Vocal Minority

The Great Uniter Is Really the Great Divider

Here’s the latest “Lion’s Roar” from guest blogger Loud Lion:

It was in Philadelphia on a March day during the 2008 Presidential primary that a then first term U.S. Senator was declared the great uniter, and having bridged the great race divide in the United States. It was after this speech that we read and heard lines like:

“Obama has also grown into the character he was born to play: the great uniter who can bring together old and young, black and white, Democrat and Republican.” (Edward McClelland; Salon.com).

We had this great statement by Chris Matthews of MSNBC referred to the speech as “what many of us think is one of the great speeches in American history, and we watch a lot of them.” (Dickens, Geoffrey (2008-03-18). “Chris Matthews Hails Obama Speech As ‘Worthy of Abraham Lincoln’”).

I could go on and on, but why should I, must of us know how the media could find no fault in the man then, and barely now. If you want to know more, I suggest you pick up Bernard Goldberg’s book A Slobbering Love Affair: The True (And Pathetic) Story of the Torrid Romance Between Barack Obama and the Mainstream Media.

With his coronation in November, the chills up Chris Matthews’s leg grew greater and greater. Here we had a President who prided himself on being the type of politician who would be the one to really cross the aisle and get Democrats and Republicans work through the many difficult and trying issues that need unifying support and not unilateral action. Well, I am here to call BS on all that. Nothing in the man’s history shows that he is a uniter.

Let’s look at the great uniters’ childhood first to see if he was exposed to uniting ideas, because it is believed that the man rises from the ashes of his childhood. (OK, I have no idea if they say it, but I kind of like the statement, so feel free to say it now.)

President Obama’s parents met in a 1960 Russian Language class. Let’s examine that in itself: 1960, height of the Cold War, Bay of Pigs and Russian Missile Crises are looming, and we have two kids, neither of which went into espionage or the like, taking an advanced Russian language class. Obama’s father wrote a thesis entitled “Problems With Our Socialism” that advocates 100% taxation of the rich, communal ownership of land and the forced confiscation of privately controlled land. 

I have no idea if this is true or not, but with his grandparents being friends with members of the Communist Party of the United States, and a father from Kenya, which was at the time fighting for independence from Great Britain, with probable support from the Soviet Union it supposes that maybe they leaned towards a belief that Communism was a true and viable solution.

After President Obama’s parents divorced, his mother met and married a graduate student from Indonesia. Indonesia at the time was in the midst of a civil war in which the military was trying to oust, which it later did, the Communist group in power. After the military assumed control of the country, all students learning in foreign countries were recalled, and with that he returned, followed a year later by his new bride and his step-son. 

An interesting twist, was/is, that at the time, the only way for Barack to be enrolled in school was to be a citizen of Indonesia, so his step-father adopted him. While Indonesia is the largest Islamic practicing, by population, country in the world, it is not ruled by sharia law. So, while Barack was now an adopted child of a follower of Islam, and was living in a predominantly Islamic nation, and went to school there, there is nothing to say he was schooled in the tolerant ways of Islam.

In 1971, Barack was sent back to Hawaii to live with his grandparents. The same grandparents that counted as their friends, Frank Marshall Davis a noted American Communist, who is mentions as “Frank” in President Obama’s books, and moved over 2000 miles so one of them could attend a school where communism was openly discussed and attended the “Little Red Church” so named after Chairman Mao’s Little Red Book. While in theory Communism espouses equality, we all know “All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others.”

A year after Barack come back from Indonesia so did his mother, staying in Hawaii for a few years (5), and then returning back to Indonesia until 1994, and then sadly died of cancer in 1995. I bring this up to point out that throughout his life Barack parents were entering and leaving his life, leaving him to be raised by his grandparents. Grandparents do not raise their grandchildren like parents raise their children for the most part. Grandparents are the ones who say yes, and give the grandchildren what they want. They are the dotters, while the parents are the disciplinarians. Also, with a mother that comes and goes as she pleases, it is my thesis that Barack thought that putting oneself ahead of your family is the norm, and that nothing was greater then oneself.

Jumping ahead, we see that the friends that Barack had after his schooling are radical class warfare devout terrorists. (Yes I’m talking about you, Willy Ayres, and Rashid Khalidi, and Mike Klonsky.) Now, I am not saying these people were not just guys from around the neighborhood, or that he believes or accepts their beliefs as his own, but you are who you are by your associations. And, these people are clearly thinking about destruction of an American society that has enabled them to obtain the positions that they are now in.

I could sit and write a lot on the hatred spewed forth by Rev. Wright, and how someone sitting in his pews for over 20 years could not have accepted at least some of the venom coming from the pulpit unless they too believed it. If not, then our president is either a sociopath or someone who say his membership as a way of acceptance within the black community he still believed he was not a real part of because he had a white mother who basically abandoned her black looking child, and whitey grandparents that raised him.

Again, this is all a part of what makes President Obama the race baiter, and great divider he actually is, and not the proclaimed great unifier.

Let’s now look at some of the wording BHO uses, and you see if these are unifying terms, or dividing.

“I can no more disown him [Rev. Wright] than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother – a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.” (Emphasis mine)

“It will be up to each of you to make sure the young people, African-Americans, Latinos and the women who powered our victory in 2008, stand together once again.”

Think back to the police incident in Massachusetts which resulted in the famous “Beer Summit,” which will surely go down in history with other great summits like Yalta, Potsdam and many others. Let’s look at his words:

“Well, I should say at the outset that Skip Gates is a friend, so I may be a little biased here. I don’t know all the facts. What’s been reported though is that the guy forgot his keys, jimmied his way to get into the house. There was a report called in to the police station that there might be a burglary taking place. So far, so good, right? I mean, if I was trying to jigger into—well, I guess this is my house now, so …”

OK, he admits that the man looked like he was breaking into the house, and if that is true, then the police have a right to check it out.

“Now, I don’t know, not having been there and not seeing all the facts, what role race played in that. But I think it’s fair to say, number one, any of us would be pretty angry; number two, that the Cambridge police acted stupidly in arresting somebody when there was already proof that they were in their own home; and, number three, what I think we know separate and apart from this incident is that there’s a long history in this country of African-Americans and Latinos being stopped by law enforcement disproportionately. That’s just a fact.”

Again, he says he does not know all the facts, but he is willing to then go on about race and it having a direct correlation between it and police. That is not someone who thinks that race should not be an issue, but that it is the issue.

Here is a phrase that the president likes to use “So if these folks want a fight, it’s a fight I’m ready to have.” You tell me, are those uniting words or dividing words. I don’t’ know about you, but when someone wants to fight me, I tend to think they are not my friend, and definitely not looking out for my best interests.

All these things by themselves does not indicate a divider, but as president the man is not a sound bite, and not someone who can allow his deep seated racial issues to control him and his speech and policies, but we are seeing it on an almost daily basis. The child learned early how to control the message, and get what he wants, and we are seeing that too on a daily basis. The teachings of Marx, Mao, Alinsky are those being used to develop and massage the message of this administration.

Sensible Liberal: The New York Times

Yes, friends. Somewhere pigs are flying and Hell is one huge glacier.

Shortly after doing this post quoting an article by Kris Kobach on Arizona S.B. 1070, I discovered this: The New York Times, to its credit, published this Opinion piece from Prof. Kobach, which contains even more liberal myth-busting.

Why Arizona Drew a Line
April 28, 2010

… Predictably, groups that favor relaxed enforcement of immigration laws, including the American Civil Liberties Union and the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund, insist the law is unconstitutional. Less predictably, President Obama declared it “misguided” and said the Justice Department would take a look.

Presumably, the government lawyers who do so will actually read the law, something its critics don’t seem to have done. The arguments we’ve heard against it either misrepresent its text or are otherwise inaccurate. As someone who helped draft the statute, I will rebut the major criticisms individually:

It is unfair to demand that aliens carry their documents with them. It is true that the Arizona law makes it a misdemeanor for an alien to fail to carry certain documents. “Now, suddenly, if you don’t have your papers ... you’re going to be harassed,” the president said. “That’s not the right way to go.” But since 1940, it has been a federal crime for aliens to fail to keep such registration documents with them. The Arizona law simply adds a state penalty to what was already a federal crime. Moreover, as anyone who has traveled abroad knows, other nations have similar documentation requirements.

“Reasonable suspicion” is a meaningless term that will permit police misconduct. Over the past four decades, federal courts have issued hundreds of opinions defining those two words. The Arizona law didn’t invent the concept: Precedents list the factors that can contribute to reasonable suspicion; when several are combined, the “totality of circumstances” that results may create reasonable suspicion that a crime has been committed.

For example, the Arizona law is most likely to come into play after a traffic stop. A police officer pulls a minivan over for speeding. A dozen passengers are crammed in. None has identification. The highway is a known alien-smuggling corridor. The driver is acting evasively. Those factors combine to create reasonable suspicion that the occupants are not in the country legally.

The law will allow police to engage in racial profiling. Actually, Section 2 provides that a law enforcement official “may not solely consider race, color or national origin” in making any stops or determining immigration status. In addition, all normal Fourth Amendment protections against profiling will continue to apply. In fact, the Arizona law actually reduces the likelihood of race-based harassment by compelling police officers to contact the federal government as soon as is practicable when they suspect a person is an illegal alien, as opposed to letting them make arrests on their own assessment.

It is unfair to demand that people carry a driver’s license. Arizona’s law does not require anyone, alien or otherwise, to carry a driver’s license. Rather, it gives any alien with a license a free pass if his immigration status is in doubt. Because Arizona allows only lawful residents to obtain licenses, an officer must presume that someone who produces one is legally in the country.

State governments aren’t allowed to get involved in immigration, which is a federal matter. While it is true that Washington holds primary authority in immigration, the Supreme Court since 1976 has recognized that states may enact laws to discourage illegal immigration without being pre-empted by federal law. As long as Congress hasn’t expressly forbidden the state law in question, the statute doesn’t conflict with federal law and Congress has not displaced all state laws from the field, it is permitted. That’s why Arizona’s 2007 law making it illegal to knowingly employ unauthorized aliens was sustained by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.

In sum, the Arizona law hardly creates a police state. It takes a measured, reasonable step to give Arizona police officers another tool when they come into contact with illegal aliens during their normal law enforcement duties.

And it’s very necessary: Arizona is the ground zero of illegal immigration. Phoenix is the hub of human smuggling and the kidnapping capital of America, with more than 240 incidents reported in 2008. It’s no surprise that Arizona’s police associations favored the bill, along with 70 percent of Arizonans.

Congrats.

Who the heck at the NYT allowed this to go to print!?

Who Said It?

The context: Illegal alien Elvira Arellano was living in the U.S. with one son. Shortly after 9/11/01, after having gotten a job at a major U.S. airport (!),  she was charged and convicted of document fraud. She was ordered to be deported, but became a fugitive. Once found, her only salvation was the intervention of either Senator from the state where she was living. Neither one agreed to help, and the poor woman was deported back to Mexico. 

When questioned about Arellano situation on local news, of the Senators callously and unsympathetically told the reporter:

“We live in a country of laws. We don’t do things sort of based on one person’s situation, no matter how painful.”

Who said it?

(Hit your Pg Dn key for the answer)

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Senator Barack Obama (D-IL)
August 16, 2006

Thanks, Naked Emporer News!

Watching the Left Play Politics with the Arizona Illegal Immigration Bill

When I added my voice to those across the country who criticized the Democrats for pushing, and ultimately passing, the health (s)care bill, my liberal friends actually responded to my objection with, “Read the bill.” “Read the bill.”

Right. As if they read the 2,700-page bill in its entirety.

Of course, now we know that not even most of Congress read their bill, otherwise they wouldn’t have passed it with (at least) two huge errors: (1) excluding children from coverage and (2) not exempting themselves from the trap they just caught the American people in! Not even President Hope&Change read the freaking bill.

Well, now my liberal friends are jumping on the “Down with Arizona!” bandwagon for having the audacity to enforce federal law already on the books with regard to illegal aliens. By now the city of San Francisco has suspended official travel to the state and other lefty enclaves are adopting other similar measures for Arizona’s crime of actually enforcing the law.

To them, the state has turned into a police state akin to Nazi Germany, where police at any place at any time can walk up to a brown person and say, “Show me your pap-uhs!” Others, like the opportunistic race-baiter Al Sharpton worries about racial profiling.

And tomorrow they say there’s going to be a 100,000-person May Day protest in cities around the country. And if the Phoenix protests are any indication, the media will portray these law-breaking thugs favorably and sympathetically.

The best part is how the left tries to spin this as a civil rights issue and a violation of the Constitution. This is a bloc of Americans who just celebrated the passing of a 2,700-page piece of health (s)care legislation that sh*ts on the Constitution, shreds it, and then sets it on fire. The same people who lament the violation of the civil rights of illegal immigrants just one month ago applauding the violation of all Americans’ civil rights by mandating the purchase of government health insurance and the hiring of 16,500 IRS brownshirts with the authority to approach you at any time and say, “Show me your pap-uhs!”

The same people who denounce the Arizona bill have no problem with this. That’s hypocrisy on steroids. It’s hard proof that for the left it’s always agenda over rule of law, politics over principle. Always.

It is of no small significance that wherever possible, the word “illegal” is left out of the discussion. You rarely see it in news stories or TV captions. That’s on purpose. It’s left out to skew the debate, to paint Arizona’s governor Jan Brewer and all who support her as guilty of opposing immigration in general, which the Democrat-media complex then converts into hatred of non-white people (i.e., racism.)

This is how liberals think. It is like a Six Degrees of Separation game. Everything—everything—conservatives/Republicans stand for amounts to racism, homophobia, xenophobia, or sexism once they manage to connect all the unconnectable dots. It’s a destructive game that’s played from my friends’ pages on Facebook right up to the halls of Congress and the White House itself. 

But with every fear-mongering statement made by these lefty fools, they demonstrate not only that they do not care for rule of law, but that they have not read the bill! Even President Hope&Change hasn’t, as evidenced by a stupid comment about the threat of people with dark skin being apprehended by police in an ice cream parlor without cause.

Politically-motivated result-oriented scoundrels all of them.

Below is an attempt to correct the lies perpetuated by the Democrat-media complex about Arizona S.B. 1070. It was written by law professor Kris W. Kobach, formerly John Ashcroft’s chief adviser on immigration law and border security, and one of the principal drafters of the bill:

Myth No. 1: The law requires aliens to carry identification that they weren’t already required to carry. On the contrary, the law simply penalizes aliens who fail to carry the registration documents that federal law already requires them to keep on their person. These federal crimes (8 United States Code Section 1304(a) or 1306(e)) have been around since 1940. The Arizona law simply adds a layer of state penalty to what already was a crime under federal law.

Ironically, the open-borders crowd has for years insisted that we use the term “undocumented” when referring to illegal aliens. Now, when a state takes seriously the documentation requirements of federal law, that crowd becomes apoplectic.

As for U.S. citizens, the law does not require them to carry any identification whatsoever. Indeed, the law cannot possibly be applied against U.S. citizens; only an alien can be found guilty under the Arizona statute.

Myth No. 2: The law will encourage racial profiling. The terms of the act make clear that such profiling cannot occur. Section 2 provides that a law enforcement official “may not solely consider race, color, or national origin” in making any stops or determining an alien’s immigration status. In addition, all of the normal Fourth Amendment protections against racial profiling still apply.

Moreover, the law actually reduces the likelihood of racial profiling by forcing police officers to contact the federal government to verify a person’s immigration status when they suspect a person is an illegal alien. It already was permissible for police officers across the country to make arrests for violations of federal immigration law where reasonable suspicion existed that a violation had occurred. Now, in Arizona, officers will have to make a phone call to Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) 24/7 hot line to confirm that any aliens in their custody really are present unlawfully. Officers can no longer proceed based solely on their own assessment of a person’s immigration status. In this way, the Arizona law takes any consideration of race out of the equation - strengthening the protections against racial profiling.

Myth No. 3: The law will require Arizona police officers to stop and question people. Here again, critics of the law are failing to read it carefully. The law only kicks in when a police officer already has made a “lawful contact” with a person, such as stopping him for breaking another law. The most likely contact is during the issuance of a speeding ticket. The law does not require the officer to begin questioning a person about his immigration status or to do anything the officer would not otherwise do.

Only after a stop is made, and subsequently the officer develops reasonable suspicion on his own that an immigration law has been violated, is any obligation imposed. At that point, the officer is required to call ICE to confirm whether the person is an illegal alien. Are critics seriously suggesting that local law enforcement officers should ignore the violations of federal law that they see at that point?

In sum, the law doesn’t make any radical changes. Rather, it is a reasonable step that gives Arizona police officers another tool in their toolbox when they come into contact with illegal aliens during their normal law enforcement duties. It also prohibits Arizona cities from implementing sanctuary policies that prevent their officers from contacting ICE.

Arizona police officers need the tool that S.B. 1070 provides. Arizona is at ground zero with respect to illegal immigration and its criminal consequences. Arizona has witnessed hundreds of violent crimes committed by illegal aliens. Most recently, the brutal murder of rancher Robert Krentz on his own property by a suspected illegal alien shocked all Americans. Phoenix is now the kidnapping capital of North America and the hub of human smuggling into the United States. Three Phoenix police officers have been shot by illegal aliens since 1999. …

Will any of these truths see the light of day? Will reason and calm reign, or will anger and emotion win the day (you know, like those angry Tea Partiers!)?

And will my liberal friends, who are just as sure as Al Sharpton that Arizona has become a Nazi-like police state actually read the bill?

Doubt it.

I conclude with these words from my friend Mike Haltman of the Political Commentator blog. He writes this in today’s Examiner:

There are few people who do not have sympathy for those who flee out of Mexico for a better life in the United States, but we have laws that concern our sovereign borders for a reason.

There is every opportunity for a Mexican citizen to legally get into the United States, and to label those who want to enforce this as racists is wrong.

A President and his minions coming on television and distorting the facts, speaking out against the enforcement of the rule of law is wrong as well.

A president telling a story of a father and his son walking down the street to get ice cream only to be rousted by the police who demand papers is wrong.

Comparing the desire to protect our borders with the Jewish citizens of Germany being rounded up and killed by the Nazis is a disgrace.

The President’s job is to be an advocate for the safety and protection of the people and borders of the United States. Not a distorter of the facts and advocate for illegal actions.

Ditto!

Quotes of Note: El Rushbo on Obama, Iran, and Arizona

"If Obama would be as tough on Iran as he is on Arizona we might have something to talk about, but then again Obama knows who his real enemies are, and there are many more of them in Arizona than there are, apparently, in Iran."

- El Rushbo, April 29, 2010

Tea Partier Vows to Take Up "Shovels and Pickaxes" Against Americans

Oh wait, that's not a Tea Partier. It's an illegal immigration supporter in Arizona:

... as was the case with a kid smacking an effigy of the politician with whom his adult onlookers disagreed, and as was the case angry mobs hurling bottles at police, as was the case with swastikas smeared on the windows of government buildings.

But wait, I thought the Tea Party movement was hateful, angry, and violent. I'm sooooo confused. 

Of course, the Democrat-media complex is going to denounce this violence-inducing rhetoric. 

Right, Reps. Nancy Pelosi and Emanuel Cleaver and John Lewis and Andre Carson and Alcee Hastings and Maxine Waters and Bawney Fwank? 

Right, President Obama and ex-presidents Carter and Clinton? 

Right, Diane Sawyer and Bob Scheiffer and Brian Williams and John Berman and Dan Harris and Terry Moran and Jake Tapper?

Right, Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews and Jeneane Garofalo and Joyless Behar and Bill Maher?

Right, Maureen Dowd and Paul Krugman and Frank Rich and Charles Blow and Howard Kurtz?

Hello? Is this thing on? Helloooo ...

Liberal Lie #14: The Right Is Violent and Homicidal, the Left Level-Headed and Civil

OK, let's do the required recap: 

In Liberaland, Tea Parties = hateful, angry, inciting violence. Pro-illegal immigration protests in Arizona = "mostly peaceful."

How's this for "mostly peaceful," you sons of bitches [h/t Ace of Spades]:

This, my friends, is a photo of a child wielding a stick at a piñata-effigy of Arizona governor Jan Brewer, while adults stand by cheering him on and snapping photos of their own.

All of you Tea Party-bashers in the Democrat-media complex: Are you going to denounce this actual instance of hateful, angry, and violent behavior? 

Or are you going to be the typical politically-motivated result-oriented hypocrites you always are?

To Those Comparing Arizona to Nazi Germany: Shame on You!

There are no depths too low for the Democrat-media complex to sink in order to pursue their agenda. The latest is the shameful comparison between the just and justified rule of law in Arizona to systematic persecution of Jews in Nazi Germany. 

I was going to write a full response to this, but Angry White Dude beat me to it:

MAINSTREAM MEDIA INSULTS HOLOCAUST VICTIMS
Tuesday, April 27, 2010

 

Here are some of the recent mainstream media headlines and comments on Arizona’s new immigration law (h/t Ace of Spades):

Democrat: Arizona law like ‘Nazi Germany’

Arizona illegal immigrant law is a Nazi measure says Catholic Archbishop Mahony

(Newsweek) Arizona or Nazi Germany?

Sharpton, other activists compare Arizona immigration law to apartheid, Nazi Germany and Jim Crow

Roger Ebert Compares Arizona Immigration Bill To Nazi Germany

NYT Former Reporter Greenhouse Fires on Arizona’s ‘Police State,’ Makes Nazi Comparison

How freely liberals throw around comparisons to Nazi Germany when things don’t go there way. When things don’t go there way translates into when something is good for America and it’s citizens. What a tremendous insult to innocent Jewish victims of the socialist German Nazi death machine to the plight of lawbreaking, illegal aliens entering our country and living at great expense on the backs of the American taxpayer. Not to mention the tremendous amount of crime committed at the hands of illegals!

... Let’s examine. Jews in Germany and Poland were productive citizens of both countries. They had their hard-earned possessions stripped from them. They were beaten in the streets and made to wear Stars of David at all times identifying them as Jews. Our police cannot even question people stopped for crimes if they are citizens! Jews were forcefully taken to concentration camps where they were gassed, shot or used in barbaric medical experiments. Six million innocent Jewish men, women and children died horrible deaths. They were treated worse than anything we could imagine. Yet liberals equate the treatment of Jews with illegal aliens!

Illegal aliens break American laws by entering our country without legal permission. Once they are here, our backward laws heap upon them rights and taxpayer aid. We spend untold billions of dollars each year housing, educating, medicating and incarcerating illegal aliens. Areas where they live soon become crime-ridden ghettos. They do not assimilate into American culture. Americans are too often the victims of violent crimes at the hands of these unlawful hordes. Yet liberals continue to compare them to Jews under the Nazis!

Arizona has over 500,000 illegal aliens. The upkeep of those illegals has nearly bankrupt the state. Crime is rampant and Phoenix has become the kidnapping capital of America because of them. It has gone too far and one state decided it was time to do something about it. But liberals are worried about hurting the feelings of lawbreakers who should never be here in the first place! Whose country is it anyway?

None of this would be necessary if the federal government had done its duty. Each President from Clinton to Obama has broken their oath of office by not protecting America’s borders. Who has paid the price? American taxpayers who either pay for illegals and the services they steal and/or those who suffer crime at the hands of violent illegals.

American values are upside down under the fools in Washington who control our country. Our President calls the new Arizona law “misguided.” Who, sir, may I ask, is misguided…the people who must pay for and suffer the consequences of failed immigration enforcement or the tools in Washington who don’t have to suffer living in proximity to these illegals and can only see a future voting bloc? Our country has slipped from a true republic into a system controlled by a ruling class.

Isn’t it sad liberals were only months ago calling the Tea Party movement names and decrying posters that portrayed Hussein Hopenchange as Hitler when Obama’s actions socializing America closely resemble Hitler’s in installing total government control? Liberals are out to destroy America. None of their actions can be portrayed as beneficial to our country. We must fight them at every turn and not tire! Arizona has set an example for all states to follow. I pray Texas will be next or we will soon suffer a wave of crime and expense from the seas of illegals fleeing Arizona.

Thank you, AWD.

When you compare what the state of Arizona is doing to deal with rampant illegal immigration to Nazi Germany, as the Democrat-media complex has done, you are sh*tting on the memory of every one of the six million Jews and millions of others who lost their lives during that dark era of modern history. There is no comparison whatsoever. No comparison.

Shame on you! Shame. On. You.

Then & Now: Obama vs. Obama

Then:

 “Even as we speak, there are those who are preparing to divide us—the spin masters, the negative ad peddlers who embrace the politics of ‘anything goes.’ Well, I say to them tonight, there is not a liberal America and a conservative America—there is the United States of America. There is not a black America and a white America and Latino America and Asian America—there’s the United States of America.”

— State senator Barack Obama, Democratic National Convention, July 27, 2004

Now:

“This year, the stakes are higher than ever. It will be up to each of you to make sure that young people, African Americans, Latinos and women who powered our victory in 2008 stand together once again. …’ ”

— “In the video message to his supporters, reported in WaPo, April 26, 2010

[h/t the indispensible WSJ Best of the Web]

Not surprising the “uniter” in chief is doing what he always does, and that’s a whole lot of dividing. Divide and conquer. Alinsky would be proud.

Liberal Media Bias: Networks' Turn to Whitewash Pro-Illegal Immigration Angry Mobs

CNN did it, so and did the New York Times. So it should be no surprise that the network news channels (who trashed the peaceful Tea Parties as angry violent mobs) got right on board whitewashing the actual angry violent mob in Phoenix. Scott Whitlock at NewsBusters reports:

ABC: ‘Mostly Peaceful’ Immigration Protests vs. ‘Very Ugly’ Tea Party Rallies

On Saturday’s Good Morning America, reporter Mike Von Fremd downplayed the violence of protesters against Arizona’s new immigration law. He spun, “Riot police were called in to try and control demonstrators protesting outside the capital. Most were peaceful. A handful threw bottles at police and were arrested.” Yet, ABC derided March’s Tea Party rallies as “very ugly,” despite the fact that there were no arrests.

There’s that “mostly peaceful” phrase again. All the other lib media outlets are using the same thing, or slight variations. The White House must really get in touch with their media flying monkeys to make sure everyone’s on board with the Democrat talking points.

In contrast, on March 20, World News host David Muir scolded, “Protesters against the [health care] plan gathered on the streets of the capital where late today we learned words shouted turned very ugly, reports of racial and homophobic slurs, one protester actually spitting on a Congressman.” Continuing to fret over those opposed the bill, he complained, “Late word from Washington tonight about just how ugly the crowds gathered outside the Longworth office building have become.”

If Tea Party protesters had thrown bottles at members of Congress, it seems unlikely that ABC would have described them as “mostly peaceful.”

Heh, there weren’t any bottles, or anything else for that matter, thrown at members of Congress. But instead of ABC and the rest of the lib media calling the Tea Parties “mostly peaceful,” they instead bought into the lies of Congressmen who claimed they had racial slurs and spit hurled at them. Pathetic.

Over on NBC’s Today show on Saturday, correspondent Jose Diaz Balart played it straight with regard to immigration rallies: “Tensions were high outside the Capitol. Four protesters were arrested.” On CBS’s Early Show, Chris Wragge made only a quick reference to the protests: “On Friday, there were protests against the bill outside the state capitol in Phoenix.”

NewsBusters also produced this short video on the stark contrast between media treatment of this protest and the Tea Party:

Note that ABC is following the same liberal template as most of the lib media I’ve cited: Note the word “illegal” missing from the caption. Also, note the subtitle: “Strict law or racial profiling?” That’s not an objective question. It’s a Democrat talking point. This bill - which is simply an official declaration of enforcing laws that are already on the federal books! - does not and never did have anything to do with racial profiling! It’s typical lib-Dem racial fear-mongering disguised as news.

And I hope enough Americans are wise enough to see right through it.

Rite Blog Round-Up (4/26/10)

Arizona / Illegal Immigration Edition:

Roman Around: Race-baiting Al ready to go to Arizona to make things right

Start Thinking Right: The Real Issues Behind Arizona’s New Illegal Immigration Law

This Ain’t Hell: Is this what justice looks like?

Wake Up Black America: Obama upset that the Governor of Arizona decided to protect the citizens of her state from illegal aliens

Doug Ross @ Journal: Irony-meter breaks: La Raza, MEChA and other racial separatist groups worry that law enforcement might use racial profiling to enforce laws

Swastikaaas in Phoenix. Will Nancy Pelosi Care?

You might remember when during last year’s town halls San Fran Nan (D-CA) seeing swastikaaas? And, of course, you remember all the concern for violence from the town hall attendees and the Tea Party movement (as I’ve already mentioned here and here)? And then there were those Congressmen who, after last month’s underhanded passing of the health (s)care bill, were concerned for their physical safety. The lib media dutifully reported stories of all the supposed death threats they were getting on their phones.

But it turns out that last Friday’s pro-illegal immigration protest in Arizona was violent and did in fact involve swastikas. Associated Press (to their credit) reports of swastikas made of refried beans being smeared on the Arizona state Capitol:

Furor grows over Ariz. law against immigrants
Apr 26, 6:06 PM (ET)
By JONATHAN J. COOPER

PHOENIX (AP) - The furor over Arizona’s new law cracking down on illegal immigrants grew Monday as opponents used refried beans to smear swastikas on the state Capitol, civil rights leaders demanded a boycott of the state, and the Obama administration weighed a possible legal challenge.

Activists are planning a challenge of their own, hoping to block the law from taking effect by arguing that it encroaches on the federal government’s authority to regulate immigration and violates people’s constitutional rights by giving police too much power.

The measure - set to take effect in late July or early August - would make it a crime under state law to be in the U.S. illegally. It directs state and local police to question people about their immigration status if there is reason to suspect they are illegal.

“If you look or sound foreign, you are going to be subjected to never-ending requests for police to confirm your identity and to confirm your citizenship,” said Alessandra Soler Meetze, executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Arizona, which is exploring legal action.

Employees at the Capitol came to work Monday to find that vandals had smeared swastikas on the windows. And protesters gathered for a second straight day to speak out against a law they say will lead to rampant racial profiling of anyone who looks Hispanic. …

 

Gee, I wonder if the governor or members of the legislature are going to express concern for their safety and, if they do, whether the media will sympathetically report about it.

I also wonder if San Fran Nan will be concerned about the swastikaaas in Phoenix. Doubt it. Last March she told a crowd of illegal aliens in San Francisco that enforcement of immigration laws is ... ready? ... un-American [h/t Stand by Liberty]. And right now the city of San Francisco is considering an official boycott of Arizona.

But it’s not only the pro-illegal protestors with Hitler on their mind. On this weekend’s “Saturday Night Live,” some no-name lib hack named Seth Myers said this during “Weekend Update”:

I know there are some people in Arizona who are worried that Obama’s acting like Hitler, but can we all agree that there’s nothing more Nazi than saying, “Show me your papers?” There’s never been a World War II movie that didn’t include the line, “Show me your papers.” It’s their catch phrase. Every time someone says, “Show me your papers,” Hitler’s family gets a residual check.

Well that’s just stupid. Is it “fascist” to ask someone for their ID a bar? At the video store? When you apply for a job? Of course not. This isn’t just stupid. It’s lib stupid.

Meanwhile, Rasmussen reports that 70% of Arizonans and 60% of Americans nationwide support what most of the lib media, "civil rights" activists like the detestable race-monger Al Sharpton, and even President Hope&Change himself oppose.

There really is a battle for America's soul going on, folks. It's the American people vs. the radical left Democrat-media complex.

Which side are you on.

Liberal Media Bias: CNN.com Calls Phoenix Thugfest "Largely Peaceful" [UPDATE: NY Times Too!]

Yes, folks. Let the media spinning begin ...

In its Politics section, CNN.com laughably starts:  

Hundreds of people gathered outside Arizona's Capitol building on Sunday in a largely peaceful protest against the state's tough new immigration law.

To which the folks at WSJ's Best of the Web responds:

"Largely peaceful" implies that there was some violence, although the CNN report does not reveal its nature or extent. In any case, it's quite a contrast with reports of completely peaceful tea-party protests that emphasize imagined threats of violence. 

Which was exactly the point I made in my first post on this topic (where you can find the video of demonstrably unpeaceful thugs attacking police with bottles and other projectiles. 

Not only that, but "tough" is quite a subjective way of describing Arizona's new law. And not only did CNN add the unnecessary qualifier "tough," they conveniently forgot the essential qualifier "illegal."

Does anyone think any of Obama's or the Dem Congress' draconian liberty-violating and wealth-stealing policies have been described as "tough" by CNN? Probably not. They've been too busy painting the largely peaceful Tea Party movement - the ones protesting those truly tough policies - as violent.

In other words, like most other things passing as journalism these days, this isn't a news story, it's a White House press release. As the illegal immigration issue heats up, get ready for more of this. Up is down and down is up. Right is wrong and wrong is justified.

Nope, no liberal media bias here!

UPDATE: Just as I hit "publish" on this post, the daily TimesWatch digest arrived in my inbox. Lo and behold, the NY Times also did a story whitewashing the Phoenix thugfest as "mostly peaceful". (Yes, that would be the same NY Times that has been pushing the "Tea Party = violent and angry" lie for the past year.). Here's Clay Waters posting:

‘Mostly Peacefully’ Means ‘Somewhat Violently’ at the New York Times

The Times sometimes takes its politically correct blandishments to humorous extremes, as in Randal Archibold’s lead story Saturday, “Arizona Enacts Stringent Law On Immigration.” Check the curious way Archibold referred to a protest against Arizona’s new anti-immigration law:

As hundreds of demonstrators massed, mostly peacefully, at the capitol plaza, the governor, speaking at a state building a few miles away, said the law “represents another tool for our state to use as we work to solve a crisis we did not create and the federal government has refused to fix.”

Achibold didn’t go into why he felt obliged to include the modifier “mostly.” For that, one had to check out a local report filed Friday night that included details the Times left out:

Three people were arrested during the immigration rally at the state capitol Friday afternoon.

Two were arrested after they were seen throwing water bottles at police, according to a news release from the Arizona Department of Public Safety, the state police agency.

Evidently, “mostly peacefully” means “somewhat violently” at the New York Times.

It’s interesting that, for all the Times’ hand-wringing over how the Tea Party movement is potentially inspiring violent acts, there has evidently yet to be a single documented case of violence or arrest at any of the many Tea Party functions.

Meanwhile, here are three actual arrests at a single medium-sized rally dominated by left-wingers, and the Times doesn’t find the fact worth mentioning.

Hey, look at that! Just like CNN.com, the NY Times describes the issue being protested as simply "immigration", not "illegal immigration."

You guys in the lib media are really something, you know that?

Ways the Left Has Screwed Up My Country Today: Dem-Media Complex Rallies 'Round AZ Pro-Illegal Movement

For months now the Democrat-media complex—from Congressmen to Senators, from the current president to a certain ex-president, from the Obots at MSNBC and CNN to the Obama Zombies at the networks, from the Obamatons at the NY Times to the Obamaniacs at WaPo—have bemoaned the supposed violence incited by the Tea Party movement. Not only have they libelled hundreds of thousands of decent American people peacefully engaging in protest, but they have smeared right-wing figures like Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, and even Sarah Palin for spearheading this non-existent violence. That’s all we hear. Tea Party = Violence. Tea Party = Anger. Why are they so aaaangry?

Blah blah freaking blah.

Over the weekend there was an actual instance of violence and rage. Except it isn’t a Tea Party rally. It’s a freaking pro-illegal immigration protest in Arizona in response to the state’s audacity to sign a bill declaring illegal immigration—gasp!—illegal!

And so this weekend pro-illegal immigration groups took to the streets. They were aaaangry. And they were violent. Just as the Democrat-media complex depicts the Tea Party movement!

If the Dems and their sycophantic media were really concerned about violence, hatred, and anger, as they claim to be w.r.t. the Tea Party movement, then this display in Arizona should share the crap out of them.

Hey, President Golden Calf? Where is your “You’d think they’d be saying Thank You!” speech? Hey, Matthews and Olbermann and network talking heads, where are your endless breathless stories about all the violence, now that there this actually video footage of it? Where is your interminable wonder about “Why are they so aaaangry?” Are we going to be bombarded this week with Frank Rich and Charles Blow editorials about “Who are these protestors? How many whites? How many blacks? How many men? How many women? How many young people? How many old people?

No, we’re not going to see any of this from the Democrat-media complex. There’s going to be no criticism of pro-illegal immigration protestors. There’s going to be no condemnation of their violence against police.

Because the Democrat-media complex supports the pro-illegal immigration movement. That’s the difference. So, just like they did with all the angry, violent anti-“war” protests during George W. Bush’s presidency, they will do all the puff pieces and whitewashing they need.

Because it’s all about their agenda:

Protesting Bush and his policies = Good.

Protesting Arizona’s illegal immigration bill = Good.

Protesting NJ governor Chris Christie’s attempts to reduce the state’s deficit and curb the excesses of the teacher’s union = Good.

But Protesting Obama-Reid-Pelosi and the unprecedented, unconstitutional government overreach = Bad.

As usual, the Democrat-media complex is against the American people, as 70% of Arizonans favor their governor’s bill. Wonder why? See for yourself:

April 26, 2010
Arizona just doing the job the Feds refuse to do
Stephen Bennett

… A report issued by Maricopa County's Attorney General Andrew Thomas in October 2008 reveals the extent of Arizona's problem with crime committed by illegal immigrants.

In 2007, illegal immigrants accounted for:

10% of sex crimes convictions
11% of murders convictions
13% of stolen cars convictions
13% of aggravated assaults convictions
17% of those sentenced for violent crimes
19% of those sentenced for property crimes
20% of those sentenced for felony DUI
21% of crimes committed with weapons
34% of those sentenced for the manufacture, sale or transport of drugs
36% of those sentenced for kidnapping
44% of forgeries
50% of those sentenced for crimes related to "chop shops"
85% of false ID convictions
96% of smuggling convictions

Illegal immigrants make up 19 percent of those convicted of crimes in Maricopa County and 21 percent of those in county jails.

Illegal immigrants make up an estimated 9 percent of the county's population.

It is estimated that each violent crime cost citizens $20,000, and each property crime cost citizens $4363 per offense.

So, after passage of the Arizona law what did the "undocumented" community and their supporters, most all law abiding lovers of America only coming here to work to provide for their families and engage in the American Dream (according to La Raza, LULAC, the ACLU, Cardinal Mahoney and certain politicians) do? Take a look. …

Never one to miss a photo op or protest event on the left, professional grievance monger Al Sharpton has just announced he's ready to join the fray and commit civil disobedience over Arizona's stand to protect her citizens and enforce immigration law that the feds won't. Taking one out of the Obama playbook, he obviously believes the Arizona legislature has "acted stupidly".

Frankly, it’s a credit to anyone who, according to the likes of Sharpton, “acts stupidly.” It means they’ve made the right, if tough, choices. Doesn’t a certain president wax eloquent about making “the tough choices”?

And speaking of that president, Obama called Arizona’s bill “misguided.” Again, a complement to Arizona. When a liberal calls a policy misguided, it’s effective. Obama doesn’t know from making tough decisions, otherwise he’d be cheering on Arizona for doing just that. Like Sharpton, Obama is a leftist race-monger who’s playing politics with the Hispanic vote at the expense of the millions of people in Arizona who suffer every day the problems caused by illegals in their state.

Keep following these Arizona protests. The Democrat-media complex will treat them just fine. They will whitewash the actual violence, while still talking up imaginary Tea Party violence. They will validate the unjustified anger of law breakers and their fellow travelers, while still dismissing the Tea Party movement’s completely justified anger/passion/whatever.

This is just another example why the Democrats and their flying monkeys in the mainstream media are not on the side of you or me or the rest of America.

My Saturday Morning with Coffee, Doughnuts, and Sean Hannity

Yesterday morning at 7:30 the clan (with a “c,” libs. Don’t get excited) and I headed out to Bookends book store in the quaint town of Ridgewood, NJ. Why? Because Sean Hannity had announced on the radio he’d be signing his new book Conservative Victory. He also said he’d buy everyone doughnuts and coffee—which he did.

Even though we had arrived at the store more than a half hour before the 9:00 signing began, the line of fans was already down the street and around the corner. I took until around 10:30 to finally meet Sean, but that gave everyone on line time to converse with those around them.

Assuming Sean Hannity fans would also comprise the Tea Party movement, let me say that Keith Olbermann is right (!!!). Well, mostly. As my kids got more and more restless, I would walk with them up and down the street past the crowd of about five-six hundred, and to be sure, many of them were over 50 and white. But, where Olbermann and the leftocracy go dreadfully wrong is how they perceive and interpret these facts.

Let’s talk first about the “old people” stereotype. Why does the leftocracy consider it an insult if many Tea Partiers are at or near retirement age? These are people who worked their tails off their entire adult lives and are now worried that their government has short changed their children and grandchildren and are denying them the American Dream they obtained through their hard work. Hey Lefties, the “Don’t trust anyone over 30” thing? That got old (pun intended) by the McGovern campaign. 

I was honored to be standing in line with tons of people my parents’ age. All these people are parents and are looking out for their children and everyone’s children. Or, in Rosie O’Donnell’s parlance, these were mothers and fathers.

Besides, there’s nothing more frightening than a leftist anti-[fill in the blank] rally with aging hippies with their boobs hanging down so far past their knees even Susan Sarandon would go WTF, and tattoos dripping like a Dali painting off their wrinkled skin. Despite 40 years of demonstrable proof that so much of what they fought for in the 60’s resulted in disaster upon disaster, these folks still believe wholeheartedly in their failed ideology. But you’ll never catch the Democrat-media complex insulting them as an angry mob of old people.

Certainly, it wasn’t only older people in Ridgewood. There were also young families like us, with young children in tow or in a stroller. I saw groups of teenaged girls reading Sean’s book as they waited in line. To one group of sisters I said, “Keep reading, there’s going to be a test when you meet Sean.”

Second, let’s consider the racial make-up of this line of Hannity fans. Of about six hundred fans, I counted four black people. But they seemed to be like that black guy who humiliated Norah O’Donnell on NBC news when he answered in the negative the question, “Don’t you feel uncomfortable being around all these white people???” They didn’t look uncomfortable at all, neither did anyone surrounding them. In fact, given the friendly atmosphere of the crowd, I walked right up to one black man in his 50’s and missing several teeth and said jokingly, “What are you doing here? Don’t you know you’re an Uncle Tom or some other offensive name they call you?” The man chuckled, shook my hand, and answered, “I’ve done more for America than that whole Democratic Party!”

There was another thing about all these whiiiite people: They weren’t really white, meaning they weren’t all WASPy “reckneck” whites. Almost everyone I spoke to on line were first- or second-generation non-black immigrants. The man behind us was a chess champion who came to the U.S. from Ukraine in 1977. A Jewish man, having raised his family in New York City and north Jersey, he now has two grandchildren and is scared to death about their future. Who better to evaluate the condition of this government than a former citizen of the Soviet Union!

The woman in front of us was from northern Greece. Having just turned 65, she was full of piss and vinegar and actually got Sean to agree to let her kiss him on the cheek while someone took her picture! Her fear about the direction of this country was the same as the Ukrainian’s. While we were on line, she related to us the day she she became an American citizen (yes, imagine that, she was a legal alien!), which occurred decades ago, but she never forgot it.

Third, the couple in front of her was in their 70’s. The husband was Turkish, so he was more olive-skinned than white.

Finally, while my wife and kids stood on the line to meet Sean, I had to get onto a separate line to purchase the book, and pick up some of Sean’s complimentary doughnuts and coffee. Directly behind me was a Hispanic man in his 50’s who grew up in the Bronx, in the same neighboorhood as my mother and mother-in-law. The gentleman in front of me was also probably in his 50’s and appeared to be from Southeast Asia (Vietnam? Laos? Phillipines?). When we weren’t chatting, he spend the time on line taking pictures of the apple blossoms on the trees lining the sidewalk.

This was the most heart-warming aspect of the entire crowd: That there were so many first- and second-generation immigrants on line to meet Sean Hannity and support the 2010 conservative comeback. These people know what it was like coming to America from their homeland, and they know that it is under attack from the radical government that currently control it. No doubt the Tea Parties are the same, maybe not everywhere, but definitely in multicultural New Jersey. But Olbermann and the leftocracy would have you believe that we’re just a bunch of racist whiiite people pissed off that there’s a black man in the White House. Whatever.

Like I said, it was a friendly atmosphere. I passed out business cards with VM’s URL on it while announcing in my best Levin voice, “Who wants free government cheese?”

Meeting Sean was exhilerating, but quick. All there was time for was for him to sign my two books, shake my hand, pat my young son on the head, and respond in kind to my “You’re a great American.” His handlers let my wife snap a picture, and sent us on our way. Sean had to have met 400 people before me that morning, so I don’t begrudge being rushed.

     

 
 
 

All in all, yesterday was a great day to be an American, and to be among great Americans.

Limbaugh vs. Clinton? No Contest [UPDATED 4/26]

It seems all liberals/Democrats know how to do is lie. Lie lie and lie some more until their lies become accepted as truth. We've got President Hope&Change on a jihad to punish Wall Street and regulate the "unfettered" free market for supposedly causing the housing crash and current economic crisis, when it was intrusive Democrat-government policies largely responsible. And of course we have the whole Tea Party = angry write racist extremists meme being perpetuated daily by the Democrat-media complex. 

To add more fuel to the fire, Slick Willie Clinton has come out of the woodwork on the occasion of the 15th anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing to compare the Tea Party essentially as potential Timothy McVeigh's, just waiting for the right motivational words in order to snap into action and then boom! there goes another government building. And who, in Clinton's, sick perverse mind would be speaking these words? Why, Rush Limbaugh and right-wing talk radio, of course. It's your typical liberal/Democrat notion of: Disagree with our policies? You must be a dangerous, bigoted extremist. Blah blah freaking blah.

This week, right after Clinton stood up at a microphone and despicably rewrote the history of the Oklahoma City bombing and the supposed right-wing inspiration of Timothy McVeigh, the despicable New York Times gave the disgraced ex-president a forum to do it again in the form of a written op-ed.

Luckily, the Wall Street Journal responded by giving Rush Limbaugh—the perceived target of Clinton’s charge—a chance to set the record straight:

April 23, 2010
Liberals and the Violence Card
Conservative protest is motivated by a love of what America stands for.
By RUSH LIMBAUGH

The latest liberal meme is to equate skepticism of the Obama administration with a tendency toward violence. That takes me back 15 years ago to the time President Bill Clinton accused “loud and angry voices” on the airwaves (i.e., radio talk-show hosts like me) of having incited Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh. What self-serving nonsense. Liberals are perfectly comfortable with antigovernment protest when they’re not in power.

From the halls of the Ivy League to the halls of Congress, from the antiwar protests during the Vietnam War and the war in Iraq to the anticapitalist protests during International Monetary Fund and World Bank meetings, we’re used to seeing leftist malcontents take to the streets. Sometimes they’re violent, breaking shop windows with bricks and throwing rocks at police. Sometimes there are arrests. Not all leftists are violent, of course. But most are angry. It’s in their DNA. They view the culture as corrupt and capitalism as unjust.

Now the liberals run the government and they’re using their power to implement their radical agenda. Mr. Obama and his party believe that the election of November 2008 entitled them to make permanent, “transformational” changes to our society. In just 16 months they’ve added more than $2 trillion to the national debt, essentially nationalized the health-care system, the student-loan industry, and have their sights set on draconian cap-and-trade regulations on carbon emissions and amnesty for illegal aliens.

Had President Obama campaigned on this agenda, he wouldn’t have garnered 30% of the popular vote.

Like the millions of citizens who’ve peacefully risen up and attended thousands of rallies in protest, I seek nothing more than the preservation of the social contract that undergirds our society. I do not hate the government, as the left does when it is not running it. I love this country. And because I do, I insist that the temporary inhabitants of high political office comply with the Constitution, honor our God-given unalienable rights, and respect our hard-earned private property. For this I am called seditious, among other things, by some of the very people who’ve condemned this society?

I reject the notion that America is in a well-deserved decline, that she and her citizens are unexceptional. I do not believe America is the problem in the world. I believe America is the solution to the world’s problems. I reject a foreign policy that treats our allies like our enemies and our enemies like our allies. I condemn the president traveling the world apologizing for America’s great contributions to mankind. And I condemn his soft-pedaling the dangers we face from terrorism. For this I am inciting violence?

Few presidents have sunk so low as Mr. Clinton did with his accusations about Oklahoma City. Last week—on the very day I was contributing to and raising more than $3 million to fight leukemia and lymphoma on my radio program—Mr. Clinton used the 15th anniversary of that horrific day to regurgitate his claims about talk radio.

At a speech delivered last Friday at the Center for American Progress in Washington, D.C., the former president said: [T]here were a lot of people who were in the business back then of saying that the biggest threat to our liberty and the cause of our domestic economic problem was the federal government itself. And we have to realize that there were others who fueled this both because they agreed with it and because it was in their advantage to do so. . . . We didn’t have blog sites back then so the instrument of carrying this forward was basically the right-wing radio talk show hosts and they understand clearly that emotion was more powerful than reason most of the time.”

Timothy McVeigh was incensed by the Clinton administration’s 1993 siege on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, Texas. It’s no coincidence that the bombing took place two years to the day of the Waco siege. McVeigh was not inspired by anything I said or believe and to say otherwise is outright slander. In the aftermath of the bombing, I raised millions of dollars for the children of federal employees killed in that cowardly attack through my association with the Marine Corp Law Enforcement Foundation.

Let me just say it. The Obama/Clinton/media left are comfortable with the unrest in our society today. It allows them to blame and demonize their opponents (doctors, insurance companies, Wall Street, talk radio, Fox News) in order to portray their regime as the great healer of all our ills, thus expanding their power and control over our society.

A clear majority of the American people want no part of this. They instinctively know that the Obama way is not how things get done in this country. They are motivated by love. Not hate, not sedition. They love their country and want to save it from those who do not.

Here here!

Of course, the media is milking this "war of words" between Clinton and Rush. It makes for good news. But what they won't discuss is the content. They won't dig down into the details of the argument, because it will expose Rush as 100% right, and Clinton as an opportunistic hate-mongering buffoon.

UPDATED 4/26: Mark Steyn has put out this article on this topic.

Things I Think (Part 2)

[From guest blogger Loud Lion. Part 1 here.]

I think that when a Liberal news reporter asks a black man if he feels uncomfortable, she and her news director are racist no matter how they spin it.

I think that when people can’t tell that the questions asked are never answered, but spun to give the appearance of answering, we will still be in trouble come 2012.

I think I am glad that Israel is not in bed with the United States like people assume they are.

I think that baseball has not grabbed my attention yet.

I think that anytime a government official uses the term fiscal responsibility while passing humongous cost expenditures the forfeit the right to call them Representatives.

I think it will be funny to see how Congress attempts to correct the mistake of including themselves in the wonderful health care “reform” they gave the country.

I think that listening to the people who were obvious plants at tax day tea parties were some of the funniest comedies ever broadcast.

I think I am hopefully making my brother-in-law happy by writing THIS.

I think that the head in the sand foreign policy didn’t work for Wilson or Chamberlain, and it won’t work for Obama.

I think that my fears for my children’s future grows daily.

I wonder if this is how a civil war begins in a democratic country.

Will we all be too busy watching TV to attend the revolution?

I feel that people have too much faith in their government.

I feel that it is funny that people want compassionate judges instead of competent judges on the Supreme Court.

I feel that Rotheslberger got what he deserved from the Commissioner.

I feel that hopefully when the Republicans get control of Congress they have a real plan and stick to it or else we will see a re-run of British political history of Labor and Tories.

I think that we need to find issues of agreement before we tackle the issues of disagreement.

I think that good scotch beats good beer any day.

And with that, I wish you a good, happy and healthy weekend.

Liberal Hypocrisy: Guess Who Increased Their Carbon Footprint This Earth Day

A non-partisan website called NYCAviation.com [h/t Instapundit] informs us:

Obama and Biden to Celebrate Earth Day by Tying Up New York Air Traffic
APRIL 21ST, 2010 • BY MATT MOLNAR

On a day when many Americans will be reflecting upon how they can reduce their impact on the environment, President Barack Obama and Vice President Joe Biden will board separate jets in Washington on Earth Day morning to fly 250 miles up the east coast to New York, where they will land at separate airports to attend separate events within a few miles of each other.

The parallel visits of Air Force One (a 747/VC-25 aircraft) and Air Force Two (a 757/C-32A aircraft) will delay dozens, if not hundreds of commercial flights at Kennedy and LaGuardia and other nearby airports as no-fly zones are implemented. Jets will be forced to circle and burn more fuel as they wait for the VIPs to come and go. Their security contingents consisting of dozens of cars, SUVs and helicopters will burn even more. Throw in thousands of commuters’ cars and delivery trucks sitting idle in traffic as law enforcement closes large swaths of the city and you have yourself a very Earth-unfriendly day. …

Yeah. What a surprise. Say it with me now, libs/Dems: Do as I say, not as I do.

Meanwhile, we are warned by author and environmental studies senior fellow Patrick Michaels:

Yes, it has been quite a year. Climategate. The failure in Copenhagen. The EPA issuing an endangerment finding in which the core scientific fact turns out to have been cooked. The IPCC blow-up. And yet [RINO] Lindsey Graham and President Obama are dead-set on cramming a new global-warming tax down our throats. How they figure to sell this policy in light of what has happened since November is anyone’s guess. Damn the data; full speed ahead!

Welcome to the future, suckers.

And happy freakin’ Earth Day.

Congrats to a Fellow Rite Blogger

I've had the fortune of having a VM post get linked by some big name site. It's happened twice from NewsBusters, but my best one was from AnnCoulter.com. Watching the spike in traffic on my web analytics page those days was extremely exciting, and I can only hope that some of those first-time visitors have come back from time to time.

But I am nearly as excited when other "lowly" individual on the blogosphere gets mentioned. And that happened to the Bookworm Room blog, which appears on the VM blogroll. Yesterday  "Bookworm" got the shoutout of shoutouts -- from El Rushbo himself. And it was well-deserved; her post on Rush is very well done. 

The traffic spike as a result of Rush's mention was visible at SiteMeter:

 Congratulations, Bookworm!

Listen & Learn: Obama Again Blames "Unfettered" Market for Housing Crash. Mark Levin Disagrees (4/20/10)

Instead of attending the funeral of the Polish leaders killed in last week’s plane crash, President Golden Calf has been instead busy with other things, including playing golf—he’s now played more rounds of golf in his year-and-a-half in office than that evil uncaring W did in all his eight years—and stumping for his Dem cronies like Barbara “Call me Senator” Boxer.

He’s also taken the time to remind the American people of one of the leftocracy’s biggest lies of the 21st century: That our current economic crisis in general, and the housing crash in particular, was the fault of unfettered, unregulated capitalism. Hating capitalism and loving its antidote—big, unaccountable, wealth-stealing, liberty-stifling government—is the motivation for President Hope&Change’s entire agenda.

The facts on the ground, however (as is usually the case with claims made by the Democrat-media complex), paint an entirely different picture. By now an Obamaniac would fail to see that the housing collapse orchestrated, either unwittingly or deliberately, by such corrupt Democrats like Barney Frank, Chris Dodd, Chucky Schmucky Schumer, and even President Hope&Change himself when he served ACORN as a liar for hire.

The whole sordid history is eloquently and passionately recapped by “The Great One” Mark Levin on Tuesday’s show:

[Edited for commercials, long pauses, and other extraneous content]

Download levin2010-04-15_80kbps.mp3

P.S. Anthony James at StopTheACLU also has an excellent recap, complete with video, on the Democrat Party's complete and undeniable responsibility for the housing crash.