Right On Target

When firearms enthusiasts get to chatting about their favorite subject, bystanders might as well get comfortable. I routinely enjoy these discussions, if only to see guys nicknamed “Da’ GunZlinger” use “milliradian” in a sentence.

Over the weekend, I participated in one such impromptu panel of citizens. The original topic was “best scopes for a new AR rifle” (my suggestion: learn to shoot well with iron sights, then spend as much on optics as your wife will on that next pair of shoes she’s only going to wear once). True to form, the conversation trended toward liberal assaults on the Bill of Rights. One poster mentioned an interesting development in New Jersey, where State Senator Jeff Van Drew has introduced a bill to ease the burden on Garden Staters who wish to legally carry their firearms.

The bill is far from ideal; among its tenets is a requirement that New Jersey residents who wish to carry pay an annual fee of $500. However, closer examination of S2264 reveals some noteworthy details. 

I am troubled by the annual levy of $500. This is the United States of America, not the Pelosi Palisades Golf and Racquet Club. There is no membership fee in the Bill of Rights. In fact, the Constitution itself says so — most recently in the text of the 24th Amendment. The idea that any government, whether Federal, State or municipal, would apply an onerous charge to the exercising of a citizen’s rights is beyond repellent. 

But there are some aspects of Van Drew’s bill which pique my interest in a positive manner. Surprisingly, Van Drew is a Democrat, although I’m guessing he’s a bit lonely at party conventions. And his bill would begin rectifying New Jersey’s heavy-handed carry laws.

Under current law, seekers must convince their local police chief AND a superior court judge of dire “justifiable need” for a carry permit. Not to seem impolitic, but if the need in question is that justifiable, it’s probably too late to track down Sheriff Andy and Judge Roy Bean. Leave it to a liberal to put that point into perfect perspective by missing the mark entirely. According to Bryan Miller, Executive Director of some wingnut group called Ceasefire NJ:

"It’s very simple: Do we want to be standing in line at a grocery store, at a movie theater, sitting next to someone… not knowing whether that person is legally carrying a handgun?"

Um… that would be a resounding YES. Mr. Miller, I LOVE the idea of every half-baked crackhead, mugger, thug and villain having that exact question weighing on their minds. 

Currently, the Garden State requires fingerprinting and background checks for each handgun purchased, whether the purchaser intends to carry it — or use it to prop up the coffee table. And shooters had better plan ahead if they intend to go pop a few off at the range. During transport, each pistol must be placed, unloaded, in a fastened case and carried in the trunk of a vehicle. If the vehicle has no trunk, the unloaded handgun must be kept in a locked box out of reach of passengers. “See here, Mr. Carjacker. If you would kindly wait for me to unlock my trunk…” 

President Barack Obama’s “home” state of Illinois has among the most restrictive carry permit laws in the nation. And yet, when it comes to violent crimes per/100,000 population, the margin between the Sultanate of the Sainted Community Activist and Tony Soprano-ville isn’t exactly crosshair-thin, with Illinois suffering nearly 200 more annually per/100K. Washington, D.C., which has gun ownership laws nearly as restrictive as the Third Reich, would be a runaway No. 1 if it was a State, with nearly double the rate of any State. NJ-S2264 would set about correcting that extraordinarily bad math. 

Some might suggest that S2264 is a poor piece of politics. It adds unnecessary and illegal fees, layers of bureaucracy and will come nowhere near undoing the injustice current laws visit upon the law-abiding citizens of New Jersey.

But this is New Jersey — the reputed final resting place of Jimmy Hoffa. And in the last year, citizens have chosen Chris Christie as their Governor and now a Democrat State Senator is taking a chisel to the liberal wall around the Garden State.

Let’s look on the bright side and call S2264 a baby step in the right direction.

The Red Carpet For Mustapha

Perhaps the most oft-repeated slogan of the War on Terror is “…fight them there so we don’t have to fight them here.” Irrefutable logic when weighed against the designs of every two bit desert-dwelling nut job with a B-40 and a dream.

But what happens if the aforementioned nut job already has the B-40 (or 500 pounds of ammonium nitrate) and the dream; but isn’t dwelling in the desert? What if he’s in Detroit, or downtown Manhattan? What if he’s currently touring an installation run by the very people sworn to protect the lives, liberty and property he and his fellow villains threaten?

On the outskirts of McLean, Va. — a stone’s throw from our nation’s capitol — lies a theoretically ultra-secure facility called the National Counter Terrorism Center. In theory, the NCTC is the heart of America’s efforts to ensure that threats to American safety don’t come to fruition. Not far down the road from the NCTC is a facility much better known to many Americans — the FBI training center at Quantico. The NCTC and FBI’s Quantico facility would seem to be the sorts of places which terrorists only view through the meal slots in their interrogation cell doors.

Imam Sheik Kifah Mustapha has seen both, and with a Federal tour guide courteously offering answers to his reportedly detailed questions; and as revealed in recent reports by outlets including WLS-Chicago (which sent a reporter along), Mustapha got the grand tour of the nerve centers of our side of the War on Terror at the invitation of the guys his pals have sworn to set down toes-up.

Mustapha is a member of the terrorist group HAMAS. While most Americans are aware of HAMAS’s violent assaults on Israel, fewer are aware that HAMAS has earned a place of honor on the State Department’s list of Foreign Terrorist Organizations. While the FBI doesn’t think too highly of HAMAS’s ability to execute attacks on American soil, FBI Director Robert Mueller told Congress:

“Of all the Palestinian groups, HAMAS has the largest presence in the U.S. with a robust infrastructure, primarily focused on fundraising… its U.S. network is theoretically capable of facilitating acts of terrorism in the U.S.”

So, while HAMAS is content to treat America as an ATM, they can blow the bank up when their checks start getting stamped “NSF.”

Enter Imam Mustapha, our erstwhile FBI/NCTC visitor. A former operative with the now-defunct HAMAS cover group the Holy Land Foundation, Mustapha, who now runs the Bridgeview Mosque Foundation outside Chicago, is one of the unindicted co-conspirators in the case which proved to be the undoing of the HLF. And Mustafa was at the NCTC as an invited guest during the recent six-week FBI Citizen’s Academy, a part of our government’s Muslim outreach effort.

What’s next?

“Welcome to Ft. Meade, Mr. bin Laden. If you look to your left, you’ll see the main ECHELON servers. Just past that, you’ll see a photograph of… you.”

There are more than a billion Muslims on the planet. There are nearly 2 million Muslims in the United States. Surely, the FBI could have hosted a follower of the Prophet who doesn’t spend his time raising money for terrorists who advocate the extermination of the Jews.

Is there even a questionnaire?

“All right, Mr. Mustapha. Are you a citizen of the United States?”
“Yes.”
“Have you ever been convicted of a felony?”
“No.”
“Have you ever blown up a civilian target in the name of Islam?”
“Me? No. (heh-heh.)”
“Do you now, or have you ever advocated the annihilation of Israel and its supporters?”
“ALLAHU AKBAR, YES! I MEAN… No? Damn! That one always gets me.”

Mustapha’s resume contains warning flags big enough to cover the Dome of the Rock. Beyond his service to terrorist backers at the HLF, he also maintains close ties with the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a group which shares his “unindicted co-conspirator” designation from the HLF trial. In fact, reading the list of reasons why Mustapha’s visit to FBI facilities ought to involve shackles takes longer than a President Barack Obama press conference during a teleprompter malfunction.

Some will claim this piece has a distinct anti-Muslim bias and point to Tim McVeigh, or Eric Rudolph. But I contend in response that The Council on American-Creepy Loner Relations has a short membership roster and extremely limited funding, not to mention a God-awful acronym.

Clearly, neither McVeigh nor Rudolph is ever going to tour the FBI’s most sensitive facilities. But Mustapha has. Quite a few of his “religion of peace” compatriots openly promise nefarious plans for us. Allow me to suggest we not show the perpetrators of such abominations the location of the off switch for our terrorism alarm.

As Seen on TV

Fox News recently reported White House Science Advisor John Holden was urging people to cease using the phrase “global warming” and instead use “global climate disruption.”

Brilliant. Rather than acknowledge that the completely discredited global warming industry was headed out to intellectual sea with the rest of the political sewage, President Barack Obama was resorting to the timeworn trick of repackaging an old product. I could simply have observed how well that plan worked for everything from Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign to General Motors, but then I mused: Why not help?

Perhaps what liberalism needs isn’t a one-way ticket to Mao’s mausoleum. Perhaps a little polish might restore the luster to the fading ideology of hypocritical tyranny. After all, it worked for Stalin, right? Errr — it might be useful in getting those unsightly rings off the coffee table. Plus, Billy Mays has passed on, so a Democrat Party infomercial is right out.

So I have undertaken the Herculean task of coming up with all new slogans for some of the tarnished bastions of left-wing politics. I’ve tried to put a happy face on the fear-mongering which has befallen much of the Left’s front line, while at the same time restoring the honesty which all too often is as foreign to liberals as a good punch line is to a Whoopi Goldberg standup routine.

To wit:

Global Warming. So-called anthropogenic global warming is in all likelihood the most successful junk science in human history. Much like phrenology or heliocentric astronomy, global warming is a theory which merely fits the observable facts.

Recent discoveries that major global warming “scientists” were falsifying their “data” nailed the lid down. High-profile backing of breathtakingly stupid Hollywood celebrities like Laurie David and uber-hypocrite Al Gore has finished off one of the farthest-reaching scientific scams since cold fusion was “discovered” 20 years ago:

  • ManBearPig is REAL! We’re super-duper SERIAL!
  • The power of imagination.
  • Is it hot in here, or is it… OH MY GOD!
  • Science? We don’t need no stinking science!
  • You say “summer.” We say “RUN!”
  • We can’t believe we get paid to do this, either.
  • Can everyone on Dailykos be wrong?
  • It’s Bush’s fault.

MSNBC. The destination cable outlet for Democrat National Committee talking points, MSNBC has been circling the bowl since Keith Olbermann led the charge to turn their primetime lineup into a bizarro-world version of Fox News. Desperately jealous “personalities” vent frustration and rage at their conservative betters, occasionally lapsing into fits of almost comical hysteria. It has apparently never occurred to GE management that the talentless nails-on-a-blackboard shrieking of Obama-cheerleader Matthews, the buffoonish Olbermann, Olbermann’s “mini-me” Maddow and mouth-breathing thug Ed Schultz might be the reason the channel’s entire primetime lineup can’t match the ratings of a single hour of Fox programming:

  • We love it here! (Please help us. We’re trapped in Keith’s basement.)
  • Sorry your remote broke.
  • If it’s even remotely related to reality — you’re probably watching VH1 again.
  • When Ed says “voter fraud is cool” he means that in a good way.
  • Like Fox News without all those high-calorie facts.
  • We promise, Olbermann’s only an hour.
  • Yes, Maddow looks like that on purpose.
  • Liberal talking points — we don’t write ‘em, we just read ‘em.
  • FEEL THE TINGLE!
  • It’s Bush’s fault.

The New York Times. Once the nation’s — if not the world’s — de-facto newspaper of record, The Times has descended into the depths of leftist illegitimacy. The “Gray Lady” is now a pale shadow of her former self, regurgitating Democrat talking points as actual news, occasionally without even rewording the releases. The plagiarism and fake reportage scandals of the last decade finally ended any pretense of credibility:

  • Remember us?
  • We were cool before email.
  • We were cool before mail mail.
  • You have to go somewhere during Department of State attacks on Drudge.
  • Print is so relevant!
  • So much more than Jayson Blair.
  • Check out our Pulitzers!
  • All the talking points fit to print.
  • Like the USA Today, without those distracting colors.
  • It’s Bush’s fault.

CNN. The world’s first global cable news network started slowly, but hit its stride during the First Gulf War. Sadly, liberal influence, led by former owner Ted Turner, forced CNN into an inevitable decline. While CNN hasn’t faced the same abysmal ratings as the tinfoil-hat-brigadiers at MSNBC, even the departure of Turner has failed to resurrect the once-proud network. The continued presence of weak personalities like erstwhile game show host Anderson Cooper and howling lunatic Jack Cafferty keeps CNN from shedding the “Clinton News Network” moniker it earned in the ’90s:

  • We used to be awesome.
  • Darth Vader does our voice-overs.
  • Like us, or we’ll send Carville to your house.
  • We’re so tired. So very, very tired.
  • Ted Turner has left the building.
  • Our ratings are still better than MSNBC’s.
  • It’s Bush’s fault.

Nancy Pelosi. Our current Speaker of the House rose to prominence after Dick Gephardt finally decided it was someone else’s turn to quarterback Washington D.C.’s intellectual junior varsity. This furious harridan lives in Catherine The Great-style wealth and comfort, but believes that the rest of us should live in Catherine The Great’s servants-style squalor. Much like the aforementioned Empress of All the Russias, Pelosi relates to normal people the way normal people relate to leper colonies. Pelosi also serves as a caution to those who might consider going the Leona Helmsley plastic surgery route. The mere idea of Pelosi’s proximity to the Oval Office is enough to make brave men quail. It will indeed be a sight watching her trying to get re-accustomed to the title of House Minority Leader:

  • Blinking is overrated.
  • Draining the swamp, one thimble at a time.
  • The miracle of Botox®.
  • I love poor people! They keep my houses clean!
  • It’s Bush’s fault.

Harry Reid. Pelosi’s Senatorial counterpart, Reid is the perfect foil for a shrill harpy like Pelosi. Despite reportedly having once been a boxer, Reid is small, weak-chinned and probably adept at standing in the ladies’ department holding his wife’s purse:

  • Compared to Obama, I’m John McCain.
  • Compared to Pelosi, I’m Barry Goldwater.

John Kerry. America woke up just in time:

  • Yooooou raaaang?

Al Gore. After losing the 2000 Presidential contest despite some exceptionally creative Democrat-engineered voter fraud, the wooden-faced and stiff-necked Gore has spent the last decade in an almost tragicomic attempt to re-establish himself as someone of note. After winning an Oscar for the world’s most inconvenient slide show, Gore continued to trot across the globe, lecturing the masses on the perils of global warming — oops — global climate disruption — while simultaneously leaving carbon footprints the size of Yankee Stadium:

  • PAY ATTENTION TO ME!
  • Do the bolts in my neck show?
  • Have Oscar, will travel (by private jet)!
  • RRRRRAAARRRRRRR! FIRE! BAAAAAAD!

John Edwards. An almost archetypical personal injury lawyer, Edwards built an eight-figure fortune exploiting the sick, injured and grieving, including one case in which he claimed to be channeling the spirit of a dead fetus (despite being pro-abortion). After Dick Cheney cleaned his clock in a 2004 Vice Presidential debate, Edwards staged a political comeback which derailed spectacularly when the National Enquirer busted him for an affair with a paid campaign contractor who bore him a child:

  • (singing)… The kid is not my son! (It IS my daughter, however.)
  • I am dedicated to ending the disparity between rich and… AMBULANCE!
  • I feel pretty! Oh so pretty!
  • Are they still hiring for a new Breck Girl?

The Ground Zero Mosque. The political hot-button issue of the summer of 2010, the Ground Zero Mosque was backed by shady finances and fronted by a Sharia-spouting Imam with an unfortunate track record of supporting the 9/11 attackers. Liberals leapt to the defense of the GZM in the name of the same religious freedom they would deny 9-year-olds who want to bow their heads in silent prayer before school:

  • Jihad, American Style!
  • Join us Fridays for Osama’s Greatest Hits, followed by bingo!
  • When we say “Allahu!” you say “Akbar!”

Barack Obama. So many failures, so little bandwidth. Elected on a wave of manufactured acclaim and old-fashioned race baiting, the former “community activist” has proven to be farther out of his depth than a kid wearing water wings swimming above the Mariana Trench. Backed by a rogue’s gallery of left-wing hate groups like the Service Employees International Union and the New Black Panther Party, Obama is plumbing depths of ineptitude unseen since the Carter Administration. Even Democrat Party candidates are showing signs of “losing the President’s number.” Despite desperate boosting by mainstream media sycophants and far-left-liberals, support for Obama is beginning to falter like a two-pack-a-day smoker in the 10th mile of a marathon:

  • Like Carter, except I don’t hate Jews that much.
  • Quiet, or Michelle will hear you.
  • What can brown do for you?
  • I can’t believe nobody noticed I lifted my campaign strategy from The Distinguished Gentleman.
  • It’s this or President Joe Biden.
  • I’m not asking you — I’m TELLING you.
  • Kenya… Hawaii… what’s the difference?
  • It’s Bush’s fault.
  • Did I mention it’s Bush’s fault?

This is by no means a comprehensive list. Obviously, there are many more leading lights of liberalism in need of an image makeover. Sadly, space and bandwidth limitations constrict my ability to offer assistance to every one of the travelers on the port side of American politics. More to the point — Mr. Livingston would probably prefer I not compose an Encyclopedia Britannica-esque compendium.

I leave it to you, my friends, my countrymen, my fellow Livingstonians to carry on.

Day At The Improv

Stephen Colbert is a funny guy. Granted, his program is a comedic shiv in the conservative movement’s kidneys, but a good joke is still a good joke.

Colbert is a rare breed amongst lefties, a comedian who is actually funny. Compared to lowbrow liberal court jesters like Mike Malloy, Colbert is funnier than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad promising to whip the Marine Corps in a game of “catch the cruise missile.”

However, Colbert should stick to Comedy Central. What we saw him do last week while “testifying” in front of Congress wasn’t funny, it was… weirdly captivating, like watching a car wreck, or Bill Clinton sitting down for an interview with Pat Robertson on The 700 Club.

There’s a time and a place for comedy; and testifying in front of the U.S. House of Representatives is neither. The goings-on in the people’s house are already funny enough. But don’t pin the blame for Colbert’s standup set entirely on Colbert. He was invited to do his schtick by subcommittee chairwoman Zoe Lofgren (D-Outer Space). I would suggest Colbert should have known better. It’s not as if I’m expecting Lofgren to know, well, much.

Lofgren extended the invitation to Colbert to testify on the issue of immigrant workers. Why the eight-term incumbent from California’s 16th would settle on a stand-up/sit down comedian to render expert testimony on such a monumentally important issue might cause some to scratch their heads, but I suspect:

  1. Lofgren is a 62-year-old lawyer and former congressional aide of Swedish descent. She’s about as hip as parachute pants, but represents a demographically diverse Silicon Valley-area district. Inviting Colbert to make the kiddies laugh was an attempt to jack up her “skreet kred.”
  2. Lofgren, like most liberals who’ve been in Washington since before even parachute pants were cool, is so completely disassociated from the 300 million taxpayers who are legally in this country that she thought Colbert was an actual expert on migrant workers.
  3. Lofgren was trying to distract the public from not only the seriousness of the immigration issue at a time when the Democrat ruling elite is being seen by more and more Americans as more disconnected from normalcy than Lindsay Lohan on the back end of a five-day bender; but also from the disastrous events of earlier in the week when a Democrat legislative ploy fell flatter than a Bill Maher punch line.

The third answer is the one which should raise your eyebrows. The Lofgren/Colbert comedy hour took place on Friday. Three days prior, Senate Democrats had tried to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants by attempting to bootleg the DREAM ACT across the legislative border under the blanket of the National Defense Reauthorization Act. The GOP spotted the subterfuge and filibustered, forcing the Democrats to turn to their trusty mainstream media for response, breathlessly pointing out that a repeal of the Clinton-era Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was also pinned to the tail of the NDRA donkey.

Despite headlines decrying alleged GOP-sponsored discrimination, the story went toes-up fairly quickly, its demise hastened by Colbert’s dog-and-pony show Friday morning. But hidden behind Friday’s fracas was the real story: The Democrats tried to pull a fast one, failed; turned out the mainstream media to cover them, failed; and then brought in a comedian to divert attention from their profligate elitism, and failed. By late Friday, even Democrats were claiming Lofgren’s stunt was an outrageous ploy by a rogue representative.

What they weren’t doing was acknowledging that they’d tried to pull a fast one and then bumbled helplessly until Colbert mercifully, albeit (hopefully) unwittingly, rescued them with his antics.

The influx of illegal immigrants is a serious issue, one which deserves serious response. The Democrats have attacked (the Department of Justice v Arizona), defamed (throwing the race card at anyone who stands against amnesty), and dishonored the nation (including AZ1070 in a human rights report to the United Nations). Now, with the Lofgren/Colbert report, they’re simply mocking not only the contentious issue of immigration reform, but also the overwhelming majority of Americans who contend the issue bears consideration.

As for the Democrat attempts as distraction, I maintain that distracting Congress from legislating is like distracting a dog from chewing on the furniture — or chewing on your kids.

But the Colbert disaster was a good look at the general tenor of the Democrat Party, 2010: Confronted by major economic, foreign policy and immigration predicaments of their own creation, they’re doing improv shows during business hours.

The Company You Keep

Georgia’s 12th Congressional District comprises 220 or so gerrymandered miles of economically and demographically heterogeneous land which includes everything from onion farms to America’s fifth largest port. The person who serves this diverse constituency, noted by the Cook Partisan Voting Index as being D+1 (listing slightly to port), is currently a wealthy trial lawyer named John Barrow.

Barrow himself is a fairly inconsequential fellow. Of his three successful campaigns for the House, two were decided by margins narrower than his shoulders. Pro-abortion group NARAL has given him a 100 percent rating; but he voted against major liberal initiatives like Obamacare and Cap and Trade.

In an effort to maintain his grasp on the good life afforded House members, Barrow horse-trades like the guy in the green eyeshade in a John Wayne movie; swapping votes for Nancy Pelosi for the power to pacify his more conservative constituents during Obama’s periodic assaults on their lives. To put a fine point on it: Barrow is everyone’s pal, but nobody’s friend.

The urbane Barrow is certainly not someone you’d expect to find skulking around the urban alleys of New York City. Indeed, it’s hard to picture the bespectacled Barrow, who’s whiter than Dennis Kucinich singing Conway Twitty tunes in a Branson karaoke bar, leaping out of his limo to hang with the homeboys who call Harlem home. So imagine my surprise when the ethics imbroglio surrounding comically corrupt Charles Rangel of New York’s 15th Congressional District (PVI: D+43 — more liberal than David Paterson’s “girlfriends”) managed to ensnare the pasty-faced Congressman from South Georgia.

For his part, Rangel has — ahem — allegedly committed a list of offenses which stretch from the Apollo Theatre to Augusta National. He has remained near the top of the D.C. heap despite even President Barack Obama reacting to his ethics scandals by suggesting he should “end his career with dignity.” During four decades in Washington, Rangel has salted away quite a pile, and has subsequently spread the wealth to far-flung congressional corners — including Southeast Georgia.

You read that correctly. The putrescence of liberalism extends from 125th Street all the way to the Savannah River. With a nod to The Bard via Charles D. Warner — politics does indeed make strange bedfellows. According to a Tuesday report in the Savannah Morning News, Barrow has been on the receiving end of Rangelian largesse since 2004 and has no intention of ridding himself of the repellent stink of Rangel’s rewards. To date, Barrow has cashed checks from the Regent of Riker’s Island totaling $24,000. And according to Barrow spokesmodel Jane Brodsky, he’s keeping the cash:

Congressman Barrow is not going to make a symbolic gesture based on contributions he received in past election cycles that were spent a long time ago.”

Truth be told, there’s not much point in Barrow dumping Rangel’s tainted treasure. With another nod to The Bard: that spot ain’t comin’ out in the wash. By refusing to divest himself of Rangel’s 24 grand, the supposedly Blue Dog Barrow has cast his lot with the far left of the liberal establishment.

Obama might call this sort of thing a “teachable moment.” Barrow, who is facing opposition from Ray McKinney (who sports an endorsement from the increasingly powerful Tea Party), may be in for a wild ride to November. While Real Clear Politics data suggest Barrow’s seat is safe, there are no polls which indicate an approval rating at or above 50 percent.

In an off-year election in which Democrats not only won’t have the benefit of Obama’s coattails, but would rather skip and go naked than huddle under the President’s hide, Barrow likely needs every nickel. Here’s the rub: when word of Barrow’s canoodling with Rangel gets back to Peach State voters, how much political vigorish will Barrow owe on the loan?

Barrow has played both sides of the fence for long enough to hold on to his seat on the back bench of the House, but has made little headway in terms of noteworthiness, much less notoriety. While he has a sizeable financial edge over McKinney, association with a wire-pulling reprobate like Rangel may cost him a great deal more than a lousy double-dozen large. And it raises fair questions about the Democrats’ direction.

Barrow’s financial fraternization with Rangel is apt allegory for the larger issues surrounding the Democrat Party in 2010. What happened to Pelosi “draining the swamp?” Where is the end of the liberal culture of corruption? And if I hold Barrow up to a 40-watt bulb, can I see where his spine is supposed to be?

According to Brodsky:

"(Barrow) has neither received nor accepted any contributions after allegations of (Rangel’s) ethical impropriety arose."

Barrow the Blue Dog and Rangel the snake — different ends of the same donkey.

The Hamburger Of Hypocrisy

Call it “televised serendipity”:  A moment in which two members of the Democrat Party leadership get together and reveal the political deformities which have turned the “big tent” into a circus sideshow. Under normal circumstances — a President Barack Obama press conference, for example — the groveling sycophants in the corporate media allow these boors to babble on without interruption.

While Americans with IQs above the intellectual Mendoza line simply tune out, most liberals remain enraptured, downloading the latest talking points, feverishly anticipating their next opportunity to regurgitate the drivel with the kind of self-importance otherwise reserved for sociopaths and trial lawyers. On occasion, however, more than one of the liberal ruling elite top-rung types end up sharing the same patch of real estate — and then we have to watch as they fog up our screens with unbridled expressions of love for each other — and scorn for the rest of us.

One of those serendipitous moments presented itself late last week, when fleshy filmmaker Michael Moore visited the set of liberal rat-terrier Bill Maher’s Real Time. While both are fairly high-ranking members of the DNC elite, neither is apparently aware that the zaftig Moore makes Rosie O’Donnell look like the “after” picture in a Weight Watchers commercial while Maher is only slightly funnier than an 8-car pileup on the expressway.

Such lack of awareness might explain how these two stooges could have a conversation in which Moore opined:

“…people like Gingrich and Palin? You know, because they’re essentially our mullahs, you know, our Taliban. Hey, how about that McDonald’s two blocks from Ground Zero, Bill?  That’s killed more people than the 19 hijackers…”

Evidently, I missed the nationwide APB for the Hamburglar on Sept. 12.

That’s right, kids — the mammoth movie maker says that Speaker Gingrich, Governor Palin and Egg McMuffins are more sinister than Islamofascism. Perhaps he simply prefers the Whopper to the Big Mac. But the idea that Moore would heave his Brobdingnagian bulk into frame and equate Mayor McCheese with militant Muslims has to be a new low-water mark for the liberal ruling class.

Maher and his carefully screened audience reacted with that smarmy snicker that the Democrats apparently teach in wingnut school. No one noted that the elephantine Moore, who helmed the camera for some of the most deservedly discredited “documentaries” since Leni Riefenstahl was making 8mm loops of Hitler doing the goose step shuffle, might be stretching his minimal credibility farther than the weakening waistband on his jockey shorts.

The good news for those of us with cerebral cortices larger than garlic knots: in addition to being shortchanged in the intellect and talent departments, the liberal ruling elite possess the subtlety of the cast of an MTV reality show. Moore and Maher’s get together was filmed in front of a live studio audience and broadcast to every household which subscribes to HBO.

For those of you who lament the lack of political acumen displayed by America’s peach fuzz generation, millions of viewers, er… thousands, um… hundreds, ah… dozens, ok… more kids saw the gargantuan gasbag Moore compare Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin and their beloved Ronald McDonald unfavorably with the Taliban than have ever sat through more than a few moments of Chris Matthews nightly tingle-time. They also observed Maher, the junior varsity Jon Stewart, laugh along with the oleaginous auteur without noting that to date, no Fry Guy has ever taken so much as a single flying lesson, much less tried to carry a box cutter onto a commercial jet.

These are the people who have taken over the Democrat Party. These are the people who launch invective at Limbaugh, Beck and Hannity. These are the people who call us racists for opposing — or even daring to question — the Obama agenda. These are the people who opened verbal fire on Christine O’Donnell (who once graced Maher with her presence) mere hours after her ground-shaking victory in Delaware. These are the people who would demand you execrate Sarah Palin while exalting Nancy Pelosi.

At a time when the Democrat party has plunged the country into economic ennui, flatlined our foreign relations and rendered our immigration protections inert, they offer us clowns like Moore and Maher, the haphazard and humorless Laurel and Hardy.

Moore and Maher are members of the liberal leadership so we can divine that this is the direction in which the left is leaning these days. But fret not, my friends, more and more Americans are paying attention.

Forgive me for saying so, but come November:

Ba-da-ba-ba-baaa, I’m lovin’ it.

Who’s Laughing Now?

Tuesday’s edition of The Hill featured a piece by Sam Youngman about a Presidential photo-op in fabulous Fairfax, Va. Entitled “President Obama seeks his inner Bill Clinton and feels voters’ pain,” the piece focused on a White House sojourn to the home of an upper middle class family in the aforementioned suburban enclave.

While my first thought was “at least they didn’t go back to Majorca,” a more intent perusal of the piece revealed a great deal about how our poor President has gotten so lost of late. At one point during the stop-over, Obama actually said he “feels their pain.” Bill Clinton used to say that, as well. Then the GOP dropped an electoral elephant on the Democrats in 1994. The more things “change…”

While Obama’s visit to the home of John Nicholas and Nicole Armstrong was no more or less carefully orchestrated than any other Presidential day trip, his talking points were — sadly — no more or less ludicrous than his other recent economic pronouncements.

Nicholas was noted as having “survived several layoffs at his Internet-services company,” while Armstrong has “recently returned to part-time work… to help pay the family’s bills.” So, while the President’s economic ineptitude has pushed the unemployment rate toward Carter-era numbers, the President went to a hoedown at a home owned by a family earning more than twice the national salary average.

Neither of his hosts is looking for work, nor are they “working” for the Census Bureau (or at any other government-backed make-work jobs the White House has been trying to sneak into the economic stew of late.) And Obama feels our pain? Obama might as well have visited a home which had recently been burglarized… and consoled the next-door neighbors.

During his photo-op, Obama also tried to tout his economic message, touching on his administration’s fight to dim the lights on Bush-era tax relief, a key point in the recent war of words the White House has been trying to wage. One White House spokesmodel suggested the Obama push to punish economic success stories by bumping up upper income tax bracket rates was:

“fight(ing) for the middle class.”

What the mouthpiece didn’t mention was the punitive nature of the Democrats’ frontal tax-assault on the nation’s leading producers. Right now, the top 25 percent of American income earners have to pull the cart for 86 percent of the IRS bill. If the margins go up, that top 25 percent (which includes nearly everyone at Obama’s Fairfax fandango) will have to spend less now to pay more in April. Even the D-students in Econ 101 can tell you taking money out of the economic reservoir lowers the level of the whole lake. More to the point: you don’t bench the varsity for running up the economic score.

But the exhaustive use of exhausted liberal justification for regressive taxes aside; Obama’s visit to the hinterlands actually got weird(er). According to the President:

“Michelle and I always laugh about it when people talk about us—I think they forget that we were basically living the same lives as John and Nicole, just it wasn’t that long ago,” Obama said. “It was, like, six, seven years ago.”

Whee, Presidential jocularity! How refreshing. I suppose we should be glad that our multi-millionaire Commander-in-Chief and his fashion plate wife can look back on their former lives of middle-class drudgery and smile. Pardon me if I don’t join in the fun there, chuckles. Remind me, Mr. Middle-class: Michelle took HOW many people along to Spain? It cost HOW MUCH? And you were dining with OPRAH that week? Then you went BACK to MARTHA’S VINEYARD?

The article dutifully noted that Obama grew up in less luxurious surroundings than the ones he was visiting on Monday (and the ones in which he currently resides). Meaning what—he’s a modern-day Horatio Alger?

I have learned to accept the essential hypocrisy of limousine liberals. But the idea of an extraordinarily wealthy man visiting reasonably wealthy supporters in order to promulgate economic policies which have not only consigned millions of Americans to far less fancy fields than Fairfax, but will also ensure few Americans can reach their level of wealth isn’t humorous; it’s horrific.

Pundits often point to the “disconnect” between Obama and the average citizen. Obama’s recent Fairfax field trip reveals something more sinister than simple separation: The President finds our plight amusing.

Laugh it up, liberals. We saw the same primary results you did. Come November, the joke’s on you.

The Thrill Is Gone

For the eighth time in what increasingly looks like will be his only term, President Barack Obama held forth at a talking point dump, aka press conference. For a man dubbed “messianic” by the liberal elite, I can’t help but notice of late, Obama looks as comfortable in front of the camera as a blind agoraphobic in Grand Central Station during rush hour. 

Watching our increasingly desperate President try to hold the attention of even the fawning sycophants who comprise the bulk of the White House Press Corps was like watching a physics professor trying on homecoming Friday to hold the attention of a lecture hall filled with frat-boy liberal arts majors.  Confronted by ABC News correspondent Jake Tapper about how Obamacare has already turned into the fiscal imbroglio Democrats denied it would be, Obama froze stiffer than Nancy Pelosi’s face on a Lake Tahoe ski lift:

“No — as I said, uh, Jacob, the — I haven’t read the entire study, uh, maybe you have.  But, uh, you know, if — if you — if what the reports are true, what they’re saying is that as a consequence of us getting 30 million additional people health care, at the margins that’s gonna increase our costs, we knew that.  We didn’t think that we were gonna cover 30 million people… for… free.

Actually, Mr. President, that’s.  Precisely.  What.  You.  Said.  While his backtracking tends to be as laughably divorced from reality as an Ed Schultz monologue, Obama’s stilted speech patterns and inexplicable “I don’t write it, I just read it” dependence on the teleprompter has actually passed funny and disembarked at creepy.  I can’t help but wonder if David Axelrod is standing behind the blue curtain with a remote control: 

“Damn it, Gibbs.  I need four AA batteries, pronto!”

Remember when this same media took such pleasure in mocking George W. Bush’s tortured enunciations?  At least we all knew that when W said “nook-you-lerr,” it wasn’t because Ari Fleischer fell asleep with his head on the keyboard. 

I thought Obama was supposed to be the smartest man alive.  During the course of the 2008 Presidential campaign, the Democrats deployed every media flack, screwball blogger and MSNBC “journalist” to extol his brilliance while excoriating anyone who dared ask: 

“Is it me, or does this guy sound like Howard Dean built a Leninbot in his basement?”

Those of us who openly questioned the acumen of the untested Illinois Senator were dismissed as racists.  Once the race card was maxed out (which happened right about the same time ultra-white boy Newsweek leftist Jonathan Alter claimed that only racism could prevent an Obama Presidency), the left began assailing doubters with Obama’s indubitable brilliance.  “He went to HARVARD.”  Um…so did the Unabomber.  For that matter, so did Al Gore.  For THAT matter — so did Bush.

Now that the Obama Express has jumped the tracks and slammed headfirst into the bridge abutment of incompetence, Democrats nationwide are booking passage to Anywhere But Obama.  Two hundred nineteen Dems voted “yea” on Obamacare.  Not one has run an ad touting their vote.

“Sure, I’m flattered that the President would like to campaign for me.  It’s just that I’m washing my hair this election.” 

The borderline-romantic yearning for the great Community Activist has faded like Bill and Hillary’s post-Monica love life.  Even plagiarist and former Bhagwan devotee Ariana Huffington’s Hollywood self-esteem builder Huffingtonpost.com can’t seem to drum up much enthusiasm, with Huffpo’s ubiquitous pseudo-academic Joseph Palermo weaving allusions to fading Obama worship into a predictable tapestry of tired Bush-bashing in a Friday piece ponderously entitled “President Obama Attempts to Bridge the ‘Enthusiasm Gap.'”  It has clearly never occurred to Professor Palermo that the Army Corps of Engineers couldn’t handle that job.

Obama’s lack of enthusiasm is beyond pathetic.  Rush Limbaugh suggested during his Friday broadcast that Obama appears impotent.  Limbaugh is underselling the problem.  There’s no little blue pill which can fix the issues in the White House. 

Whatever you want to call it, Obama’s lack of vitality is dangerous.  Islamofascism, the Service Employees International Union and Nancy Pelosi don’t let up on the throttle just because Obama’s hiding under the Resolute Desk. 

During the 2008 Presidential campaign, Democrats fired distortions, defamation and plain old venom at Sarah Palin with abandon.  Her garrulous vigor made her a far more inviting target than the man who would be her boss, John McCain.

Looking back, Obama’s verbal ineptitude (not to mention his professional incompetence) makes both McCain and Palin look positively Ciceronian by comparison.  The Democrats honestly expect us to believe Palin couldn’t have handled Joe Biden’s job?  I’m not convinced Obama can, either.

Fahrenheit 450

I remember the first time I read Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451. I was a prisoner in an 8th grade English class. I also knew I was going to be facing Ayn Rand and George Orwell, with Anthem and Animal Farm looming on the syllabus. The teacher was clearly working on a bit of a motif.

The only motif my teenage mind could discern was: “Truckload of homework.” The teacher was endeavoring to instill a more profound lesson: Literary and intellectual oppression is anathema to civilized society. For those of you who are victims of teachers’ unions: Burning books is stupid.

Burning books also doesn’t work. The anti-intellectualism of someone who would torch even Al Franken’s idiotic drivel deserves even less respect than the driveller himself. Don’t sell Al’s deepest thoughts short — there’s that wobbly leg on the coffee table, for instance. More to the point: From the Nazi Säuberung to the Fairness Doctrine, even short-lived victories in a war on knowledge always end up buried under a pile of either bodies or ballots (in the Fairness Doctrine example, a pile of Dennis Kucinich speeches).

During my internment in 8th grade English, I would gladly have siphoned gas out of my teacher’s Oldsmobile to assist an effort to rid us of the collected works of Bradbury, Rand and Orwell.

I was 13. What’s Terry Jones’s excuse?

Jones, the pastor of the incongruously-monikered Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Fla., has announced that he and his congregants will be marking the ninth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks by putting the Koran to the torch. Despite cautionary notes sounded by everyone from the local fire department to General David Petraeus, Jones is going ahead with his bonfire of the inanities. Jones says he and his congregation are making a statement about standing up to the forces of terrorism embodied by the Islamofacists who flew planes into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field in rural Pennsylvania.

I say Jones is playing the part of a lowbrow Macbeth (bet Jones is no fan of Shakespeare, either). By throwing his pyrotechnic tantrum, he’s offering sound and fury, but signifying very little.

Standing up to the forces of extremism and stupidity by acting in an extremely stupid manner is… extremely stupid. I have perused the Koran and remain decidedly non-Muslim (it’s a bacon thing). Nor do I have any desire to set my copy on fire, because it’s a really nice leather bound edition and I am intelligent enough to read divergent doctrine and/or opinion without being overcome with the urge to reach for a lighter (or shop for a new vest in the Semtex department).

However, Jones and his flock burning the Koran won’t further inflame the hatred of those who venerate the 9/11 hijackers. Gainesville, Fla., is also home to the University of Florida. Give an Islamofascist an eyeful of what the Gator coeds are wearing on campus and the Dove World Outreach Center might as well festoon their building with flaming Suras.

“Akbar, did you see the church in Gainesville has burned the Koran?”

“I did, Mustafa. But did you see that girl outside the student union? I COULD SEE HER ARMS ABOVE THE WRISTS!”

“THAT’S IT! DEATH TO THE INFIDELS!!”

They’ve already drawn their proverbial line in the rubble. Besides, we’re already fighting them and have been for the better part of a decade. And for the millions of Muslims worldwide who want nothing to do with the Al-Qaida/Taliban brand of Islam, most are either smart enough to recognize crazy when they see it or will shake their heads with the same sad bewilderment which I feel every time Chris Matthews starts talking about Obama-induced tingling in his lower extremities.

I suppose I should note that liberals are — predictably — trying to cast Jones and his minions as members of the “religious right.” I should subsequently direct you to the aforementioned Fairness Doctrine for an example of who the Islamofascists’ kindred spirits are on this side of the pond.

The real issue here is that Terry Jones and the Dove World Outreach Centrists are morons, albeit morons basking in their 15 minutes of fame. They don’t represent the American people, so President Obama can scrap his latest apology to nations which stone women for flashing their ankles, and MSNBC’s “hosts” can stop wringing their hands.

If you burn books, you’re just an idiot — nothing more. If you’re concerned about idiots, look for the smoke, then walk the other way.

The Fat Lady Won’t Sing

It may not have packed the emotional punch of the last chopper off the roof of the embassy in Saigon, but the word has come down from on high: The last combat troops have left the building.

Actually, I’m going to amend that last remark. A Stryker Brigade crossed the Southern Frontier between Iraq and Kuwait, marking the departure from our Mesopotamian quagmire of the last troops we’re actually CALLING “combat troops.”

We still have plenty of guys with guns in Iraq—more than 50,000—but they’re not “combat troops,” they’re “advisors.” Not to accuse the President of militaristic duplicity, but so were about a quarter million of our boys and girls who visited fabulous downtown Saigon in the 1960s.

But we’re not supposed to be treating the anointed savior with the same scrutiny with which George W. Bush and Richard M. Nixon (but not Bill Clinton) dealt. Since Barack Obama ascended the people’s throne, the corporate media doesn’t use words like “quagmire” anymore, nor do they refer to the “Vietnam of the Middle East.” Obama promised a swift withdrawal from Iraq, and he has thusly delivered—more or less. All right, less.

Nonetheless, calling everyone in digital desert camo an “advisor” means Obama gets to claim victory. And while The Associated Press noted that Obama didn’t actually claim victory in his speech last week; given that he hasn’t come out ahead in so much as a game of checkers with Bo the First Dog since he took office, hanging the metaphorical “Mission Accomplished” banner off the White House balustrade is as close as he’s going to get anytime soon. Considering the corporate media’s continued adherence to the Obama-as-savior mantra, the irony of the situation is that this undeclared “victory” was planned and executed during the demonized Bush Administration.

Perhaps that’s why Obama noted in his recent televised remarks that he called Bush prior to the telecast, and why he offered him praise during the speech. And perhaps that’s why wingnut hacks like Rachel Maddow and Bill Press (yep, he’s still alive) launched anti-Bush invective from their MSNBC pulpits in the wake of Obama’s address. If you only saw Keith Olbermann’s failed television science experiment, you might not know that the decisive troop surge which Bush put into action had ever occurred.

As House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) pointed out in the wake of Obama’s performance:

“Over the past several months, we’ve often heard about ending the war in Iraq but not much about winning the war in Iraq,”

Boehner went on to point out that the same Democrats who fought Bush tooth and nail on every facet of the Iraq War (once they stopped supporting it) were now trying to portray themselves as latter-day Churchills, as opposed to modern-era Chamberlains.

Or perhaps Obama has finally realized what Bush knew all along. To put a fine point on it: This ain’t over. Iraq remains enough of a junkyard to make North Jersey look like the south of France. Their most recent elections are fading into memory and their government appears to be stretched to the limit catching stray dogs—and stray bullets.

Meanwhile, Obama is steeling himself to raise the proverbial roof in Afghanistan. He said during his speech that American troops could now “apply the resources necessary to go on offense” in Afghanistan, as if our troops currently engaged with al-Qaida and the vestiges of the Taliban were playing Wii and drag-racing their Bradleys before now.

No doubt our current Commander-in-Chief would love to spend the remaining time between now and Nov. 2 discussing America’s supposed Baghdad bon voyage. But as Bush knew, there’s no rest for the West Wing.

Obama must now convince a skeptical nation—and military—that not only is Iraq either in the bag or out of our shopping cart, but that the War Obama Wanted in Afghanistan is winnable under Democrat direction. Add to that the sorry state of our economy under his laughable lack of leadership and the sorry state of his party headed into what may well be an electoral Waterloo come November, and Obama may spend his fall wishing he’d saved up some sick days.

While You Were Drowning…

For those of you lucky enough to enjoy vocations which don’t require endless news and issues research, count yourselves doubly lucky that you weren’t subjected to President Barack Obama’s speech marking the fifth anniversary of Hurricane Katrina’s disastrous visit to New Orleans. Granted, Katrina was hard on the Big Easy, but five years later Obama didn’t repair any damage. He was busy doing damage control.

Speaking to an audience of college students at Xavier University, Obama rolled through his standard teleprompter-zombie applause lines:

(“it’s great to be back here in [insert city name]. What a job you all have done recovering and rebuilding from [insert disaster reference here]. I promise you I’ll do everything in my power to ensure [repeat disaster reference here] never happens again. Remember, vote for me, because I give a damn.”)

Then the President, looking remarkably refreshed after his latest vacation — this time in Martha’s Vineyard, an ultra-exclusive enclave favored by liberal millionaires, began spouting talking points which strained credulity, to say the least.

Standing in the heart of a city which was nearly wiped off the map by a combination of decades-long Democrat incompetence and corruption, a dystopic liberal culture of dependence and one mighty impressive natural disaster, the fabulously wealthy President Obama… blamed everything on President Bush.

Again.

But blame is as American a pastime as baseball. Actually, given the multisyllabic surnames dominating most Major League rosters these days, blame is right up there with Mom and apple pie. But Obama is blaming the wrong guy.

With Hurricane Earl now becoming a force to be reckoned with, and the five-year anniversary of the Democrat-engineered Katrina disaster, I thought I’d take a moment to — as the kiddies say — drop a little knowledge on you.

According to Obama, Katrina was:

"a man-made catastrophe — a shameful breakdown in government that left countless men, women and children abandoned and alone.”

Last time I checked, hurricanes are almost never man-made, despite Al Gore’s assertions. As for governmental breakdowns, the actions of Mayor Ray “Chocolate City” Nagin, and Governor Kathleen “Crocodile Tears” Blanco in the face of Mother Nature’s oncoming wrath didn’t exactly reverberate with redoubtable statesmanship. Of course, the goodly people of New Orleans re-elected their Candyman, so some of the blame for their plight can be placed on them.

Actually, quite a bit of the blame for the plight of New Orleans can be set down right on Bourbon Street. Despite the insistence of multimillionaires like Spike Lee and Kanye West, the teeming mass of destitute humanity gathered at the Superdome wasn’t consigned to their plight because “George Bush doesn’t care about black people.” Nor did the levees near the 9th Ward give way because they were secretly destroyed by Federally-placed explosives (sorry, Mr. Farrakhan).

A massive hurricane formed in the Bahamas, made its way into the Gulf of Mexico and then headed for Mardi Gras-ville. Bush actually declared a Federal state of emergency two days before Katrina’s landfall. In fact, Bush ended up having to push Louisiana’s Democrat Governor Blanco to order mandatory evacuations less than 24 hours before Katrina’s arrival, with Nagin finally ordering mandatory citywide evacuation later that day.

Beyond that, the pictures tell a far more accurate story than the Democrat-controlled corporate media would ever allow. And I’m not just talking about flooded fleets of school buses. Nor am I referring to those scenic shots of fine Orleans-ians swimming through the flooded streets with filched flat screens (although had they purloined the plasmas earlier, they might have caught the GET OUT, THERE’S A GIGANTIC FREAKIN’ HURRICANE HEADED RIGHT FOR YOU warnings blaring from the boob tube for at least 72 hours before Katrina set up shop near Lake Pontchartrain).

I’m thinking of the thousands of NOLA residents swarming together at the Superdome and adjacent convention center. After decades of voting Democrats into office, they were helpless; willingly robbed of their ability to fend for themselves beyond basic self-preservation instincts. Nagin, Blanco and the massive, overarching bureaucracy created by virtually unfettered liberal authority — granted by the electorate — had abandoned them at the crucial moment and they were prostrated before God and CNN.

Five years later, and still, according to Obama: Bush did it.

Now I’m going to throw out a heavy concept for you port-siders: Let’s assume that Bush DID do it. Let’s say he engineered a hurricane, directed it to New Orleans, dynamited the levees, ensured Blanco and Nagin would both fumble the ball on the goal line, pulled the batteries out of the NOLA buses and flooded the city.

Perhaps this is not a man with whom you want to pick a fight.

Back Inside the Asylum…

If anyone wants to shove their heads in the desert sand regarding Iran, have at it.

I’m disinclined to hand a free pass to an Islamofascist regime with a pronounced tendency to make the psych ward at Bellevue look like bingo night at the senior center. I’m similarly disinclined to believe Pollyanna-ish assurances that we have nothing to be concerned about in the wake of a line of trucks pulling into the brand-spanking new nuclear plant at Bushehr, Iran on a recent Saturday afternoon.

Sure, they were delivering uranium fuel to the terrorist regime’s new nuclear facility — but what’s a little radioactivity between friends? Plus, The Associated Press says the Russians are keeping a watchful eye on things. I’m sure we’re perfectly safe now. The town drunk has promised to watch the town sociopath while we’re out shopping for a new economy. What could possibly go wrong?

But wait — the Russians are not the only ones playing Officer Krupke when it comes to Iran’s supposedly peaceful development of the world’s most dangerous filament fertilizer.

The United Nations gave the all-clear as well. In fact, they’re claiming that the Russian-oversight plan should ease concerns about just how enriched will be the enriched uranium now clasped in the Iranian paws.

In order to function as fuel for a power plant, uranium needs to reach the 3.5 percent enrichment level. Weapons-grade uranium must be jacked up to the 90 percent level. The Iranians are already working on enriching the good stuff to a 20 percent level (for medical research, honest!)

Fret not, my friends — the Russians are going to control the fuel supply. And there’s no chance the Iranians might sneak around the corner and dump a little extra octane into the mix, right?

Even the mighty French have chimed in. The French Foreign Ministry released a statement regarding the Iranian nuclear program, saying — again — there was no real cause for alarm. Terrific — the French said the same thing about Germany and the Anschluss.

If only the Iranians were as reassuring. Leave it to one-third of the Axis of Evil to remind us that they’re… one third of the Axis of Evil. While the Russians, French and U.N. all spoke in soothing tones, the note struck by Iran was decidedly less mellifluous.

Lest we think Ahmadinejad and the rest of the Islamic Clown Posse were just playing nuclear dress-up, they also broke the news that they have tested their air defense systems around Bushehr, and have determined them to be effectively operational.

Any time a spokesterrorist “strikes a defiant tone” — trouble isn’t just in the neighborhood, it’s doing doughnuts on the lawn and TP’ing the house.

According to Iranian nuclear chief Ali Akbar Salehi:

"Despite all pressure, sanctions and hardships imposed by Western nations, we are now witnessing the startup of the largest symbol of Iran’s peaceful nuclear activities,"

The same guys who can’t finish a sentence without shrieking about the fiery death of some Zionist-capitalist-imperialist-somebody are promising to play nice with their high-yield glow sticks.

We have no intention of building nuclear weapons with this stuff we have that can be used to build nuclear weapons. We are a peaceful society, simply trying to…DEATH TO THE ZIONIST/AMERICAN INFIDELS…make it cheaper to turn on the lights.”

Let me get this straight: an Islamofascist regime is about to throw the switch on a heavily defended NUCLEAR facility, and the only assurances that they’re not going to start churning out atomic luggage for every Tom, Dick and Akbar with a saif to grind are coming from the guy who can’t get past the first step in an Alcoholics Anonymous meeting, the guy who still laughs at Jerry Lewis movies and the rejects from the carnival?

For you victims of teachers’ unions out there, Iran’s proclamations of peaceful nuclear intent are as transparent as a Lady Gaga Grammy Awards costume.

Iran sits on top of some of the most expansive oil reserves on the planet. Unconstrained by a Democrat Party bent on protecting foreign oil interests to the detriment of their own people, the Iranians can — to paraphrase Governor Sarah Palin: “Drill here and drill now.”

The AP, doing their best version of the liberal appeasement shuffle, excuses the Iranian desire for nuclear power despite being awash in enough black gold to make Jed Clampett magenta with envy by suggesting their refinery capabilities don’t match their raw material output.

Here’s a suggestion: instead of building nukes, have the Iranians considered building REFINERIES? It’s not like they have to worry about the Sierra Club showing up to demonstrate — the Sierra Club is busy pretending global warming is real. Besides, the Sierra Club is stupid, not crazy. Protesting against American oil companies earns you donations from Sean Penn. Protesting against Iranian anything earns you a bullet.

Three weeks ago, I penned “The Lapdogs Of War” for Personal Liberty Digest in which I suggested that the time had not yet arrived for war with Iran. Ham-fisted foreign policy, especially with regards to the evil-dwarf regime running the show in Tehran makes a concerted military effort dubious at best.

In a hypothetical conflict, the United States vs. Iran would be shorter than Ahmadinejad without the lifts in his shoes. Sadly, the fact that Obama has alternated between apologizing to murderous dictatorships for the American pursuit of freedom and cowering like a frightened 5-year-old in a thunderstorm every time one of these tin pots starts banging his cymbals together assures we would end up bogged down in the mother of all Mesopotamian quagmires.

However, while our current ruling elite may have brought back the idiotic foreign policy malaise of Jimmy Carter, who was such a sniveling knot head when it came to dealing with global hostilities that his biggest military engagement was a loss in the Battle of the Chattahoochee Bunny; there is an alternative: Israel.

Now, I know many of my fellow Bob Livingstonians consider allowing Israel off the leash to be anathema at best, but consider the alternatives. Our current ruling elite is less likely to lead a successful military effort than House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) is to turn down free Botox®. And given the green light on turning Bushehr into an even more inhospitable sandbox than it already is, Israel would light these guys up like a Menorah on… whatever day it is that a Menorah is fully lit.

When Saddam Hussein tried to enact his original nuclear ambitions, Israel hit the off switch at Osirak (built, perhaps tellingly, by the French) with a sledgehammer, killing the Iraqis’ chances at debuting the world’s first atomic arsenal in the hands of a complete lunatic (not counting Stalin, Khrushchev, Brezhnev, Andropov, Chernenko and Xiaoping.) Iran has already admitted plans to construct an additional dozen nuclear plants in mountain strongholds.

Iran has also repeatedly promised the complete destruction of Israel. Iran ALSO has missiles which put Tel Aviv well within range. Israel has no problem kicking hostile Islamofascist regimes in the teeth. Given their track record in that area, they’re pretty good at it.

A pre-emptive Israeli strike on Bushehr might lead to open warfare in the Middle East. A nuclear-armed Iran will, by its own admission, almost certainly lead to open warfare in the Middle East. The former might well involve American money. The latter might well involve American lives. Combining the possibility that Iranian aggression may well be backed by Russian and/or Chinese men and materiel with Obama’s weak-kneed tendencies, a nuclear-armed Iran could well spell Big Trouble in Little Tehran.

Iran has stepped up its schedule with surprising speed. In addition to the Bushehr reactor, they also used the weekend to debut a new Qiam-1 medium range missile and even capped off their Sunday with a ceremony to introduce the world to an unmanned bomber which Ahmadinejad dubbed their “ambassador of death.”

Given the Iranian regime’s rhetoric, when they can start trying to dictate the terms of the nuclear conversation, they will. I’d rather gamble with Israeli lives than our own. And with our current Commander-in-Chief more interested in engaging Arizona law enforcement than Islamofascist terrorism, the odds on the table are nowhere near worth our chips.

Perhaps most telling of all: I considered offering this piece to President Obama for comment, but he was on vacation… again.

Refusing The Dream

Examples of Democrat duplicity are so common that it has become clichéd to even point to them.

The inability of the average liberal to identify or even care about the wayward path of their political masters has lexicologically welded “liberal” to “hypocrite” in much the same way as “Olbermann” attaches to “twit.” But nothing compares to the Democrat response to a mass gathering of concerned taxpayers.

If you want to see the Left bring out the big guns, take a look at their frantic and hate-fueled response to the Glenn Beck-fronted Restoring Honor rally. Whether Beck’s Saturday rally in front of the Lincoln Memorial drew between 300,000 and 500,000 (probably) or 1 million (probably not), a crowd larger than Ed Schultz’s nightly audience showed up in Washington to:

  • Protest President Barack Obama’s disastrous economic policy.
  • Protest Obama’s disastrous foreign policy.
  • Protest Obama’s disastrous immigration policy.
  • Call for a spiritual renewal in America.
  • Hate black people.

Actually, that last one was regurgitated by the buffoonish Al Sharpton, who spent his Saturday across town speaking to a meager handful of the usual dupes, bigots, union thugs and mouth-breathers who take him seriously.

Whether you choose to believe attendees or their liberal detractors, the crowd was large enough to send seismic waves throughout not only the ruling elite in Washington, but their corporate media outlets. Imagine Woodstock, only the hippies have grown up, gotten jobs and taken baths. Also, the rally crowd didn’t leave behind the Amazonian jungle-sized heaps of paper and refuse leftist gangs tend to scatter like breadcrumbs.

Liberal hate groups lashed out at Beck’s festival. Democrat agitprop bureau Media Matters for America shrieked about the event’s overtly political tones in… overtly political tones. MMA even managed to get in the obligatory shot at Sarah Palin, which I believe is now mandatory for any wingnut whining about how much they hate… everyone who isn’t them.

On tinfoil hat brigade bunker Dailykos.com, one diarist (“diarist” sounds better than “DNC talking point stenographer”) claimed to have attended the event and followed that dubious assertion by recounting a string of incidents which were so transparently fictional that I actually laughed out loud. Towards the end of his blather he proudly crowed about stealing a Gadsden flag from someone else’s purse. His supposed crime was greeted with praise by most of the rest of the Dailykos inmates.

Sharpton headlined the most discussed “counterdemonstration,” although the gathering’s anemic size can be more accurately described as a “counterwhimper.” Despite telling NBC that he ignored Restoring Honor, Obama tried to legitimize Sharpton’s cocktail party by dispatching Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, which is the intellectual equivalent of sending a kindergarten teacher to legitimize Cellblock D.

It evidently occurred to neither Obama nor The New York Times (which dutifully dispatched a reporter to cover the tiny “event”) that parasites like Sharpton are long past the point of legitimacy. Sharpton’s assemblage was called “Reclaim the Dream.” Sharpton has made a pile of dough without seemingly holding a job or having any discernable skills beyond race-baiting. You’re living the dream, Al.

Social networking site Facebook provided some excellent exemplars of leftist hysteria. I turned to three pages owned by friends; none of whom I shall identify by name in order to protect them from having their liberal cards revoked. One gleefully noted the corporate media didn’t provide much coverage of the Beck event. It’s a fair bet he didn’t consider that he was acknowledging the port side media’s deliberate and politically motivated refusal to do their jobs; not to mention that in noting their dereliction, he was admitting his own fixation with the event.

Another poster called Beck a “douchebag.” I was tempted to respond, but then remembered he not only watches stand-up comedian Bill Maher, but thinks the colossally unfunny Maher is insightful — punishment enough. Both comments were followed by threads of far less impressive, but far more venomous invective spewed forth by bottom-rung types who either are not only completely consumed by hate, but clearly lack introspection of any kind.

A third friend expressed his concerns that the event would “get ugly.” I don’t think he meant Dailykos-approved petty larceny.

None of the posters, from pillar to podcast, made any mention of the more than $5 million the event raised for worthwhile charity. Likewise, few on the left noted the presence of a Presidential emissary at the uber-divisive demagogue Sharpton’s counter-demonstration. On the 47th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” speech, liberals were too busy building their nightmare.

The Tangled Webs We Weave

In his recent piece “What Websites Do You Read?” my fellow Bob Livingstonian, Chip Wood, opened a discussion on his favorite off-ramps, rest areas and destinations on the Information Superhighway. The attendant comments section included a plethora of possible places all of you thought worthy of at least a gas’n’go on the trip to enlightenment. Many, if not most, of the sites listed not only by Chip, but also by you denizens of Personal Liberty Digest, were noteworthy for the excellence of content, breadth of subject matter and depth of information. Some were… less so (Dailykos? REALLY?)

No matter the political bent of the site in question, whether it be Personalliberty.com or even barackisahottie.com (or whatever) — if it tickles your fancy, you can find it in cyberspace. In fact, if you can’t find it, and you have opposable thumbs, you can MAKE it. So, good news for you MSNBC devotees, you can get keithnrachel4eva.com up and running whenever you’re ready.

Unless the FCC doesn’t like the idea.

Actually, as of today, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) can’t stop you from throwing up a website devoted to most anything — even things which aren’t real, like Rachel Maddow’s talent. But, what if a government agency, with fully vested enforcement authority, pulled you over in your sporty new Dell and cited you with a ticket for excessive conservatism? What if they simply closed the off-ramp to your favorite website?

Welcome to the web under Net Neutrality.

Government regulation is like a wedding or Michael Moore behind the counter at a Dunkin’ Donuts; it never gets smaller or less expensive for everyone else. Net Neutrality, as originally conceived, was supposed to ensure equal and unfettered access to the Internet for everyone. An idea designed to guarantee that Internet Service Providers and wired heavyweights couldn’t price smaller companies and content into the broadband slow lane. Net neutrality, in theory, was an okay idea. But in practice it will be a governmental cyber-boot on America’s online neck.

Tuesday afternoon the Second Amendment group Gun Owners of America (GOA) publicly logged off from the net neutrality coalition Save the Internet, citing its potential for government encroachment on information freedom in the age of Obama. According to GOA communications director Erich Pratt:

"Back in 2006 we supported net neutrality, as we had been concerned that AOL and others might continue to block pro-second amendment issues… The issue has now become one of government control of the Internet, and we are 100 percent opposed to that,"

Liberal bloggers rushed to suggest that GOA was actually leaving Save the Internet to avoid association with tinfoil-hat brigades like ACORN and the attack poodles at Moveon.org. But with groups including the Christian Coalition still on the Save the Internet friends’ list, Democrat attacks on the GOA are as empty as the inside of Joe Biden’s cerebral CPU.

Truth be told, the wingnuts have done a better job of leaving their footprints on the web. The monolithic nature of liberal ideology makes the leftist flock easy to herd.

People who think Bill Maher is funny, or consider MSNBC’s primetime lineup a legitimate news source, are easy pickings for digital gurus who wave flashy Internet interaction in front of them. And Net Neutrality in the hands of the FCC plays right into the Obama handbook. Pseudo-academic Joe Palermo, writing on the redoubtably leftist Huffington Post:

“..progressive news and information sites, along with MoveOn.org and other Internet organizing networks, played a key role in this dramatic shift in communications technology away from the Right and toward progressive social change. We need to lock in this advantage.”

Which FCC-controlled net neutrality would do in bank-vault fashion. Much like the not-so-dearly departed Fairness Doctrine (which liberals support), FCC reclassification of the Internet as a type II technology (essentially categorizing it as a telephone service) will open the door to the Feds shifting from addressing web traffic to web content. Given the left’s all-out war on any and all dissent, smearing it as racist, hateful or evil (Nancy Pelosi’s recent call for official investigation into Ground Zero Mosque opposition comes to mind), it would mean that outlets like Personal Liberty Digest could face governmental direction on content, or be relegated to some low-speed, lower-tier Internet backwater.

The left and their media have continually tried to confuse the citizenry with technobabble and double-talk. But FCC Internet regulation represents the ultimate Orwellian fantasy — total information control.

There is a place where net neutrality already exists, although they don’t use such a cavalier moniker. Residents call that place whatever they’re told to. We call it the People’s Republic of China.

Another Day Of The Undead

I’m no aficionado of the vampire craze. Not that I don’t get the allure of watching oversexed attractive people chase each other around; but vampires are (were) bad. Anything which can fit into a category of “undead” is not good news, no matter how impressive its abs might be.

So imagine my horror Friday when I was greeted by the visage of one of recent history’s most vile grotesqueries. Like a teenager in one of those psycho-zombie-in-a-hockey-mask movies, I thought we’d driven a stake through the heart of this creature, doused it in gasoline and set it on fire. And yet, still it returned — the lumbering bulk, the ominous drone, the gaping maw.

Al Gore is back.

While the rest of us were browsing in the non-fiction section, Gore resurfaced like the “Creature from the Green Lagoon.” According to The Hill, Gore noted on his blog (hey, good thing he invented the Internet) that Americans need to take to the streets to protest the industrialized world’s failure to act on “the climate crisis.”

How does the most famous loser in Presidential history keep returning from beyond the political grave? Shouldn’t Gore be hanging out with Walter Mondale; watching Captain Planet reruns at the Old Vice President’s Home?

At the very least, shouldn’t he be at one of his multimillion dollar mansions, getting a *ahem* massage? I mean, didn’t we push this loon out of the Prius and speed off in a cloud of carbon neutral exhaust and ecologically low-impact recycled tire dust?

To make “The Revenge of the Gore-Zilla” more terrifying, he’s brought backup. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, remarking on Sunday about floods in Pakistan and forest fires in Russia, said “there is a linkage,” between those disasters and global warming. America’s termagant-to-the-world made some further gloom-and-doom comments, but the message was clear: Not only is global warming theoretically bad, but it’s literally coming to get us.

But there’s a theoretical hitch in their literal fear mongering. Global warming scares liberals the same way Freddy Krueger scares 7-year-olds; although liberals don’t have dad to come home and check the closet. Global warming is the phrenology of the modern age. It’s a scam, wrapped in a racket, shrouded in a swindle. It’s warmer now than it was then (“then,” in the climate change lexicon meaning “winter”); and that increase in temperature coincides with societal development (a climate-change phrase meaning “summer”), therefore — it’s our fault.

What was once junk science reserved for late-night talk show appearances by coke-addled Hollywood stars and burned out academics who escaped the ’60s with acid flashbacks and tenure has become the cause célèbre of the Luddite Left. Global warming is a theory which has been “proven” by touting the molehill of anecdotal evidence (it’s warmer in some places, there’s less ice in some areas, hurricanes are bad), while ignoring the mountain of evidence to the contrary (it’s colder in some places, there’s more ice in some areas, hurricanes have always been bad.)

The danger isn’t just endless griping from Woodstock-surplus types who are so ecologically sensitive they’ve stopped bathing (thereby making the rest of us more sensitive, albeit less ecologically so). It’s the shadowy specter which lurks just behind the façade of saving the planet: greed. Gore may babble about “An Inconvenient Slide Show,” but he lives like a king and has a carbon footprint the size of one of those Paleolithic rhinos which went extinct the last time the Earth got too warm. (Or was it too cold? Was anyone checking the Indricotherium’s exhaust?) And Clinton may talk about our impact on the planet, but I’m betting she and Bubba have no plans to downsize their Chappaqua palace.

Global warming = power. The real danger isn’t just floods, fires and hurricanes; it’s Kyoto Accords, Cap and Trade and Al Gore’s Silliest Home Videos. It’s the Democrat party convincing chowder head college students that only by voting for them can they save the planet.

For that matter, it’s the Democrat party convincing said chowder heads that the planet requires saving. When the bunko artists running the global warming industry got caught fabricating data, the response was: “But, we have a consensus!” Sure you do. And there used to be consensus that the Earth is flat.

As long as we allow the wingnuts to keep opening global warming’s scientific coffin, Gore will keep coming at us. Freddy Krueger will only go away if people stop going to the theatre to see what’s happening on Elm Street. And Al Gore and his climatological claptrap will only disappear when we stop feeding him the one thing he needs to survive:

Relevance. (And BRAINS!!!!)

The Caliph of Ground Zero

A thousand years ago, the Iberian Peninsula was under the thumb of the Muslim Caliphate of Cordoba, an offshoot of the Umayyad Caliphate. While responsible for cultural and economic developments, the Cordoba Caliphate was also particularly hard on what they called “infidels,” and everyone else called “Christians and Jews.”

The Caliphate’s method of dealing with Christians and Jews was to tax the living infidelity out of them. For those who couldn’t pay there were routinely fatal consequences. Religious sensitivity was decidedly NOT a part of the Cordoba Caliphate’s social programs.

In 1985, President Ronald Reagan visited Germany for the G-7 Summit. His itinerary included a stop at the German World War II cemetery at Bitburg. One problem: the Bitburg Cemetery contained the remains of several Waffen SS storm troopers.

Reagan’s purpose was to commemorate V-E Day and to honor the memories of all those who fought and lost their lives in the 20th Century’s greatest conflict. Polling indicated Americans would rather Reagan blew past Bitburg on Die Autobahn. And that polling was right, in a sense.

Though Reagan certainly didn’t support the Reich, visiting Bitburg was a bad call. With millions of opponents—and victims—of Hitler’s hardest corps still alive, the visit was… insensitive.

In 2009, a group of investors fronted by Imam Feisal Abdul-Rauf purchased the Burlington Coat Factory building just blocks from the site of the 9/11 attacks. Abdul-Rauf, a sharia-observant imam who has repeatedly made statements that the United States is to blame for the 9/11 attacks (including my fave: “…Osama bin Laden is made in America…”) named his part of the investment group “The Cordoba Initiative.”

A shadily-funded group (developers have repeatedly double-talked on the source of their nearly $100 million budget) want to put a mosque named for a brutal caliphate within rpg-range of the site where other Muslims murdered 2,700 people—for not being Muslim enough. Not exactly the textbook definition of sensitivity.

Of all the hot-button issues the Democrat Party is pushing this year, support for the Ground Zero mosque is one of the biggest head-scratchers. Abdul-Rauf is an imam who has repeatedly endeavored to blame 9/11 on America; he’s part of a religious movement which believes women should be neither seen nor heard (no Hillary Clinton jokes, please) and wants a mosque on top of the spot where the landing gear from one of the planes used on 9/11 by the terrorists landed. But Americans lack sensitivity? Compared to Feisel Abdul-Rauf, I’m Alan Alda, and the GOP is a sensitivity-training seminar.

But, in the spirit of multi-partisan accord, I’ve decided I CAN live with a mosque whose imam preaches hate, intolerance and the kind of respect for women that makes Joseph Smith look like Jane Fonda—IF—we infidels get something in return. Cordoba House construction can start tomorrow; and I will wield a shovel while standing next to some cat named Akbar bin Laden (or whatever).  But, construction on the new Basilica of the Blessed Crusaders has to start the same day in Riyadh. No? All right, but don’t say I didn’t offer.

Let’s take a clinical look at the chaos. According to CNN, 27 percent of Americans believe Obama was born somewhere other than these United States. Wingnuts routinely dismiss these 27 percent as crazier than Rosie O’Donnell in fat camp lockdown. Only 29 percent of Americans support the building of the Ground Zero mosque. Using liberal math… Obamacare had better cover psychiatric treatment.

The Constitution of the United States of America, written by what may well have been the greatest single gathering of intellect in human history, grants us religious freedom, from Muslim to Mormon. But I don’t see this as a matter of religious freedom. It IS a matter of sensitivity. I have sarcastically hypothesized the idea of a mosque-for-basilica tradeoff. But a church built in Riyadh under those circumstances might as well be named Our Lady of The Immaculate Thumb in Your Eye. It’s… insensitive.

Thousands met their end mere yards from the Cordoba House site. The perpetrators of that monstrosity (despite the statements by Imam Abdul-Rauf) were acting on behalf of their version of Islam. Supporters of the Ground Zero mosque are whining about religious sensitivity; although they’ll deny it to the folks who put up too gaudy a Nativity Scene at Christmas, or the 9-year-old who wants to bow his head in silent prayer before some National Education Association union wonk “teaches” him that 2+2=5.

Begging the question: You want sensitivity? How about showing a little?

Say, Uncle…

When it comes to the left wing of American politics, I’m seldom surprised.  Any family which includes Nancy Pelosi and Bill Clinton—not to mention sideshow siblings like Moulitsas, Moore and Sheehan, along with creepy Uncle Barney Frank and wacky Gramps Soros, is going to create moments which stick out like the honest guy at a personal injury lawyers’ convention.

Last Thursday, as I perused the liberal hate speech site Dailykos.com, I ran across one of the Democrat talking-points memos they call “diaries” and stopped dead in my online tracks.  The title of the blog entry was: “GOP Uncle Tom misplays the race card.” 

I pulled the proverbial handbrake and backed down the idiot expressway which is Dailykos to check if my eyes had deceived me.  A sensitive, caring and oh-so-much-smarter-than-the-rest-of-us liberal actually called a black man (in this case, Alan Keyes) an “Uncle Tom.”  I couldn’t have been more surprised if Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton announced they were quitting the shakedown racket and going to work as analysts for the Cato Institute.  The discussion which followed this blogospheric babble featured a debate over whether use of such repugnantly racist terminology was acceptable if the subject was someone liberals dislike.

I was unaware that question remained unsettled.  (The correct answer, for victims of teachers’ unions, is NO.)

Truth is, the modern Democrat Party isn’t unfamiliar with racism.  From Orville Faubus to the dearly departed former Klansman and Senator from West Virginia Bobby Byrd, the Democrat party has been playing racist politics for decades; horse-trading the overt racism of its more radicalized travelers for the subtle racism of affirmative action and avoidance of discussion when it comes to the outrages of William Jefferson, Maxine Waters and Charlie Rangel.  (Yes, Virginia, demanding a free pass for them because they’re black is still racism.)  What DOES represent a new development is the arrogant racism becoming more and more prevalent amongst white liberals. 

In 1991, white liberal senators; led by Ted Kennedy (D-Chappaquiddick) conducted a confirmation hearing on Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas.  In a spectacular example of full-throated leftist hypocrisy, the Democrat Senators on the panel engaged in an assault which Thomas himself quite accurately described as “a high-tech lynching.”  I was a college student at the time, and I recall the on-campus opinions of the Democrats’ Senatorial mob included:

  • Amazement that our poli-sci professors (leftists  all) had clearly misled us about the poor nature and quality of the corpulent gasbags in the Senate.
  • Concern amongst the more easily duped students that their armpit hair was visible below the sleeves of “We Believe You Anita” t-shirts.
  • Trying to figure out how to make a drinking game out of guessing Ted Kennedy’s weight.  (well, it WAS college.)

What we were watching, although we didn’t know it at the time, was a watershed moment for the Left.  For the first time since they had failed to stop civil rights reform, white Democrats fired racist barbs at a black man—and got away with it.

From then on the pigs were out of the pen.  During the Clinton administration we were treated to executive brilliance like Bubba’s plan to curb juvenile crime with “midnight basketball”—brought to you by an administration whiter than an Arkansas hoedown.  During George W. Bush’s tenure in the White House, left-wing media pundits launched withering attacks on Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice—including Jeff Danziger and Ted Rall’s almost impossibly offensive cartoons.  Both Rall and Danzinger remain employed and are considered leading liberal intellectuals.

I wish I could comfort you by telling you that the wingnuts on Dailykos, legislative trash like the senatorial Democrats, and mewling filth like Rall and Danziger represent the far left fringe of today’s Democrat Party. 

But they don’t.  These days, the lunatics are running the DNC asylum.  The Tea Party is racist, says the NAACP.  But the NAACP’s support for blacks who murder white police officers isn’t.  Proponents of SB1070 are racist, but the New Black Panther Party isn’t.  What they’re missing is that racism is a two-way street—albeit one which dead ends in both directions.

To be fair, there ARE bigots in the conservative family tree.  But they’re the type of relatives we only see on major holidays—and they have to sit at the kids’ table.  The liberals are letting theirs carve the roast.

Messages for the inmates at Dailykos.com: A Ms. Beecher Stowe called.  She sounded upset. 

Also, the cleaner called: Your hoods are ready.

The Lapdogs Of War

Iranian General Hossein Kan’ani Moghadam announced Tuesday that his nation’s military has begun digging mass graves for our troops should the United States decide to level the Persian soccer pitch.  Speaking through the Fars “news agency” (described by London’s Daily Mail as semi-official, and clearly neither more nor less credible than MSNBC) Moghadam said:

“The mass graves that used to be for burying Saddam’s soldiers have now been prepared again for U.S. soldiers, and this is the reason for digging this big number of graves.”

Analysts suggest General Moghadam is saber-rattling, which is either silly (the 101st Airborne v. the Revolutionary Guard is Mike Tyson v. Marvis Frazier stuff), stupid (he’ll die) or both (his army will get beat like the French and he’ll still die.)

Ever since 2005 Seymour Hersh has been screeching about American plans to attack Iran.  While there is undoubtedly an American battle plan for the Islamic dictatorship—as there are similar contingency plans for attacks on every credible threat on the planet—no such effort has come to pass.  And with Barack Obama’s Presidency flailing like Keith Olbermann searching for talent, no such effort is likely to materialize. 

Not that I would mind if the Navy fired a cruise missile up Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s tailpipe, but Iran has been funding Islamofascist terrorism for the better part of three decades—so what would be the point?  Turning Teheran into a parking lot just to whack the world’s best-armed midget isn’t what I would describe as a good deployment of military resources.  That’s swatting a fly—with an F-18.

But here’s a question for the class:  even though we CAN beat Iran like a rented mule; SHOULD we?  Iran is developing weapons of mass destruction—the actual, nuclear kind.  Iran is a terrorist state.  But Saddam Hussein gassed, murdered and tortured hundreds of thousands.  The Taliban and al-Qaida have declared war on everyone who thinks women look better in clothing smaller than king-size bed sheets.  And we can’t agree on dropping them to the canvas long enough to let our military deliver a knockout punch.

Instead, duplicitous pontifications and politicians whom I wouldn’t trust with a potato gun have turned both Iraq and Afghanistan into multi-billion dollar reality TV shows.

In 1985, Studs Terkel won a Pulitzer for his World War II history “The Good War.”  Terkel, an otherwise unremarkable blowhard, doubtless chose the title as a clever allegory for the dichotomous American view of warfare. 

Only the most depraved or combative think of war as “good.”  In the utopian ideal, civilized humans would settle their differences with methods which didn’t involve artillery.  I’m the first guy to say I’d be a lot happier if the entire ruling class of Iran suffered simultaneous coronaries from getting overheated at a flash of ankle at Sid Sharia’s Burka Bar.  But that’s unlikely, so how long do we allow a circus freak like Ahmadinejad to shake his little fist before we pop him in the snoot with an AC-130?

While there may not be such a thing as a “good war,” there IS such a thing as a “good” war.  If a creepy Austrian with a terrible barber manages to convince an industrially-capable European nation to march across the continent in support of a world vision which includes gas ovens for 6 million to 12 million people—war is the only answer.  The alternative—which includes living on a planet controlled by thin, pale and excessively neat people who think the “Horst Wessel Song” is groovy—is too horrible to contemplate.

I am not preaching total war on a planetary scale.  It costs good men and women their lives and, less importantly, it costs money.  Moghadam is a lunatic in a third rate army which ended up sending 9-year-olds to get gassed at the front during a decade-long conflict with the other-kind-of-muslim lunatic next door.

Bellicosity from the world’s almost-nuclear junior varsity gives me pause.  Nearly 70 years after we took Hitler and Hirohito out behind the woodshed, we still have plenty of crazy in the neighborhood.  Putting aside our massive economic issues, major problems with border security and Nancy Pelosi, after seven decades we still can’t figure out when the next good war will be.

Since politics kept us from tossing al-Qaida, the Taliban and Islamofascism in general on the same historical ash heap to which we consigned the bad guys of WWII, I’m going to say no way on Iran. 

Some people DO deserve killing, but these guys aren’t worth the bullet.  

Yet.

What’s Spanish for “Best Western?”

I can’t remember a single detail from a single trip taken by former First Lady Laura Bush. After the Lady Macbeth of Little Rock (and Chicago and Chappaqua) served two terms as co-President, the fact that nothing comes to mind is a bit of a relief.

Hey, at least Mrs. Bush never tried to put the nation’s lawyers in charge of the nation’s doctors.

The smart money says that following her junket to Spain, Michelle Obama will figure out the virtues of the Laura Bush school of smiling and nodding at state dinners. Mrs. Obama’s Iberian itinerary went well beyond the usual foreign photo-op and turned into a budget-busting romp that has ojos rolling from here to eternidad.

At a time when more than one in 10 Americans are one step away from wearing sandwich boards declaring: “Will flamenco for food,” Mrs. Obama’s six-figure trip has engendered entirely reasonable discussions about just how out of touch the Democrat ruling elite has become.

To be fair to Madam Michelle, she does seem to be comfortable serving in a ceremonial role best suited for someone who ascended to the people’s crib by virtue of being married to the right guy at the right time. Such acceptance means a continuation of the blessedly unremarkable First Lady-dom of Mrs. Bush, and an abandonment of the damnably noteworthy First Strong Woman-dom of the erstwhile co-president and current Secretary of “Not Running in 2012—Honest!”

Lest you think I’m descending into some “everything the Obamas do = bad” monologue, let me point out that First Ladies have done their fair share of globetrotting in support of their spouses. But there’s a marked difference between kindly women smiling at foreign toddlers—and kicking back with 40 or so pals at the five-star Hotel Villa Padierna in Marbella (a Ritz-Carlton Resort®), where the rooms run from $500 to $2,000 a night—if for no other reason, the aforementioned urchins are rarely allowed into such lavish locales unless they’re shining shoes.

We have all seen the news reports of the taxpayer-footed tally for the First Family’s Spanish sojourn (minus the President, he was dining with Oprah Winfrey—positively pedestrian by comparison). Contrary to rumor, Mrs. Obama and her entourage ARE paying their personal expenses at their opulent accommodations. But the images of the First Lady, close to four dozen friends and relatives and the required retinue of security and support staff enjoying the high life while the President endeavors to prevail upon American taxpayers to tighten their trusses is one of the great moments in liberal glibness. (Gliberals—get it?)

So, while it might be unfair to criticize Mrs. Obama and her pals for heading out for some high living, it is absolutely fair to point out that the Democrat ruling elite, with Barack Obama at the head of the table, are dining like King Louis XVI and Marie Antionette while the rest of us are consigned to beg at the Bastille’s back door.

Sadly, every aspect of this public relations disaster was preventable.

For starters, perhaps a hollow apology for calling Spaniards bigots immediately before the Obama entourage arrived was less than smart. Next time, open with: “Buenos Dias,” instead of: “Sorry about that whole ‘Spain is racist’ thing. Here’s Michelle!”

A crowd that large is not doing anyone any favors. Consider a group about the size of a jazz combo, not the New York Philharmonic. The pictures coming back from Majorca look like rehearsal sessions for Michael Jackson’s Thriller tour.

Seriously, the “Villa del Mucho Dinero” is undoubtedly fabulous, but it’s in… um… Spain. (For victims of teachers’ unions—that’s a whole other country. Think Mexico, except the Spaniards still live in Spain, not East L.A.) Madame First Lady, while your husband and his fellow Democrat elitists are firing torpedoes at the nation’s economy, how’s about you try a Hampton Inn near Six Flags next time?

While I suppose that we unwashed non-liberal heathens can take solace in the fact that Mrs. Obama didn’t offer up one of her “for the first time in my adult lifetime, I’m really proud of my country” non-sequiturs, many of us are starting to notice an Orwellian subtext to the liberal elite’s societal disconnect. We’re outside, looking through the dining room windows at the Hotel Villa Padierna in Marbella, trying to figure out who the real pigs are.

The Face Which Launched A Thousand Lunches

The Venus De Milo. Michelangelo’s David. Rodin’s Thinker. And… Helen Thomas?

According to the Detroit Free Press, the disgraced former UPI reporter is going to be cast in clay for an outfit called the Arab-American National Museum. Whether that august collection is more “Smithsonian of Dearborn,” or “place your parents made you visit on those long car rides—(a giant ball of string!”)—is immaterial. What is important is timing, and intent.

Helen Thomas’s career as a journalist extends back to WWII. In fact, she was reporting on events in Washington before President Obama took his first steps. (I will leave the geographical location of those steps to your imagination.)

A daughter of Lebanese immigrants, Thomas rose through the ranks—eventually becoming the dean of the White House Press Corps.

But the old adage held true for the old girl: “getting to the top is a lot easier than staying there.” Thomas’s leftward bias drew the attention of Americans who expected more news and less opinion from the 4th Estate. She left UPI in 2000 after 57 years, and took a job more suited to her particular talents: liberal opinion columnist for Hearst Newspapers.

Thomas spent most of the next decade expressing her displeasure with President Bush. While that alone puts her in one of the least exclusive media clubs in the world, Thomas evidently wasn’t satisfied with skewering the GOP. As she put it during a speech in 2008:

“I censored myself for 50 years when I was a reporter. Now I wake up and ask myself, ‘Who do I hate today?’"

Not exactly the kind of inquisitive impartiality one might expect from a venerated veteran of the front lines of reportage. After all, isn’t it the conservatives who “hate?”

Thomas engaged in pitched battles with the Bush Administration. She once told an autograph seeker that Bush was the “worst president in history,” and that if Dick Cheney ran for President in 2008 she would “kill herself.”

All the while, Thomas continued to present Islamic terrorist groups which engaged in bombings as victims of a US/Israel plot. In 2006, she rose in defense of Hezbollah, suggesting that Israel was entirely to blame for the unrest in the Mideast. Her rant was so appallingly bent to favor people who were, at that time, planting bombs next to Tel Aviv teenagers, that then Press Secretary Tony Snow was compelled to respond: “thank you for the Hezbollah view.”

Now, a statue of Helen to preserve her mug for the eons ahead. If a museum in Dearborn, Mich., (Dearborn boasts a population of which 33 percent are Arabic by heritage) is honoring a famous and successful Arab-American, then so be it. One might be tempted to suggest there are members of that demographic who are more accomplished, less offensive to victims of terrorism, or at least easier to look at. But the timing smells like day-old falafel.

Thomas stopped being the dean of the White House Press Corps this past May, after she popped her cork on camera about Israel in this exchange with a Rabbi during Jewish Heritage Day at the White House:

Nesenoff: We’re asking everybody today, any comments on Israel?
Thomas: Tell them to get the hell out of Palestine.
Nesenoff: Oooh. Any better comments on Israel?
Thomas: Remember, these people are occupied and it’s their land. It’s not German, it’s not Poland…
Nesenoff: So where should they go?
Thomas: They go home.
Nesenoff: Where’s the home?
Thomas: Poland. Germany.

So the Jews should leave their homeland (in which they lived by the Word and Grace of the Land Lord of all landlords) and head for Germany. That worked out so well for them last time. How did Helen become statue-worthy—if not statuesque—at the same moment she pulled the stopper out of her anti-Semitism bottle? Mere coincidence seems unlikely.

As you read this a group headed by an Imam (Feisal Abdul Rauf) with ties to backers of hyper-oppressive Sharia law wants to build a mosque within rpg-range of Ground Zero in Lower Manhattan. Abdul-Rauf is of the opinion that 9/11 represented our collective chickens coming home to roost. (I hope he didn’t glom that line from Jeremiah Wright.) Rauf has also suggested that “…Osama bin Laden is made in the USA”—my, how insightful.

Americans are often excoriated for our lack of sensitivity toward Muslims, illegal aliens and portly ex-White House correspondents. At what point do those aforementioned folks owe us the same in return?

Heck, build a $100 million mosque which makes the Cathedral at Chartres look like a Vegas wedding chapel. But consider building it in Dearborn—or take Helen’s advice: build it in Palestine.

Her statue will look… lovely in the foyer.

The Full Court Press

Federal Judge Susan Bolton, acting last week on behalf of the Democrat party and President Barack Obama, went after Arizona’s most recent efforts to stem the tide of illegal immigrants like a starving wolverine running down Bambi. Bolton issued a preliminary injunction in United States v The State of Arizona, gutting the key components of a bill designed to remedy the Federal government’s abdication on immigration reform. Her ruling was hailed by liberals as a step forward for drug runners, gang recruitment and lazy gardeners.

Actually, the Democrats released no such statement. Nor did they make any comments regarding their continuing effort to grant amnesty to a vast reservoir of untapped voting muscle.

Bolton, who was appointed to the Federal bench by President Bill Clinton, based part of her ruling on the issues implementation of SB 1070 would create for the Federal government. Essentially, she stated that Arizona couldn’t do on its own what the Feds were refusing to do for them. Section 2(b) of SB 1070 says:

“For any lawful stop, detention or arrest made by [an Arizona] law enforcement official… in the enforcement of any other law or ordinance… where reasonable suspicion exists that the person is an alien and is unlawfully present in the United States, a reasonable effort shall be made… to determine the immigration status of the person, except if the determination may hinder or obstruct an investigation. Any person who is arrested shall have the person’s immigration status determined before the person is released…”

Bolton concluded section 2(b) of SB 1070 would place an undue burden on the Federal government, given that the Feds would be required to respond in a timely manner to immigration status inquiries coming in from the Arizona law enforcement community. Given Arizona’s geographic proximity to our Third World neighbors downstairs, those inquiries figure to be fairly abundant in number.

To rephrase Bolton’s logic for those who are victims of teachers’ unions: Arizona is a Southern border state. A lot of illegals cross into Arizona. Under SB 1070, Arizona cops are going to be asking the Feds to check the immigrant status of a lot of illegals. Obama and the Democrats don’t like that idea—it might mean actual work (not mention potentially angering La Raza and the Mexican American Legal Defense & Education Fund [MALDEF], among others.)

While navigating her Byzantine maze of logical reasoning, Bolton evidently forgot something: 8 U.S.C. §1373—which legally requires the Feds to respond to precisely the sort of requests Obama and his liberal cronies don’t want to acknowledge. Thusly, Judge Bolton’s ruling not only voids key sections of SB 1070, but also overturns pre-existing Federal immigration law and directly abrogates the 1st Circuit’s decision in Estrada v Rhode Island, which set forth standards by which law enforcement officers could check suspects’ immigration status.

But the goodly judge wasn’t through taking the shears to the sheepdog. Bolton also managed, through the invention of a fictitious Chilean dog-walker (yes, you read that correctly), to dredge up the leftist bugaboo of racial profiling.

When a cop stops a black man in a Scottsdale golf community because he “looked out of place”—that’s profiling—that’s already against the law. When a cop asks Tino in Tucson to provide legitimate ID, especially when Tino is struggling with “eye” and “dee”, that’s not profiling, that’s police work. As for the racial component in play—it’s not as if greater metropolitan Tucson has been overrun with mass numbers of willowy blondes who speak English with winter Olympics accents:

“Klaus Schnitzengruber? And you’re from Flagstaff?”
“Er…Ja. Vlagshtaff. Ich bin ein Vlagshtaffer.”

Hence, the inclusion of “reasonable suspicion” in SB 1070. Should Herr Schnitzengruber get popped for a busted taillight in Tucson; it’s auf wiedersehen for Klaus.

The transparency of Bolton’s impetus in issuing her injunction isn’t just offensive—it’s illegal. Spurred by a profligate administration and a liberal machine bent on presumably adding millions of voters to its ranks, Bolton has shredded the Constitution, stomped on pre-emptive Federal court decisions (not just Estrada, but also United States v Salerno, which states that Bolton’s “Chilean dog-walker” construct is judicially irrelevant), and wiped the mat with 8 U.S.C. §1373 (the Feds have to respond to immigration status inquiries) AND 8 U.S.C. § 1304 (immigrants must carry ID at all times).

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has pledged to carry this fight all the way to the Supreme Court, if necessary. Given the spurious nature of Bolton’s ruling—and, by extension, Obama’s efforts to undermine the fight to secure our nation’s borders—Brewer should be able to handle the weight.