what compelled the gunman. Ms. Giffords, who represents the Eighth District, in the southeastern corner of Arizona, has been an outspoken critic of the state's tough immigration law, which is focused on identifying, prosecuting and deporting illegal immigrants, and she had come under criticism for her vote in favor of the health care law.

To repeat, there is no evidence that Loughner had any interest in the illegal alien issue or in Gifford's stand on it. Indeed, there is no more evidence that Gifford's position on the illegal alien law motivated Loughner's attack on her, than there is evidence that Giffords's position on Afghanistan or taxes or the funding of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting motivated his attack on her. Yet the Times couldn't refrain from tossing off the hint that Loughner shot Giffords because of her opposition to Arizona's controversial law on illegal aliens.

But here, I think, is the silver lining. That final, cheap-shot paragraph in the Times article may be the fading echo of the leftist media's attempt to blame the Tucson massacre on the right. The facts showing that Loughner was a mentally ill person who had nothing to do with conservatism have been widely disseminated. The left realizes that they can no longer sustain their Big Lie that Loughner was a conservative motivated by "conservative anger." But the skunks at the Times couldn't completely abandon their pet notion that the massacre was caused by right-wing hatred, since that charge, as Robert C. insightfully shows in the previous entry, is central to their own ideological identity. "To the believer," Robert writes, "the unfounded accusation itself is offered as a testimonial of belief to other fellow believers."

Liberalism, as I have said many times, is not about reality; it is about the perpetual reenactment of the sacred liberal "script" in which virtuous, inclusive liberals demonstrate their virtue by suppressing bigoted conservatives.

Auster's post is here.  He makes reference to an email written by one Robert C of Nashville, which is also worthy of a read, as it has insights into the workings of the liberal mind.

"Never Let a Good Tragedy Go To Waste": Democrat Readies Gun Control Bill in Wake of Arizona Shootings

The Democrats assault on constitutional liberties is ruthless and relentless.  Now one of them will attempt to capitalize on the Arizona shooting tragedy by introducing another attempt to whittle away Second Amendment gun rights.

Yes, they're right:  if no one could legally own guns, it would be more difficult for the criminally insane to get a gun and go on a shooting spree.  If no one could legally own cars, there would be no traffic deaths.  However, the cure is more deadly than the condition it is designed to cure.

Did Left Wing Hate Speech Cause the Giffords Shooting?

Only two days before Rep Gabrielle Giffords was shot in Arizona, a blogger at the left wing site Daily Kos criticized Rep Giffords.  The liberal blogger lives in Giffords district in Arizona and had voted for her and supported her for election, but now was quite upset that Giffords had voted against Nancy Pelosi for Minority Leader.  The blogger declared that Gabrielle Giffords was now "DEAD TO ME."  Interesting choice of words.  Did liberal assassin Jared Loughner read the Daily Kos post and internalize the headline as a suggestion to be taken literally?

The Daily Kos quickly scrubbed the post yesterday, but not before several conservative bloggers made a screenshot of it.  I got a copy of it from the American Thinker at this link and increased the size so it is more readable.  It is directly below.

UPDATE:  Michelle Malkin lists the Left's long legacy of political hatred and advocacy of violence, proving conclusively that liberalism is the author of violence and intolerance, NOT the Right.  See it here.

Thoughts on the Arizona Shooting Today

I was in a tax seminar all day and away from my computer, so just found out about the shooting in Arizona today.  Some FA shot a congresswoman through the brain and killed a federal judge and several others.  The perp was a 22 year old punk and his motivation is as yet unknown.  It could be that his only motivation was that he is insane.

Of course, the left will blame it on Sarah Palin, the Tea Parties, the GOP and conservatives. Their logic is that if we don't have communism, people will go crazy from want and start killing public officials.  Either that, or the perpetrator was driven lethally mad from listening to right wing talk shows or by reading Sarah Palin's Facebook page or from watching Fox News.  The left is entirely predictable and as usual, completely devoid of all decency as they attempt to make political hay out of a tragedy.

The lady congresswoman, Gabrielle Giffords (D-AZ) was shot through the brain but the report is that doctors are optimistic about her chances for recovery.  How this can be is not clear, but sometimes (if I remember right) if a bullet passes through the very middle of the brain, it only damages the connective tissue in the middle, and that particular tissue is not as critical as the gray matter on either side.  However, if the brain swells it can kill the victim, as happened when Robert F. Kennedy was shot back in 1968.  Let's all hope for the best for Rep Giffords.

Five other people besides the judge were killed and around a dozen wounded.  This doesn't appear to be a targeted killing so much as the rampage of a lunatic.  We'll have to wait to find out, of course.

Update:  Some sites are reporting that the suspect, one Jared Loughner, is a leftwing liberal who posted a video of himself burning the American flag on YouTube. See Atlas Shrugs and Moonbattery for details.

Now that we know the shooter was a liberal, it's time for a little backatcha:
What is it about "progressive" politics that drives men to commit heinous crimes?  Is it because liberals teach young people to despise their own country through years of anti-American brainwashing?  It it because these young people become intensely frustrated after being programmed with an enormous sense of entitlement?  It is it because the left has taught them that the world owes them a living, and that all the evil totalitarian regimes in the world are in the right while the USA is always in the wrong?

One can only wonder about Jared Loughner.  He was probably driven to madness by watching Rachel Maddow on MSNBC or Chris Matthews on Hardball, or perhaps by listening to leftist propaganda on NPR. No doubt the class warfare pushed by liberal politicians like Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid had an important impact.

Oh liberals and Democrats, HAVE YOU NO SHAME for the evil that your hateful rhetoric and divisive polices have wrought?

UPDATE:  Atlas Shrugs has reported that Gabrielle Giffords is the first Jewish representative from Arizona.  Liberals have been spouting anti-semitic propaganda for some time now, demonizing Israel and praising their murderous Muslim attackers.  Yep, there is one more reason to blame the left for this tragedy, their hostility to Israel and left wing antisemitism.

A Real Life Jabba the Hut: World's Fattest Man Denies Devouring Cleveland

Jabba the Hut

Paul Mason

A U.K. man (one Paul Mason) got so fat (at 980 pounds) that he made Michael Moore look like a fitness freak.  The man devoured everything in sight, turkeys, hams, pizzas, homeless people, dogs and cats and even small cars.  However, there is no truth to the rumor that he also devoured Cleveland.  Now he's suing the National Health Service for not stopping him.  Someone should have wrestled him to the ground.  They would have, but they were afraid of being either crushed or devoured.

Well I may have exaggerated his actual food intake somewhat, but the guy does have a small point (the only thing about him that is small).  He told the NHS he had an eating disorder but they sent him to a mere dietitian.  This guy needed more than a diet, he needed some serious therapy.  Eating disorders are a serious mental health problem and people die from them.

At his fattest, Paul was 70 stone.  A stone is the equivalent of 14 pounds, so Paul's weight got up to 980 pounds. Paul finally got lap-band surgery and his weight has shrunk dramatically, down to 518 pounds (hopefully, still dropping).  This probably saved his life and prevented a copyright infringement lawsuit from Jabba the Hut.

You go Paul, we're rootin' for ya.

Read all about it (and see some amazing photos) here.

Hat tip to Ann Althouse.