At The (Term) Limit

I never supported mandatory term limits. I am well aware that the vast majority of those who hold elected office could better serve their constituents by taking a long stroll off of an appropriately short pier (unless they’re Kennedys). I am also aware that many of us live with precisely the government we earned at the ballot box. To put a fine point on it: We already have term limits. Every election represents the potential end of the term of the corrupt, the incompetent and/or the just plain undeserving.

Unfortunately, far too few of my fellow Americans share my attitude; especially when it comes to accomplishing more at the ballot box than picking up one of those fun little “I voted” stickers. Far too many of our Senators, Congressmen, commissioners, mayors, aldermen and such hold their positions for far too long. The re-election rate in the U.S. House of Representatives in the sea change year of 2010 still hit 85 percent, tying 1970 for the lowest mark in half a century. Your Congressmen managed to best their beleaguered Senate colleagues by a whole percentage point, with Senators returning to their taxpayer-funded digs to the maudlin tune of 84 percent.

Last Tuesday, the county I live in offered a ballot initiative to eliminate the current two-term limit on the position of Chairman of the County Commission. Although the current chairman is a nice enough old fellow, the initiative suddenly appeared in the final weeks before municipal election day, engendering fair questions about the timing and intent of the ballot measure. Despite my long-held view that political longevity should be bestowed by the voters alone, I voted “no.” I have concluded, after a couple of decades of soul-searching, that we in the electorate simply can’t be trusted with the task of keeping our elected officials honest.

Look again at the re-election rate for incumbents at the Federal level. Those rates change at the State and local levels only in those places that have instituted term limits as a matter of law. Elsewhere, taxpayers lay prostrate under the thumbs of the same wire-pullers and career loafers who gave birth to the exact disenchantment we’re discussing here today — and almost exclusively by their own hands.

Senator Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii) has served in the U.S. Senate since 1963. Inouye became the longest-serving current U.S. Senator 17 months ago, when Senator Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) died. Representatives John Dingell and John Conyers, both Democrats from Michigan, have dishonored their constituents for more than a century combined. Senator Strom Thurmond (R-SC) left office in 2003 at the age of 100. He was the oldest-serving Senator and, until Byrd beat his record, he was the longest-serving Senator in U.S. history.

For those who muse that mandating term limits might discourage the best and brightest from running for office, the five aforementioned gentlemen serve as warning enough. The best and brightest among us want nothing to do with the electoral process, primarily because they might have to contend with petrified remnants like the five men mentioned, among others.

Some people worry term limits will drive out the few politicians who actually serve their constituents. Granted, mandated term limits would send Ron Paul for the exit, but Congressman Paul respects the voters enough to have abandoned a re-election bid in order to focus on his Presidential aspirations. As my grandfather might have said: “Ya gotta admire that kind of moxie.” And people like Paul find ways to contribute to their fellow man, Congress or not. The problem is that for every Paul, there’s an Alcee Hastings, Nancy Pelosi, Maxine Waters, Henry Waxman, Sheila Jackson Lee, Zoe Lofgren, etc.

Of course we can do better at the polls. We can elect thoughtful people who will pursue a course of action purely out of a sense of dedication to their Nation and its people. But we don’t do that. Time after time, offered the opportunity to improve our lot through intelligent balloting, we re-elect Charles Rangel.

Our Republic is slipping away from us. Term limits would hardly solve the problem. But they would be a start.

–Ben Crystal

The 33 Percent

During the genesis of the Tea Party, the corporate media could barely contain their desire to apply to that group the most defamatory labels possible. No matter how dubious, politically motivated or demonstrably dishonest the source, the hacks in the MSM raced to print spurious tales of racism, violence and hatred. The slander reached such a comically fevered pitch that Tea Partiers began carrying signs reading “It doesn’t matter what this sign says, MSNBC will call it racist.” And MSNBC, among others, was more than happy to oblige — all while carefully ignoring authenticated video of union thug violence in Wisconsin, Common Cause racism in California and the fact that nobody produced a shred of evidence proving the Tea Party was guilty of anything more than recognizing that MSNBC is an overloaded clown car.

The media coverage of the so-called “occupiers” has been markedly different, although equally suspect. But who are the “occupiers?” We know they don’t like being called “fleabaggers.” I might care more about their delicate sensibilities if they had spent the past few years calling Tea Partiers something other than repulsive names. Plus, accounting for proportion, fleas run far, jump high and lift many times their own bodyweight.  No flea ever held up a sign demanding the fleas who found the rats’ nest share the blood. Fleas work hard. “Fleabagger” is unfair to the fleas.

Perhaps we should consider who they are not. They are not all refugees from their parents’ basements. There are the kids who hang out at the coffee shop (which is a franchise of a global chain). There’s also that kid with the hair and the facial piercings who won’t look you in the eye at the copy store and the ones who piled up a quarter million dollars in debt while completing their women’s studies degrees. And there are the ones who are high on acid and think this whole thing is the worst Phish concert ever.

Examine their professed identification with the poor, homeless and those in need of special care. Just the other day, I watched the homeless guy on the corner stop talking to the voices in his head in order to take a call from his mother on his iPhone. Oh, wait; that was an “occupier.” Actually, the occupiers appear to react poorly to the homeless. Disturbed people seem to annoy them, as well. Witness the epic beat down delivered unto the homeless and disturbed guy who woke up the occupier in Zuccotti Park last weekend. I’m still trying to figure out what the occupier was so angry about. Sure, the homeless guy woke him up; but it’s not as if he was late for work.

They do hate the rich — except for George Soros. And it would appear Michael Moore gets an exemption, as well. Or maybe they believe him when he claims reporters who point out that he’s banked millions of dollars are lying tools of the 1 percent. Of course, at $50 million, Moore is part of an even smaller group: the 1/10th of 1 percent. Alec Baldwin seems cool with the kiddies, as well. And he hawks credit cards on television, when he’s not calling for someone to kill Republican Congressmen. Susan Sarandon is hardly suffering, and she’s… well… she used to be semi-married to Tim Robbins.

Not all the occupiers are pasty-faced suburbanites, either. In Atlanta, members of the Nation of Islam have begun wearing their cute little bow ties to the Occupier rally. Say what you wish about those racist — albeit dapper — wannabe storm troopers, at least they have style.

The union thugs have been spotted bringing their particular panache to the proceedings. Who didn’t get a kick out of watching United Steelworkers’ Union President Leo Gerard crying “…we need more militancy… We start occupying the banks, places themselves.” So, that whole “occupier” nonviolence thing was more of a guideline than an actual rule.

Don’t forget the run-of-the-mill filth who always seem to show up at liberal shriekfests: the pimps, dealers, thieves, rapists and Al Sharpton. That was quite a number they did on Oakland, Calif. We learned the one aspect of government the Occupiers don’t want more of: police.

The so-called “occupiers” are an amorphous melange of criminals, parasites, layabouts, spoiled brats, Hollywood morons, millionaire and billionaire hypocrites, racists and MSNBC hosts. Wait a second; I recognize these guys. They’re the Democratic Party. They’re the 33 percent.

–Ben Crystal

The Noose Is Loose

I am intrigued by Herman Cain’s campaign. It continues to break virtually every rule in the book regarding successful Presidential quests; yet it continues to roll full steam ahead, despite the flagrant violations of political sense.

The YouTube ad featuring Cain’s extraordinarily non-telegenic chief of staff smoking on camera was nothing short of bizarre, but it worked precisely as intended. Cain’s debate performances have been inconsistent at best, but he has managed to avoid any Walter Mondale moments. While many of the other candidates have more-established bases of support, better-founded fundraising teams and much stronger ties to the Republican establishment, Cain has played up his outsider status without deliberately insulting as-yet undecided Republicans.

And, on the off chance you missed it, Cain is a black man. Cain is a conservative black man. To the Democratic/liberal elite, which snares the black vote in a web of taxpayer-funded governmental dominance and the exaltation of bloviating transparencies like President Barack Obama, the conservative black man is less appealing than a churchless reverend–turned-cable-host who took part in a conspiracy which involved smearing feces on a teenage girl (not that such an aberration exists or anything).

When the liberal elites dislike something, they ignore it. If it gains in stature, they deplore it. And if it begins to threaten their death grip on their beloved governmental power, they break out the big guns (except for the Brady Campaign guys; theirs are make-believe). Hence, the escalation of the already appalling blitzkrieg on Cain from mundane racist remarks by low-forehead types like Lawrence O’Donnell to the pure-hit piece that appeared on POLITICO and has since become the key talking point across the corporate media. Entitled “Herman Cain accused by two women of inappropriate behavior,” the story was a vague mashup of nonspecific allegations, unconfirmed documents and faceless sources.

The sources — including the recollections of close associates and other documentation — describe episodes that left the women upset and offended… There were also descriptions of physical gestures that were not overtly sexual but that made women who experienced or witnessed them uncomfortable and that they regarded as improper in a professional relationship.

“Not overtly sexual but that… made [them] uncomfortable…” Really? What’s the matter, ladies? Did mean old Mr. Cain suggest those vertical stripes don’t suit you? What a cad.

Granted, the National Restaurant Association did settle complaints against Cain, reportedly for five figures. But such small settlements in the age of vermin like John Banzhaf and John Edwards are more indicative of the fact that it’s cheaper to pay vermin to leave than it is to try to exterminate them in the courtroom.

Although the POLITICO hit piece is already unraveling, the usual liberal suspects are clinging desperately to its weak threads. As expected, MSNBC took the lead with Democratic mouthpiece Chris Matthews actually congratulating one of the POLITICO “plumbers” for the drivel. The rest of the liberal media legions have followed suit, including The New York Times, The Washington Post and the tinfoil-hat wing of the blogosphere. Actually, they’re noteworthy for having spent more than a year ignoring the absolutely true allegations against Edwards.

A button-man scrap of quasi-journalism is directed against a rising black conservative at a time when the liberals’ alleged savior is stumbling like a Kennedy leaving a partially submerged car in a creek near a Massachusetts town. I’m sure the timing is purely coincidental and not in any way by design. After all, the corporate media would never trot out some cellophane-thin tale of this nature for political or — horrors — racial reasons.

The real lesson in this full court press against Cain is an old one. The same liberals who had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the truth about their idols — Kennedy (pick one), Bill Clinton, Edwards, Eliot Spitzer and David Patterson, to name but a few — only to promptly excuse and/or forgive them stand at attention at the front of the line to tie the noose around Cain’s neck. Maybe they still have the one they tried on Clarence Thomas.

–Ben Crystal

The Lawyer, The Liberals And The Law

When I first saw the headline: “Muslims Sue to Remove Crosses at Catholic University,” my common sense-alarms began shrieking like Democrats trying to shout down an intelligent guest speaker.

Granted, one could remove the identifier “Muslims” and still have a headline which would deliver a frown to the face of virtually anyone above Ed Schultz on the human evolutionary scale. But the idea of a bunch of Muslims who willingly chose to matriculate to the private Catholic University are actually suing because the place just seems too “Christian-ish” is the sort of stupid you can usually only catch on MSNBC. Keep in mind that “Catholic University” is not a reference to an individual Catholic university; “Catholic University” in this case is the NAME OF THE FREAKING SCHOOL!

 “My, Akbar! What a marvelous university we have chosen!”

 “Indeed, Mustafa. If only there were fewer infidel symbols about. It really offends my delicate sensibilities.”

However, before you begin spitting epithets at poor Akbar and Mustapha, a caveat: they have nothing to do with this scurrilous outrage. In fact, not ONE Muslim is a complainant in the lawsuit against Catholic U. So, who possesses the unmitigated gall required to defile an American courtroom in such a manner it requires a particularly abominable character — someone of such low moral fiber, with such a clouded soul they would give Hannibal Lecter pause?

Meet John Banzhaf, George Washington University law professor, infamous uber-litigator and an ambulance-chasing, frivolous lawsuit-bringing parasite who is so deservedly reviled for his litigious ways that he makes even former Democrat Vice Presidential nominee John Edwards look like Clarence Darrow.

If you haven’t heard of Banzhaf, count yourself lucky. In addition to being a prominent member of the American liberal movement — in itself a refuge for many of the most twisted and deficient cretins in the nation (see also: fleabaggers), Banzhaf is essentially the living embodiment of the reason Americans hate trial lawyers.

Think of the guys who advertise on buses, phone books and late night television. The guys who promise should you slip and fall in your neighbor’s driveway, he’ll get you a “SUPER SETTLEMENT;” even if that means bankrupting your neighbors, the contractor who built the driveway, the company which makes the asphalt the contractor used, and your city for approving the installation of such a slippery place.

Now think of that briefcase-toting slug on steroids. Banzhaf is the bottom-feeder who sues pretty much anyone from whom he thinks he can abscond with money; no matter how devoid of merit his actions might be.

Of course, Banzhaf is pursuing this latest legal-beagling for the same reason Democrat leaders do anything: good, old-fashioned hypocritical greed. His actions, though revolting, are no different than liberal icon, Halliburton investor and war profiteer Michael Moore urging his followers to abhor the wealthy while he sits on a pile of money.

Banzhaf is suing Catholic U. for the same reason Nancy Pelosi shrieks about the plight of the poor from her multi-million dollar palace in San Francisco. Banzhaf’s motives are the same as those of President and Mrs. Obama, who can call themselves “warriors for the middle class” while spending millions on Spanish vacations and separate planes to Martha’s Vineyard (where Michelle will nag people about their diets in between spoonfuls of Crisco® straight from the can).

In the case of Banzhaf’s latest assault on dignity, there are real victims beyond the mindless drones who offer fealty to filth like Moore and the Obamas: the students in whose name Banzhaf filed the suit.

There are moments when the actions of SOME Muslims border on the cringe-worthy. And as I have noted before, most of the basic tenets of Islam really don’t work for me. The often brutal subjugation of women, the pre-industrial attitudes of many Muslims and the ban on bacon cheeseburgers are all deal-breakers for me.

However, not all Muslims are terrorists. Not all Muslims are troglodyte repressors. And absolutely NO Muslims are suing Catholic University over the ubiquity of Christian imagery at that well-respected institution. Instead, they’re being used as props in the same appalling hypocrisy which marks virtually every liberal action.

 Now they know how we feel.

–Ben Crystal

The Dream Team

During the run-up to the 2008 Democratic Presidential nomination, the relationship between the competing Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama campaigns plumbed impressive depths, culminating in now-Secretary of State Clinton’s poorly worded intimation that Obama might not serve out his entire term.

But President Obama managed to bury the hatchet (although perhaps not in the precise spot for which he was aiming). The two camps put aside their differences with Obama’s nomination of Clinton to the Nation’s top diplomatic post. With Clinton relegated to the State Department, Obama could focus on his top priorities: blaming others for his failures, remaining “unaware” of malfeasance in his cabinet, grubbing for cash with Lady Gaga and playing golf.

Nonetheless, with America waking to the reality that Obama makes Jimmy Carter look like Andrew Jackson, Obama better start bringing his A game. Otherwise, he and Hillary can discuss what might have been over coffee in the Berkeley poli-sci department. Meanwhile, I thought it might be fun to imagine what might be. Therefore, I humbly present my ideal version of the leadership of the nation post-2012.

I did not include the entire cabinet in my musings. On one hand, I suspect most of you share my opinion that the Office of the United States Trade Representative can be filled by almost anyone who recognizes that prostrating ourselves before the ChiComs is a bad idea. On the other hand, in my utopian Presidency, there is no Department of Education, so the Secretary thereof can go back to colluding with teachers’ union thugs.

Meet the Presidential ticket: Cain/Paul 2012. That’s right, I said Herman Cain and Ron Paul, not the reverse. Cain’s close ties to questionable institutions like the Federal Reserve will be reined in by his close proximity to the brilliant Paul, and Cain will present a much more electable face than Paul, who is less palatable to moderates. Cain also possesses a certain presence which Paul — who looks every one of his 76 years — lacks. Additionally, Cain is better suited to the diplomatic obligations of the Presidency. I understand that many of you are die-hard Paul supporters and will, therefore, curse a blue streak at my conjecture. To you, I say: Think of it as a co-Presidency. It could hardly be worse than the last one; Hillary isn’t involved.

Serving at the pleasure of President Cain and Vice President Paul will be the following:

White House Chief of Staff: I could go the same route as Obama did and select a spectacularly profane man who looks like an extra from a zombie film. However, Rahm Emanuel is busy in Chicago, and Carl Paladino would scare off all the interns. I suggest the anti-Rahm: Representative Eric Cantor (R-Va.). Cantor is bright, direct and reliably conservative. He possesses the same grit and determination that Emanuel displays, with neither the crippling liberalism nor the visage of Nosferatu’s younger brother.

Secretary of State: Ambassador John R. Bolton. Bolton possesses diplomatic acumen forged through years of foreign service, and he is specifically versed in the worst of growth industries: weapons of mass destruction. As an added bonus, Democrats so abhor the man for his unwavering belief in American greatness in the global arena that they filibustered his U.N. nomination, forcing President Bush to recess-appoint him. That has to be a plus in any conservative’s estimation.

Secretary of the Treasury: Senator Rand Paul (R-Ky.). With both Paul and his father close to the top of the Administration, the American economy will benefit from the presence of not one, but two Horatios at the bridge. Senator Paul is the type who would assign his Secret Service protection detail to keeping a 24/7 watch on the national checkbook. Something tells me he would also revoke the Fed’s visitor passes. At the very least, I’ll bet he can navigate the logical labyrinth that is the TurboTax® software.

Secretary of Defense: former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. If you thought Donald Rumsfeld was tough, say hello to his iron-willed sister. Rice has already proved she knows no fear, and her presence in the Administration will make our more-organized enemies (think the ChiComs and whoever is in charge of the increasingly unhinged Russian Federation) remember their place. Rice engenders universal respect, which is a powerful resume addition when dealing with both military leaders and the lowest-ranking service members.

Secretary of Homeland Security: Joe Arpaio, the sheriff of Maricopa County in Arizona. Give Sheriff Joe six months, and the 38th Parallel in Korea will have to hand over the Most-Heavily-Militarized-Border-on-the-Planet belt. If Arpaio gets the nod, buy stock in electric fencing and anti-personnel mine manufacturers. And gone will be the days of airport security personnel who are fat guys with mustard stains on their shirts. Instead, the guys at the metal detector will be Navy SEALs who will look twice at the dude wearing the dishdasha, but won’t molest your 4-year old.

Secretary of the Interior: former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin. We’ve all seen the helicopter-coyote-hunting videos. Who better to handle the trials of wildlife policy than someone who has actually seen wildlife in places other than documentaries? As for resource exploitation: “Drill here, drill now.” Yes, ma’am, Madame Secretary.

Attorney General: For the nation’s top cop, I initially considered former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani. However, his views on the 2nd amendment don’t necessarily jibe with mine, and that’s a deal breaker. I want an Attorney General who is tough on crime, tough on terrorism, tough on immigration and will pursue real bad guys without wasting time and tax dollars on harassing the enemies of the President and his cronies.  I wonder if former Attorney General Alberto Gonzalez would consider returning to the Justice Department?

Secretary of Health and Human Services: former Senator Bill Frist (R-Tenn.). He’s a doctor, not a lawyer, which means he’s head and shoulders above anyone associated with Hillarycare, Obamacare or any of the other socialist systems the Democrats seem to have lifted from the let’s-be-just-like-Cuba playbook. Judging by his performance during the regrettable Terri Schiavo affair, he’s also capable of delivering diagnoses via photograph and video. All right, that’s silly; but it’s no sillier than letting the ambulance-chasers take control of the people waiting for the ambulances.

Secretary of Agriculture: Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels. Daniels possesses real executive experience at the Federal level as the former Director of the Office of Management and Budget. He’s the Governor of a grain and farm belt State. In addition, he stood up to the Scientologists, which has no bearing on his potential effectiveness as Agriculture Secretary, but it does mean he’s not big with the Hollywood crowd. That must count for something.

Secretary of Labor: Raymond J. LaJeunesse Jr. Who? Vice President and Legal Director of the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, that’s who. In the Cain/Paul Administration, the focus will be on productive and working Americans, not union thugs. It’s about damned time someone sat down in the Secretary’s chair who knows that Taft-Hartley isn’t a prep school in New England.

Secretary of Veterans’ Affairs: How many of you were even aware that Secretary of Veterans’ Affairs is a cabinet-level post? The way the Democrats treat the military, I suspect Secretary Eric Shinseki spends a fair amount of time polishing his medals. Let’s replace him with the war hero whom the Democrat-controlled Senate promised not to reconfirm as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: Retired Gen. Peter Pace. As the old sage says: Send in the Marines.

I am aware that I left a few cabinet posts unaccounted for. Some were excluded for lack of space. Others didn’t make the cut because President Cain and Vice President Paul took the proverbial axe to their departments. Who needs an Ambassador to the U.N. after we evict the U.N. from its cushy Upper East Side digs? And with the Cain/Paul Administration wresting control of the Nation’s education from the grasping paws of bureaucratic functionaries, the Department of Education is rendered as useful as Joe Biden at a Mensa conference.

You’re all welcome, as always, to offer your own suggestions. Mr. Livingston doesn’t delete even the remarkably absurd remarks from the comments section below. After all, this isn’t I am aware that many of you will take umbrage with some of my choices. Keep in mind, mine is a somewhat utopian concept of what government might look like after 2012. Think of it as hope… for a change.

–Ben Crystal

This Is My Country

Every year at this time, I pack up my blaze orange, my snake boots and my 12 gauge, and I travel to the sort of place in which the average Democrat would be as comfortable as Janet Napolitano in a bikini contest. By the time you read this, I’ll be stomping through fields of corn and sunflowers, surrounded by nature’s bounty in the plains of South Dakota. Deer will frolic, coyotes will skulk and pheasants — well — pheasants will die. Quite a few pheasants will die.

My father accompanies me on this trip each year. Actually, I am still allowed to accompany him, even after that regrettable incident with the truck a few years ago. (To this day, I maintain that I did not bury the truck side well-deep in the mud. The trail wandered, and I had to swerve to miss that combine that someone foolishly left in the middle of that huge field — also, I was trying to light a cigarette at the time.) While on our trip, my father and I eat red and brown food, drink red and brown booze, smoke cigars and generally act in exactly the manner my mother thinks we do.

But the annual “Crystal boys” retreat has come to mean a great deal more than simply spending a week acting like an overgrown fraternity brother with men who either have reached the age at which they should know better (my father is in his mid-70s) or men who know men who know men who should know better (I am considerably younger). Truth be told, my own purpose actually overshadows even the lofty goal of allowing my mother a few days of peace and quiet. Amid the general carousing and camaraderie, I find something I miss throughout the rest of the year.

The lodge in which we stay sits in a town of about 150 people. To get there, we fly into the airport in Bismarck, N.D., and then proceed to drive south for a couple of hours through some of the most blessedly magnificent land in our great Nation. There are vistas which can claim greater grandeur: the towering majesty of the Rockies, the Lord’s palette which is an Atlantic coastal sunrise, and even the gargantuan geometry of the Manhattan skyline, to name but a few. The high plains are fairly flat and almost ubiquitously beige. There is no hum of traffic, no roar of industry and no urban glare. Nearby Lake Oahe is fine for fishing, but it’s hardly the stuff of an Ansel Adams photo. The Black Hills are hours to the west. The Missouri River rolls through, but without much whitewater fanfare. The fields run off to the horizon in every direction. Yet, it is as beautiful a place as God in His infinite wisdom ever created. Out here, hundreds of miles from anywhere most people will ever visit, I see America.

Some might think this place — and its people — simple. But they are far from it. The people out here are what the sage might call “the salt of the Earth,” although even that phrase fails to do them credit. These are the people whom liberals deride as “hicks” and “hayseeds.” President Barack Obama isn’t going to visit anytime soon; there are no smug Hollywood millionaires about. The people who work this land work hard; the union thugs would hardly recognize them. Plus, getting a stretch limousine through a sorghum field is nearly impossible. Farming is everything here, the alpha and the omega of the regional economy; and these people understand the value of their labors. Trying to abscond with their hard-won earnings and handing them off to the bottom-feeders in the basement of the Democratic Party would be, in a word, unwise.

Much like this land, the people out here are tough, but they are humble. They give thanks at every meal and celebrate every day as a gift from the Almighty. This is America is it was and still can be. I don’t mean we should all trade in the minivan for a John Deere and sell the townhouse for a few acres of loam. Most of us would starve to death, and the liberals would go stir crazy once they realized the nearest Starbucks® is 200 miles away. But there’s a valuable lesson to be learned out here: This is a great Nation, populated by great people.

Thank You, God, for letting me live in this country. And don’t worry, Mom. Pop is fine.

–Ben Crystal

President Two-Face

I’ve seen the Democrats’ latest attempts to recast President Barack Obama as some kind of latter-day Alexander the Great. I’ve observed from Outside The Asylum as the same liberals who castigated President George W. Bush, President George H.W. Bush and President Ronald Reagan (but not President Bill Clinton) for their warlike ways have suddenly tried to recast themselves as latter-day Gen. George Pattons.

Obama, for whom they voted based on a tenuous combination of racism, hatred and shared opposition to securing freedom against the onslaught of Islamofascism and socialism, has taken to strutting around the golf course like the conquering hero in the wake of the brutal execution of Libyan dictator and terrorist benefactor Moammar Gadhafi.

Democratic mouthpieces far and wide are bleating their continued fealty to his belatedly bloodthirsty Presidency. Even infamously battle-averse Obama court jester Bill Maher took a break from his usual public displays of what appear to be some serious mommy issues to praise Obama as “President Badass.” Maher even went so far as to praise the use of unmanned drones of late, an interesting departure from his claim that the use of cruise missiles after 9-11 was “cowardly.”

Far be it for me to point out that Obama had as much to do with the execution of Gadhafi as Maher has with women who don’t charge by the hour. But Obama took victory laps through the corporate media in the wake of the executions of Osama bin Laden and Anwar al-Awlaki, so it should hardly come as a surprise that he’s shined up his jack boots following Gadhafi’s death at the hands of Libyans. My real confusion centers on the Democrats who were positively aghast when Bush directed the effort to clear the planet of Islamofascist vermin are now positively aghast that Obama isn’t amassing praise for the same.

Don’t mistake me here. I fully support the prejudicial termination of pretty much every Tariq, Dhakir or Haji who dreams of killing Americans (or coaxing Akbar from the falafel stand into doing it). I say so despite disagreement with people for whom I have the utmost respect, even Bob Livingston himself. I believe the world is a better place without bin Laden, al-Awlaki and Gadhafi, three ticks who gleefully embedded themselves in the hide of humanity — and encouraged others to do the same — for decades. But why in the name of Allah are liberals so excited? What happened to the “war criminal” charges they heaved at Bush and Dick Cheney? Who hit the mute button and stifled their cries of freedom for the poor jihadis currently (still) cooling their heels in Gitmo?

Meanwhile, Obama has suddenly acknowledged we still have troops in Iraq, and that they’ll be coming home soon. As is the case with most Obama proclamations, I’ll believe it when the last soldier disembarks from the plane. Hopefully, the tarmac on which that soldier’s boots gently tread will be in the United States and not in Libya (which has already announced Sharia law as the basis for its developing government), Uganda (yes, we have troops there) or Tunisia (where Islamofascists are poised to take control).

However, now that Obama has abandoned his stand against American military interventionism, I suppose I’ll just have to hope that whichever Republican sends Obama packing next November will deliver — well — change.

–Ben Crystal


The Plane Truth

Just across the Savannah River from the town in which I currently reside lies a blessed land of golf courses and archaic blue laws. South Carolina is home to Hilton Head Island, Myrtle Beach and some other noteworthy stuff. I kid my Palmetto State brethren, saying that South Carolina is rich with history and ripe with verdant luxury (especially the Bermuda-grass type). I’m willing to look the other way on the booze restrictions if they’re willing to look the other way when I duck-hook a three-wood into Calibogue Sound.

South Carolina wants what every State hopes for in today’s economic wasteland: more jobs. Fortunately for South Carolinians, their State isn’t run by the Democrats. South Carolina operates as a right-to-work State. That means citizens may work without checking their dignity, independence and a good portion of their hard-earned dough at the door to the local labor union offices (from whence it will be disbursed to the Democrats for whom they didn’t vote).

Courtesy of the Taft-Hartley Act, South Carolina disallows the Democrats’ union-thug protection racket in favor of opportunities for its citizens. Unfortunately, many of its citizens have been victimized by that other liberal abomination:  the teachers’ union. Thus, South Carolina, like many places dealing with even a moderate infestation of liberals, sees simultaneous feast and famine. South Carolina residents are free to work without a forced donation to the International Brotherhood of Fat Guys Wearing Track Suits and Gold Chains; but many of them are unable to do so, having had the sense stomped out of them by the International Personhood (I’m sure they’d insist on that) of People Who Finagled Teaching Certificates Despite Being Unable to Spell “Certificate.”

But the teachers’ union/Democratic Party war on our children’s gray matter is a topic for another column. The union/Democratic Party war on our paychecks is on display in South Carolina, where Boeing Co. wants to create thousands of jobs in a 787 Dreamliner assembly plant. The union thugs, outraged that Boeing would decide to build the plane in a State other than decidedly pro-union Washington, have contracted none other than the purportedly pro-jobs Obama Administration as a button man.

The Boeing plant opened in June, but it may well be forced to close, depending on the outcome of a case currently wending through the courts. That case features Boeing facing a fairly well-funded adversary: President Barack Obama. Lest someone claim that Obama himself is not involved, let me point out that the actual malefactor is the National Labor Relations Board. However, the NLRB is guided by Acting General Counsel Lafe Solomon, a far-left flunky who — along with fellow job-killer Craig Becker — had to be recess-appointed to his post after Republican Senators indicated they had read their resumes. Solomon = Obama (and vice versa, given Obama’s limited acumen).

The NLRB under Solomon’s guidance is nothing more than an extension of the Obama Administration, which is noteworthy because the Obama Administration is an extension of the union thugs — at least regarding employment law. The NLRB is fighting Boeing on the Dreamliner plant because the union thugs think Boeing opened the plant only to escape their clutches in Washington. From my perspective, that seems like good policy; look what the unions did for General Motors Co. and Chrysler. However, the NLRB has proven no such malfeasance on the part of Boeing, while playing some hanky-panky of its own.

Congressman Darrell Issa subpoenaed NLRB records pertaining to the Boeing case only to be rebuffed by an agency which evidently believes “contempt of Congress” is akin to a parking ticket (it really, really isn’t). Meanwhile, documents obtained this week by Judicial Watch under the Freedom of Information Act reveal the NLRB’s motives, including two NLRB lawyers openly cheering a union thug press release defaming Boeing: “Hooray for the red, white and blue!” Another features NLRB Region 19 Regional Director Richard Ahearn (the guy who signed off on the anti-Boeing action) evidently promising to defy an Issa subpoena.

Obama is currently on a campaign swing, whining about how the Republican Party is to blame for the Democrat-controlled Senate killing his pretend-jobs bill. Meanwhile, his Administration is threatening the actual jobs of thousands of South Carolinians. A glance at the NLRB website offers statements regarding employee rights to unionize and/or engage in what they call “protected concerted activity” (aka acting like a union). It also mentions protections for unions themselves. I couldn’t find anything about Americans’ rights to simply work. Come to think of it, I haven’t heard that from Obama, either.

Something’s Rotten

I do so love the scent of autumn. The crisp air is rich with the essence of nature’s fireworks, mingling delicately in the breeze with burning logs in happy homes, potpourri cooking on kitchen stoves… and the body odor of overeducated-yet-underinformed college students, their pseudo-academic professors, bloated millionaire and billionaire Democratic donors and fading Hollywood cretins. But noisome as the so-called “occupiers” may be, they’re about as novel a political movement as the Soviet Politburo.

Meanwhile, the redolence of brainless adolescents, ivory tower refugees, babbling Hollywood players and the billionaire liberal hypocrites who bankroll operations like the “Occupy” movement is made all the more rank by another stench: pure political desperation.

During a Sunday afternoon speech, President Barack Obama, who has been blowing kisses to the occupiers from across the political room, began playing the un-neutered puppy to the occupy movement’s exposed leg. Obama faces public dissatisfaction rivaling the sad days of Jimmy Carter’s Presidency: an economy his party has thrown into the deep end chained to a cinder block, a scandal-ridden cabinet whose peccadilloes include a gunrunning operation which involved more dead bodies than a Kennedy road trip, and a crowning achievement — Obamacare — which is dying like a sick old man denied care by a death panel.

The President needs help. He needs votes. He needs someone other than the sideshow freaks on MSNBC to take him seriously. So on Sunday afternoon, Obama turned to the only group of people silly enough to consider voting for his re-election and said he “…will continue to acknowledge the (occupier) frustration that he himself shares… if asking a billionaire to pay the same tax rate as a plumber, a teacher or a bus driver makes me a warrior for the middle class, I will wear that charge with honor.”

Begging the President’s pardon, but to which “frustration” might he be referring? He knocks down close to a half-million dollars a year in salary, dines regularly with billionaire entertainment magnates like Oprah Winfrey and is guaranteed the lifetime of easy excess granted to ex-Presidents. He has ascended the loftiest heights of political fortune in a remarkably short time despite a lack of meaningful experience, and he is backed by a king’s ransom paid by the same people the so-called “occupiers” claim to revile. He’s as attuned to the daily travails of average Americans as Nancy Pelosi is to the sort of real work done by “plumbers.”

And his claim to represent the self-and-grossly-inaccurately-monikered “99%” is laughable. Unless he is doing his taxes the same way Secretary of the Treasury Geithner did his, he is firmly planted in the “1%.” And why not wear the “1%” label like a badge of honor? That 1 percent covers close to 40 percent of the nation’s tax bill each year. Nevertheless, whether one employs the Obama litmus test of owning a corporate jet or earning more than $200,000 per year, Obama is very much one of the occupiers’ hated by “them.”

I suppose he should count himself lucky that the average “occupier” is about as astute as the sheep in the back of the flock. Furthermore, he enjoys the undying fealty of the corporate media, who have simultaneously offered both him and the occupiers underserved legitimacy. Add to that the fact that his party’s money and influence has turned what might have been a voice against injustice into the America-hating, flag-defiling, epithet-hurling asylum the Tea Party was wrongly accused of being, and he has a clear strategy: Identify himself with the Fleabagger mob and beg for their votes.

He may well pull off this “man of the people” charade, although I suspect he’s going to be disappointed that the “occupiers” don’t represent 99 percent of anyone except the audience at the Bonnaroo music festival. And he’s not fooling me for an instant; I can smell him from here.

–Ben Crystal

Razing Cain

It strikes me that as long as the race card remains in the American socioeconomic deck, liberals will play it like they were splitting a pair of aces at a Vegas blackjack table. President Barack Obama has skated past disasters which would have sunk some Presidencies as if they were involved in a scandal to falsify testimony in front of Congress to hide a nine-figure boondoggle which armed narcoterrorists and caused the deaths of two Federal law enforcement… ooh, this is awkward. But I’m a racist for mentioning it. The Tea Party is racist, too. You’re racist for nodding your head at the opening sentence. To be fair, there is real racism in America. There are real victims who really suffer, but Obama is not among them.

If you’re looking for the face of true targets of racism, 2011-style, look no further than Herman Cain. Cain’s campaign attracted little attention at its outset, deservedly so. Cain was a successful businessman and known conservative among those familiar with him. But he was hardly a national presence and even less of a political force. Cain has come on strong of late, and he has begun attracting attention from the deepest pits of the Democratic Party.

Cain is a conservative, and liberals hate him for it. Indeed, the very same Democrats who employ the brickbat charge of racism in defense of every entry on Obama’s prodigious resume of failure are running out of a playbook most Americans haven’t seen since Robert Byrd was still playing with Klansman action figures.

Comedienne and leading liberal philosopher Janeane Garofalo noted Cain’s growing surge in early August by declaring on Keith Olbermann’s nightly hatefest: “Herman Cain… is being paid by somebody to be involved and to run for president.” She’s saying Cain is no more than a paid minstrel, dancing like a calliope monkey. For his part, Olbermann wondered if Cain suffers from “…delusions of grandeur or are (Republicans) just taking advantage of him?” Of course, Olbermann never considered the possibility that Cain is an intelligent businessman who created his own personal and financial successes through hard work and dedication. For the record, Garofalo and Olbermann, in addition to being Democratic heavyweights, are only slightly darker than Edgar Winter.

But nothing could have prepared me for putty-faced liberal sock puppet Lawrence O’Donnell’s assault on Cain last Thursday. O’Donnell, whose racist streak is well-documented, once claimed Michael Steele was “dancing” for his “real master… the Republican National Committee.” To suggest that O’Donnell peppered Cain with racist invective is to suggest that Obama is on the fence about Saul Alinsky. O’Donnell attempted nothing less than a prime-time lynching. In questioning Cain’s commitment to racial equality, O’Donnell attacked Cain’s father for successfully keeping Cain focused on individual achievement, saying:

Where do you think black people would be sitting on the bus today if Rosa Parks had followed your father’s advice?… You watched black college students from around the country and white college students from around the country come to the South and be murdered, fighting for the rights of African-Americans. Do you regret sitting on those sidelines at that time?

The same man who thinks Scott Brown is a disgrace to the Senate seat once held by Clarence Thomas lynch mob member Ted Kennedy did everything but set a cross on fire on his set. It’s worth noting that O’Donnell’s program is preceded by Al Sharpton’s hour of rage. To my knowledge, Herman Cain never smeared human feces on a teenage girl in furtherance of a fraudulent conspiracy; but evidently, Sharpton exemplifies the white liberal ideal of a “good” black man. Granted, Sharpton is filth; but who the hell is O’Donnell to think Cain, Obama or even Sharpton want, need or care about his estimation of their racial credentials?

To Cain’s credit, he remained composed and dignified throughout O’Donnell’s spectacularly bigoted ranting. If some liberal talking hairdo took a shot at my old man, I admit I would have struggled to keep from knocking his teeth out.

During Tuesday night’s Republican Presidential debate, the other GOP contenders began focusing their discontent on Cain. But their objections had nothing to do with race. Congressman Ron Paul quite reasonably socked him for his unnerving defense of the Federal Reserve. Cain faced opposition to his 9-9-9 plan. (He should; the Fair Tax is a better system). They treated him in the same manner they treated each other, like a political adversary.

They treated him like an equal. There’s another “teachable moment” for the Democrats.

–Ben Crystal

Movement Made Up Of Fools

The so-called “Occupy” movement is difficult to quantify. They’re outraged, but over what: general opposition to American governance? The large population of Obama supporters belies that conclusion. Perhaps the movement is a “youthquake,” as a rising generation asserts its growing power? But the sizeable proportion of middle-aged ne’er-do-wells speaks to a simple rehashing of aging complainants. And a call for racial equity is out, given that the movement is about as racially diverse as the Kennedy compound.

Some seem to despise the wealthy and their perceived sway over politics. The influence of fascist billionaire George Soros and the presence of Jeff Immelt in the White House lend their outrage credence. Unfortunately, Democratic battalions including the Soros-controlled and the union thugs have co-opted what might have been a valuable voice against the increasingly imperial Presidency and its attendant excesses. The corporate media has toiled to offer the “occupiers” the grassroots legitimacy they denied the significantly more philosophically honest Tea Party. Ultimately, the so-called “Occupy” movement is fairly rote. Leftists and far leftists shrieking at the top of their lungs over the fact that life has failed to meet their expectations.

I considered catching local press reports and basing an analysis thereon. However, I’m not Jayson Blair, and this isn’t The New York Times. So I ventured downtown to the park in which the local chapter of this slacker revolution set up shop. I expected the same retro hippies endlessly searching for the second coming of Jerry Garcia, the pseudo-anarchists with their designer-label black clothing and made-in-China “Che” T-shirts and college students, ignorant of the harsh realities of life outside the dormitories, whipped into a partisan frenzy by ivory tower academics who have spent their lives similarly disconnected from the travails of normal existence. I was not disappointed by the confirmation which awaited me; although, I did experience a bit of a letdown over the meager attendance. While massive throngs attend rallies nationwide, the local “Occupy” chapter couldn’t manage to occupy more than the edge of the city park it chose as a base. A father and son merrily tossed a football on the grass within first down yardage of the assemblage.

As I approached down a side street, a group of eager youngsters stepped out of a Land Rover, signs in hand. The irony of arriving at a protest over economic distress and perceived oligarchy in America in a $50,000 car which can’t achieve 20 mpg off a cliff in a tornado evidently was lost on all.

Wandering through the “crowd,” I noted that all the protesters wore identical red bandannas, presumably to differentiate each other from the much larger number of tourists who were trying to take photos of the historic setting.

I observed one fellow toting a flip camera mounted to a tripod walking from protester to protester, demanding on-camera statements. Actually, he walked from young female protester to young female protester and gathered mostly giggles. I suppressed the urge to tell him that reacquainting himself with deodorant and a razor might improve his odds.

Another college-aged protester held up a hand-lettered and incredibly verbose sign proclaiming something about banks, but the combination of poor handwriting on his part and disinterest on mine left it unreadable and unread.

A number of the signs read: “Somos Uno,” although everyone in attendance spoke English. The protesters cheered each time a passerby honked his horn, blissfully unaware that at least half of the honkers were merely warning them to get back on the sidewalk.

A number of signs featured the slogan “war is not the answer,” alongside the logo of the “Friends Committee on National Legislation.” I have no issue with Quakers, although I thought it odd that a group dedicated to “legislation” was associated with a movement which has nothing to do with it.

I didn’t catch many of those ubiquitous “99%” signs. Perhaps someone clued the occupiers into the fact that they hardly represent 99 percent of anything other than Mother Jones subscribers. Either that, or someone noticed that the reviled 1 percent pay close to 40 percent of income taxes. I somehow doubt both scenarios, actually.

As I was leaving, I encountered a man wearing mismatched fatigues who was headed toward the occupiers in decidedly non-martial gait. I asked him if he had served.

“I was a Marine,” he said.

“So, you went through basic nearby,” I said.

“Oh yeah, Fort Stewart, man,” he replied.

Marines start Corps life at Parris Island, S.C. — Fort Stewart is the home of the Army’s 3rd Infantry Division.

Next time, I’m staying home.

–Ben Crystal

The Smoking Gun

On May 3, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder told a House Judiciary Committee hearing: “I’m not sure of the exact date, but I probably heard about [Operation] Fast and Furious (OFF) for the first time over the last few weeks.” Holder, already under scrutiny for protecting the racist hate group New Black Panther Party from prosecution despite blatant attempts at voter intimidation, willingly swore an oath to tell the truth to Congressman Lamar Smith’s panel that day.

Unfortunately for Holder, someone in the corporate media decided to investigate. Documents obtained by CBS News (and ignored by their colleagues at the other corporate media outlets) reveal Holder received detailed briefings about OFF as early as July 2010. It is possible that the calendars at the Obama Department of Justice are as accurate as, well, sworn testimony by Eric Holder. However, it is far more likely that when Holder told the members of the Congressional panel that he heard the lowdown on OFF just weeks before they did, he was prevaricating like Bill Clinton upon being caught in the cloakroom with a plump 23 year-old. (“I was just giving her a little outcome-based education, Hillary. I promise!”)

Let us peel this partisan onion and peer at the proof. Eric Holder lied. He didn’t “forget.” He didn’t “misunderstand the question.” And the internal memos outlining DOJ concerns that OFF had gone off the reservation were not about “a different case.” Granted, he has offered one and/or all of the aforementioned excuses, but his efforts are as transparent as Lady Gaga’s underwear. Holder knew, and people – including at least two Federal agents – died. What should worry you is not whether the most corrupt Attorney General since Janet Reno (possibly John Mitchell, which is saying something) willingly perjured himself in front of Congress; it’s patently obvious that he did.  What should worry you is that if Holder knew about the debacle in such detail, then someone else was fully apprised: President Barack Hussein Obama.

What the Obama Administration, in the person of Holder, wants you to believe:

1. U.S. Attorney and Obama appointee Dennis Burke, acting on a suggestion by Assistant U.S. Attorney and Obama appointee Emory Hurley, approved a gun-walking plan which cost (way) more than $100 million.

2. Despite misgivings from numerous field agents and gun shop owners pressed into cooperating with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, OFF went into effect, with acting ATF Director Kenneth Melson personally watching straw purchases from a CCTV feed in his office.

3. At least two Federal agents (Border Agent Brian Terry and Customs Agent Jaime Zapata) were murdered by narcoterrorists armed by OFF, and numerous OFF-walked weapons have turned up at crime scenes across Mexico and the border region of the United States.

4. Holder and his big buddy, Barack, knew nothing.

I’ll presume that the promotion of Hurley was reward for being such a great guy and was not at all related to the fact that Obama wanted to buy his silence.

I’ll grant the American electorate does not always demonstrate the strongest of intellectual prowess; hell, we elected Obama. But even Sgt. Schultz wasn’t as obtuse as Holder and Obama want us to believe they were, and Col. Hogan was a lot craftier than Eric Holder. Holder’s ever-changing story in the face of evidence that he knew that OFF was going bad like month-old milk speaks volumes.

Since OFF became a public disaster, Hurley has been kicked upstairs, Burke resigned, Melson has been transferred, the White House has issued opaque semi-denials and both Obama mouthpiece Eric Schultz and Holder mouthpiece Tracy Schmaler have launched profane tirades at CBS News reporter Sharyl Attkisson for covering the growing scandal. The vehemence of their obfuscation doesn’t whisper ignorance; it screams cover-up.

Keep in mind, the alternative is worse. In the only other scenario which approaches plausibility, Holder really did forget the briefings, and Obama never knew that his Justice Department was running a more than $100 million rogue operation which involved thousands of weapons walking into the hands of narcoterrorists, who subsequently employed them in untold numbers of violent crimes. In that case, the President and his Attorney General are so colossally incompetent that they shouldn’t be allowed to manage the lost-and-found at the mall, much less the nation and its Federal law enforcement apparatus.

Of course, if you believe that, I have a… gun to sell you.

A Righteous Kill

If you’re trying to figure out why President Barack Obama has lately appeared to be over-inflating that birdcage he calls a chest, U.S. aerial drones executed wanted terrorist and expatriate American Anwar al-Awlaki, along with his similarly American-by-birth sidekick, Samir Khan, last week. Therefore, Obama gets to walk around in his John Wayne shoes for a bit.

Let me be clear: I oppose virtually everything Obama planned to do, has done and/or will do during his four years in the White House. But the executions of al-Awlaki and Khan are not on the list. I know my kill-’em-where-you-find-’em attitude gets me sideways with some folks, including Bob Livingston and Congressman Ron Paul.

We shouldn’t be in the business of whacking people like we were in Tony Soprano’s gang and our victims were wearing wires in the back room at Satriale’s. But occasionally, the role America should play and the role America must play are not the same role.

Sure, it would be easier to simply let these animals continue spouting off about jihad in Jihadi-stan (Yemen, in this case). Consider it: Jihadi-stan sucks. It’s dirty, the food is terrible and the women are all dressed like beekeepers. You can’t tell if that’s hot Fatima or that hook-nosed Ayesha walking down the (dirt) street; and even if you could, walking around dressed like beekeepers in 110 degree heat all day makes them both smell like hamsters.

The problem is that al-Awlaki was not play-acting at terrorism. Al-Awlaki exhorted his followers to kill what he calls “infidels” and you call “the Nelsons from two houses down.” And punching his ticket hardly lowers the intellectual temperature in the human room. It’s not as if, given enough time, he was going to abandon his holy war against the infidel crusaders and concentrate on that cure for cancer he dreamed about as a junior jihadist.

For those of you who object to Obama trying on his big-boy shoes after al-Awlaki’s execution, that’s an unfortunate door-prize you keep when you win a Presidential election. The military scores the touchdown, and the President gets to spike the ball. George W. Bush did it, George H.W. Bush did it, Ronald Reagan did it and even Bill Clinton did it — although Monica Lewinsky helped. Jimmy Carter never did it; but, as we found out later, he was rooting for the other team.

I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with sticking Islamofascists to a bulletin board like human thumbtacks — no matter which country they call home. Does it violate Yemeni sovereignty? Possibly, but ours is more important. I will concede that that sounds jingoistic; but from time to time, it’s perfectly reasonable to remember that the United States is better. They want to kill us because we live by ideals which are anathematic to them: free elections (unless ACORN is involved), cold beer and letting women drive (hey, maybe… nope — my mom will probably read this). And they have proven that — given time and some luck — they can do it. We, in turn, kill them because they’re planning to kill us.

However, what Obama failed to learn and his supporters will never acknowledge: If you want to dine on the spoils of war, you must use the utensils of death. Suddenly, the same people who spent the eight years of the Bush Administration decrying the idea of American troops even mildly inconveniencing Islamofascists have become the most hawkish people since Gen. Douglas MacArthur asked for permission to nuke China. The same doves who wanted a public trial for Khalid Sheikh Mohammed are now channeling their inner Rambo over the executions of al-Awlaki and Khan. Barack Obama the candidate deplored secretive actions against Islamofascists. Barack Obama the President demands credit and respect for ordering them. Even some of their fellow travelers are compelled to recognize such blatant hypocrisy. On Sunday’s broadcast of the no-longer-compelling Meet the Press, Democratic Party sock puppet E.J. Dionne Jr. wandered off-script: “You’ve got to be honest and say what would liberals say if George Bush had done this?”

I do believe we already know the answer to that one.

–Ben Crystal

An UN-Acceptable Proposal

A good friend of mine is a citizen and resident of another country. A fine fellow, he shares very few of my political ideals. That said, he seldom engages in direct debate with me — mostly because every time he visits, we leave politics at the door. Also, we both agree on the merits of good wine and good food — an issue we both consider far more important than President Obama’s latest attempt to impersonate a competent executive. More importantly, he’s a better cook; and I’ll be damned if I’m going to allow the U.N. to cost me a good meal.

Among the areas in which we get crosswise to each other is the proper role of that august assemblage of the Upper East Side: the United Nations. He thinks the U.N. is a valuable diplomatic tool and potential military bulwark against the forces of tyranny, bloodshed and oppression. I think the U.N. takes up what might otherwise be fabulous East River real estate which could be put to better use as a landfill or secret mob graveyard. It is difficult for me to take seriously an organization whose biggest contribution to their host city is unpaid parking tickets.

Earlier this week, the U.N. followed up another red-carpet event for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, evil midget and President of the Islamofascist “Republic” of Iran, with the announcement that it is nearing success in its bid to expand its domain to include the Robert Moses Playground. Already in the midst of a $2 billion renovation (which was supposed to cost around $600 million, but who’s counting?), the U.N. wants to purchase the park in order to construct a more than $400 million high rise next to its current shrine to peaceful diplomacy — or bureaucratic incompetence and appeasement, depending on which newspaper you read.

Truth be told, if the U.N. is going to vacuum up American oxygen (not to mention prime parking spaces), I suppose it’s fair for the organization to enjoy nice digs. After all, we wouldn’t want Lil’ Mahmoud to rant about whatever while standing on shabby carpeting, would we? It’s tough work to murder thousands of your fellow countrymen, rig elections and grind your country’s culture down to Paleolithic levels. Mahmoud’s tootsies deserve plush pile. In addition, if the U.N.’s Manhattan palace is nice, then Ahmadinejad and the rest of his fellow super-creeps (I’m looking at you, Hugo Chavez, presuming the chemo works) are more likely to stay in Manhattan rather than bother the rest of us.

But here’s the rub: The American taxpayer shoulders the burden of nearly a quarter of the U.N.’s budget. We’re on the hook for 22 percent of every failed negotiation, every unprevented genocide, every stalemated military conflict which cost thousands of lives and every half-billion-dollar real estate boondoggle designed to prevent lunatics like Lil’ Mahmoud from bloviating like a character from “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest” in less-than-4-star environs.

Even in an economy which hasn’t been driven into a bridge abutment on the Alinsky Expressway by the profligate morons in the Democratic Party, I hardly think an institution as corpulent as the U.N. should redecorate its crib on the American taxpayers’ dime.

I’m not suggesting that the U.N. doesn’t serve a theoretically valuable purpose. If the nations of the world didn’t have a place to come and pay lip service to global peace and freedom, their various leaders would be forced to lie to the same flunkies all the time; and the flunkies would be forced to pretend they believe them without the benefit of the occasional vacation. But, surely, there are better locales and sources of funding than the United States and the contents of the wallets of U.S. taxpayers.

Instead of sponging off the beleaguered people of its least-favorite country, the U.N. should put the arm on those who are sympathetic to its cause (the real cause, not the stated cause). For example, George Soros is loaded. The Democratic Party has cash, and it will probably blow it on Obama 2012. For that matter, what happened to the billion dollars Ted Turner promised the U.N.? It obviously wasn’t spent on the victims of Islamofascism, Chinese purges or African genocide.

It is long past time to evict the U.N.’s collection of globalist riffraff, one-world buffoons and terrorist apologists. I hear Tehran, Iran, is lovely this time of year.

–Ben Crystal

Student Threatens Man Passing Out Constitution Copies

The video below was recorded by Phil Cleary, a National Guardsman and field representative for The Leadership Institute. Cleary filmed this at the University of Minnesota Duluth on Constitution Day. The characters in this real-life glimpse into the twisted minds of today’s liberals offer at least as much entertainment as their intellectual equals on reality television, albeit with neither the moral gravitas of an episode of “The Jerry Springer Show” nor the academic loftiness of “The Real Housewives of… Wherever.”

The self-proclaimed defender of the supposedly threatened “multicultural center” and devotee of the late terrorist and convict Huey P. Newton is a UMD student named Blair Jordon Moses. Moses (who I suspect would be ecstatic with the nickname “Baby Huey,” although the real Baby Huey allegedly murdered a woman for calling him “Baby”) takes up most of the screen time. However, his asinine rants are noteworthy only for the overt nature of the threats they contain.

In fact, I’m tempted to forgive Baby Huey, if only because he’s clearly a victim of the teachers’ unions and their apparatchik accomplices in what passes for higher education. Granted, he did threaten Cleary, so he’ll probably be expelled, or not. He is a member of one of America’s protected classes; so for all I know, he may ride this video of what appears to be his mental breakdown to the Presidency of the student senate.

Give Baby Huey credit for some remarkable logical calisthenics. First, he threatened to shoot Cleary: “I just want to let you know, that if you ever threaten the multicultural center, I will exercise it (my 2nd amendment rights).” Then — if you’ll pardon the turn of phrase — he shoots himself in the rhetorical foot by proclaiming that he doesn’t “believe” in the Constitution. Is that how that works? You just refuse to believe in it. He would be better off refusing to believe his idol was gunned down in a crack deal gone awry. Let me check… nope, Newton is still dead.

When I was in school, threatening to shoot another student usually resulted in a one-way ticket home, although I can’t remember any junior-varsity racists actually threatening to kill people back then. But I attended one of the finest colleges in the nation.  Baby Huey attends one of the finest colleges in northeastern Minnesota.

The real treat in this live-action dramedy arrives at 2:19. Witness the sweeping entrance of UMD senior administrator Susana Pelayo-Woodward, the director of the Office of Cultural Diversity. From her role in the incident, I glean that she clearly needs remedial education on not only diversity and tolerance, but basic adult responsibility — not to mention the U.S. Constitution. Although she was undisturbed by Baby Huey threatening another UMD student’s life, she was worried about something: Cleary was handing out copies of the Constitution. Pelayo-Woodward asked: “Is this a white supremacist group? It looks like one.” In yet another remarkable intellectual milestone for the peculiarly circular logic of liberalism, she ignored the death threat from the budding terrorist in order to smear the document which allows her the right to smear the document which allows her the right to smear… forget it.

Call it a sense of patriotic civic duty or perhaps a glimmering ember of hope that our country won’t someday be consigned to the stewardship of a generation which is cerebrally outmatched by currently lower life forms like cockroaches, amoebas and Rosie O’Donnell, but I actually expressed my concerns over the ordeal in an email to members of the University of Minnesota Board of Regents, the President of UM and senior personnel at UMD. I pointed out the obvious distress they should experience over one student threatening another, the fact that the aggressor was motivated by the unhinged hate which he appears to have picked up while imprisoned in their institution, and the fact that a member of their senior administration was unruffled by Moses’ verbal assault because she was too busy proving she wears the same idiotic blinders. I also noted that should they eschew disciplinary action against both Moses and Pelayo-Woodward, they would be exposing themselves to a lawsuit which would treat their funding like Godzilla treated downtown Tokyo. In fact, should Baby Huey decide to act out on his threats, not an impossibility if he’s trying to emulate Newton, then they may well be criminally liable as well as civilly so.

Wonder of wonders, someone at UMD is checking the mail. I received the following response:

At UMD, we place a priority on creating a positive and inclusive campus climate. In fact, advancing equity, diversity, and social justice is a core value of our university and is a goal of the UMD Strategic Plan. Freedom of expression, diverse views and opinions, and philosophical debate are part of the treasured tradition of this country’s public universities and the University of Minnesota Duluth. Moreover, UMD takes very seriously its zero tolerance for violence.

Regarding your specific concern, the September 16 incident involved people exercising their constitutional right to express their personal opinions and philosophies. UMD’s Office of Student Life is working to resolve any issues resulting from the encounter.

The representative from Youth for Western Civilization is not a UMD student. Like others who are not students at UMD or groups not registered as student organizations at UMD, he was welcomed to express his views and to distribute information on our campus within the guidelines established for such activities. This welcome continues for all who want to have a public forum to express views.

That qualifies as the most Byzantine babble which has ever appeared in my inbox, and I’m counting that sweet deal the Nigerian barrister clued me into. They are on the case, and they are planning nothing. UMD considers Baby Huey’s threat to Cleary’s life a “constitutional right.” As for Pelayo-Woodward, the email gave nary a hint as to her fate. After I read UMD’s simpering pablum, I called my brother and told him to scratch UMD off the list of possible schools for my nephew, who happens to be an exceptionally gifted hockey player. Actually, the little guy is also a smart cookie, so UMD was unlikely to make the list.

In the past, I and my colleagues at Personal Liberty Digest™ have often reminded you of the essential hypocrisy of liberalism. Although some of the other writers might be more diplomatic about it, I will simply say: Liberal ideology is pure excrement. (Actually, I was going to use more vivid terminology; but each time I do, Mr. Livingston says things like: “How’s your resume looking, Ben?”)

It’s not as if Baby Huey and his hyphenated-American consort are isolated in their appalling hatred. Just last week, a liberal named Stephen Hanks verbally assaulted Bristol Palin in a New York bar. Hanks’s rant was classless and obscene — or, as Bill Maher would call it, “brilliant.” However, it translates from the liberal hate speech as: “I hate your mother so much, I can’t stop myself from attacking her children.” Head union thug Jimmy Hoffa Jr. wants to “take out” the Tea Party. When a Teamsters Union thug talks about taking someone out, he doesn’t mean to dinner and movie. Representative Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) said the Tea Party is destined for “hell.” The last time I checked, that decision is above her pay grade. And Mad Maxine should probably focus on her own upcoming judgment; odds are, she is far from guaranteed a ticket upward in eternity. Common Cause members have demanded the enslavement and/or lynching of Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Lest we think UMD is alone in its madness, consider pretty much everything that’s ever happened at Berkeley.

Granted, we conservatives have a few rotten eggs floating in the barrel, like the heckler who recently called President Obama “The Antichrist.” Obama wishes he was that big-time. I’m not even convinced Satan would hire him as an intern; although, perhaps George Soros could put in a good word for him with the lord of evil. We conservatives make fun of our loose screws; the Democrats send theirs to Congress, elect them President and watch them on MSNBC. Moreover, the Democrats give them influential positions shepherding young minds. Judging by the incident at UMD and the school’s lack of concern, that’s where they are inflicting the most damage.

–Ben Crystal