'U.S. Patriotism vs Liberal Solidarity'

What better day than Independence day to discuss the "progressives'" essential arrogance that poisons our society.

Noteworthy:

"In liberal-land the preferred feeling of belonging, of united action in a group, is not patriotism. It is called solidarity. But it is only allowed if you are acting in an approved liberal cause. That's because solidarity gets defined as 'uniting individuals in their response to particular situations of injustice, oppression, or tyranny.'

It is a fine thing to be a member of a labor union, united in solidarity--forever--in opposition to corporate greed. It is a good thing to be a member of a black journalists' association battling against under-representation of African Americans in newsrooms and on editorial boards. It is also ethical to rise above clan, tribe, and nationality towards the notion of a global humanity, a solidarity that embraces all humans, or even all living things.

But don't you try it at home. The solidarities that conservatives experience, for family, for church, for the armed forces, for local civic pride, for the nation--these are different.

You know how it works.

Family?

Think of the dangers of the patriarchy and the bigotry of exclusive heterosexual marriage.

Church?

Think Elmer Gantry and religious wars.

Armed forces?

Think My Lai and Abu Ghraib.

Civic pride?

Think of the shallow civic booster George F. Babbitt.

Nation?

Think aggressive nationalism and crypto-fascism.

You have to hand it to our liberal friends. They have done quite a number on everything we conservatives hold dear."

....and:

"The great national task before conservatives is the moderation of a century of liberal excess. It begins, of course with reversing the insanity of the Obama convulsion that, in one huge legislative belch, aims to bring the entire health care system under government power and to smash the fossil fuel energy economy with swingeing taxes. So much for the excesses of liberal political power.

But just as urgent is the task of moderating liberal cultural power, to call out the excesses of fascist unions, fascist feminists, fascist non-white racists, fascist artists, and fascist gays.

In other words, when liberal solidarity gets beyond fighting against injustice, oppression, and tyranny, and becomes instead unjust, oppressive, and tyrannical, then attention must be paid"

#

'He thinks you're stupid'

John Hinderaker discusses the Obamanation Lie of the Day, "Cap 'n Trade" file.

Zero:

"At a time of great fiscal challenges, this legislation is paid for by the polluters who currently emit the dangerous carbon emissions that contaminate the water we drink and pollute the air we breathe."

As if......

Hinderaker:

"Obama isn't dumb enough to believe that the many billions of dollars in costs that his proposal will impose on energy companies, etc., will somehow disappear thereafter. But he thinks you are."

Scott Johnson:

"And enacting Obamacare is mandatory in order to save money.

As I stated here, the Obama administration's operative political theory is that the American people are incredibly dumb."

#

The man behind the Iranian "reform" movement is no reformer

With the news coming out of Iran, it's important to keep the proper perspective on the situation. That proper perspective is clear: Mousavi's cabal is part of the problem, not a part of the solution.

Noteworthy:

"But there is very little evidence that the label of 'democratic reform,' attached to Mousavi and many of his followers, is anything but a masquerade.

Mousavi is not some democracy-minded reformer. All candidates for elective office in Iran are handpicked and only allowed to run for office by the express permission of the Supreme Council of Guardians and its leader Ayatollah Khamenei. All candidates agree to follow orders. On issues that matter to the West -- Iran's quest for nuclear weapons, threats of genocide aimed at Israel, interference in Iraq and Afghanistan, support for Islamist terrorism and any reasonable compromises with the West on these issues -- the two candidates were virtually the same.

Mousavi is a longtime proponent of Islamist triumphalism and terrorism, a hardliner on Iran's illegal nuclear weapons program and an anti-Semite who has called for Israel to be destroyed. He was a key aide to Ayatollah Khomeini during the Islamic revolution in 1979 and played a part in the decision to overrun our embassy and take American diplomats hostage. As Iran's prime minister between 1981-89, Mousavi was vociferously anti-Western and anti-American. He had a major hand in the creation of Hezbollah in Lebanon. His handpicked interior minister, Ali Akbar Mohtashami, was Mousavi's liaison when the Iranian government formed and funded that terrorist group. One of Mohtashami's first major operations was the murder of 240 US Marines in Lebanon."

Meet the New Boss.

Same as the Old Boss.

#

The widowed housefly speaks!

Iowahawk has the story.

Excerpt:

" 'Bob was a wonderful husband and provider,' said the widow, Mrs. Vivian Vvzzvzwwzzz, wiping tears from her compound eyes. 'Even though he was always busy at the Rose Garden turd pile, he always flew home in time to tuck in our maggots.' "

Do you think a Truth and Reconciliation process is called for here?

What should the Trash Bin Forum and the Dead Carcass PAC do?

I mean, how will the entire D.C. fly community ever get past the horrendous impact of the violence to their community?

#

Regarding the various 'progressive' sanctimonies over 'right wing-inspired violence'

Such obnoxious unction is the ultimate in political and social hypocrisy.

Here's why:

"How -- they ask while glancing furiously at the 'right"'-- did killing become thinkable in America?

Mother Teresa answered their question over a decade ago at a D.C. prayer breakfast that they snored through:

'Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love but to use any violence to get what it wants.…If we accept that the mother can kill her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?' "

...and:

" 'Every child a wanted child' is a slogan Hitler himself could have devised. Instead, pro-abortion liberals did, and they have been killing 'unwanted' children ever since. They are in no position to lecture 'the right' on America's violence. "

Here's an excellent example of the babble, dribble, drool, and spew we're talking about:

"The Age of Obama has brought both a terrific upswelling of general positivism and a concomitant grand lightening up/toning down of outrageous verbiage and ranting extremism among the hotheaded-dictator set, and with it the strangest thing of all: an apparent global decline in overt, easily identifiable flameballs of tangible evil.

Just look around. The entire reptilian Republican party, our cherished font of evil ideas and evil intentions, is now just a cute, leaderless sideshow of circus freaks, all bluster and tantrum and Sarah Palin's kooky gams. It's quite a spectacle: One of the two major political parties in the United States is now entirely run by a blowhard talk radio cow, an insane Fox News comedian and a crusty bomb-thrower dug up from the vault of 1988 (Hi, Newt!)

And the evil tyrants? Struggling for relevance, mostly. Saddam's long gone, Kim Jong-Il is a batty coot, Iran's Ahmenijhad's bark is far worse than his bite, and even harmless thugs like Castro and Hugo Chavez are stunned to humble reverence by an American president who abides no such childish bulls--t and exudes actual integrity and preternatural calm.
...

So there you have it. All told, I'm not that worried. This is America, after all. I know we can do it. We have the ingenuity, the imagination. Our megacorporatons and our neoconservative politicians and our gun-wielding sociopaths are famous the world over for innovating new and exciting ways to reek of pure evil.

Hell, we still have Monsanto, ConAgra, Halliburton, Exxon, Archer Daniels Midland, Yum! Brands, Wal-Mart, most of the coal industry, Tyson meats, Fox News and the everpresent Catholic church, plus a few dozen others who will happily stop at nothing to maintain their long-standing evil empires, no matter what that damnable do-gooder president says. Isn't that reassuring?"

Why am I never surprised anymore to read slime like this from yet another bottom feeding, scum sucking dirtball like this clown?

Yet, WE'RE the ones who hate......

(Hat tip: Tom Elia, at The New Editor)

#

WHY is ACORN still getting ANY taxpayer money?

Cap 'n Trade? No, COMMAND and Trade....

Virginia Postrel picked up this little tidbit about the Waxman-Markey legislative outrage, from WaPo: (Linked inside the link)

"In fact, the bill also contains regulations on everything from light bulb standards to the specs on hot tubs, and it will reshape America's economy in dozens of ways that many don't realize.

Here is just one: The bill would give the federal government power over local building codes. It requires that by 2012 codes must require that new buildings be 30 percent more efficient than they would have been under current regulations. By 2016, that figure rises to 50 percent, with increases scheduled for years after that.

With those targets in mind, the bill expects organizations that develop model codes for states and localities to fill in the details, creating a national code. If they don't, the bill commands the Energy Department to draft a national code itself.

States, meanwhile, would have to adopt the national code or one that achieves the same efficiency targets. Those that refuse will see their codes overwritten automatically, and they will be docked federal funds and carbon 'allowances' -- valuable securities created elsewhere in the bill that give the holder the right to pollute and can be sold.

The Energy Department also could enforce its code itself. Among other things, the policy would demonstrate the new leverage of allocation of allowances as a sort of carbon currency -- leverage this bill would be giving to Congress to direct state behavior."

Postrel:

"The editorial hints that these sorts of provisions have been inserted because the bill's authors are counting on fellow members of Congress not to read what they're voting on. They undoubtedly remember how easy it was to get Congress to ban incandescent light bulbs by sneaking a provision into the Bush-era energy bill."

No, our concern for our nation's path under the Obamanation is sheer fantasy, right?

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: The election of Obama marks the onset of permanent stasis for our country.

As Postrel has so eloquently put it in"The Future and it's Enemies", stasis is the destroyer of dynamism, something our nation needs to achieve.

From the book blurb:

"Thus, the true enemies of humanity's future are those who insist on prescribing outcomes in advance, circumventing the process of competition and experiment in favor of their own preconceptions and prejudices"

Nowhere is this more readily apparent than the incredibly offensive Cap and Trade legislation that they are trying to ram down our throats, the same as all the other agenda items have already been or will be handled.

Let's ensure that Obama and his Dem/Lefty/"Progressive" toadies are held responsible for the damage they wreak.

#

Wheel of Fortune: 'Scientific Consensus on Anthropogenic Global Warming' version

They think they're going to solve the puzzle, but the rest of us know that the next spin will bankrupt ALL of us.

#

'Empathy', and Supreme Court nominees

John Hinderaker:

"Barack Obama famously says that a key quality he wants in a Supreme Court justice is 'empathy.' As many commentators have observed, 'empathy' is really a cover for lawlessness. But it's actually worse than that, because empathy, as that term is used by Obama, is inherently selective.

Does Obama mean that his nominee will have empathy for the unborn? Well, no. He doesn't have in mind that kind of empathy. How about empathy for taxpayers and small business owners? No, that isn't exactly the right sort of empathy either.

Obama's favorite example of the right kind of empathy is Lily Ledbetter. As Paul has pointed out, Lily Ledbetter was a liar with a lousy case that was properly barred by the statute of limitations. What 'empathy' is at work here? Empathy with unions and, perhaps even more important, the people who profit more than anyone else when lousy cases are kept alive in the courts--plaintiffs' lawyers, among the largest contributors to the Democratic Party.

What Barack Obama means by an 'empathetic' judge is one who has his or her thumb on the scale on behalf of politically favored groups. This is the opposite of the traditional view that a judge should be neutral, i.e., have equal empathy for all litigants."

#

Are the Chrysler dealership closings tainted by political payback?

Gateway Pundit wants to know. You should, too.

Noteworthy:

Again here is what we know so far--

** Earlier it was reported that the Obama Administration may have targeted GOP donors in deciding which Chrysler dealerships would have to close their doors.

** Later it was discovered that a Big Dem Donor Group was allowed to keep all 6 Chrysler dealerships open.... And, their local competitors were eliminated.

** The Auto Task Force, which includes Obama cabinet members, is reportedly calling the shots on which dealerships will close and stay open.

** Steven Rattner leads The Auto Task Force and is married to the former National Finance Chair of Democratic Party, Maureen White.

** The closings in several instances appear to benefit Dem donating dealers where local GOP-linked dealerships were closed.

** Even Rep. Vern Buchanan (R-Fla) lost his Chrysler dealership in Florida and found out from a colleague on the House floor.

** Lithia Motor Group's owners gave $15,000 to two Democrat candidates and support nationalized healthcare. They will likely lose just two of 29 dealerships and gain 5 more.

** One report claims the odds that these Chrysler closings occurred without partisan bias are less than 1%.

** After closing the 789 dealerships Chrysler announced that they are already looking to open new franchises.

** Chrysler dealership owners donated to Republicans over Democrats by a ratio of 76% to 24%.

Very interesting.

If the accusations are true, would anyone really be surprised, given the Obamanation's record so far?

#

Let's look at the Sotomayor nomination from another angle

Andrew Cline, at American Spectator:

"Take everything that is known about Sonia Sotomayor and change three factors -- her race, sex, and family's initial socioeconomic status -- and the points cited in praise of her selection would be diminished by more than 50 percent.

The complimentary commentary would be reduced to: Mr. Sotomayor graduated summa cum laude from Princeton and has had a breadth of experience over his lengthy legal career. That's it."

He concludes:

"Were Sotomayor a white male who grew up in economic comfort, but who had exactly the same legal experience and judicial record, would the praise of Obama's choice be so widespread and so fawning?

Not a chance.

More likely, these same writers would find Sotomayor lacking in qualifications. And that says a lot, none of it good, about how the left views the role of the courts in this country. "

#

So which agenda item is Obama distracting you from with his SCOTUS nomination?

I'd say none of the below. My money's on the illegal immigration amnesty scam.

Added benefit of this distraction from the Obamanation:

"An aside, won’t Pelosi be happy to finally be off the main-stage - note how Obama was more than happy to let her sweat that out on her own. That was unexpected bonus distractions for Obama. [Troll/Moby notice: EIT's are NOT torture]"

#

Here's perhaps THE most important reason that Sotomayor is dangerous to our well being.

From the nominee:

"I have absolutely no idea about the science of global warming .....But if the science is right, we have relegated ourselves to killing the world in the foreseeable future. Not in centuries to come but in the very near future."

This is a quote of a comment she made from the bench on a case heard in the 2nd US Circuit Court of Appeals

People who think that way are VERY scary indeed. And VERY shallow to boot.

#

As predicited, Sotomayor is Obama's SCOTUS choice

....to replace Souter, as discussed here.

More, from Kathryn Jean Lopez and Wendy Long, at Bench Memos.

Lopez:

"Sotomayor is a liberal woman, so the National Organization of Women is on board, announcing their 'Confirm Her' campaign.

That's the same same group, by the way, which produced a sign I have on my wall that warned 'STOP SOUTER OR WOMEN WILL DIE'

"Going through Sotomayor's credentials on MSNBC, Chuck Todd just went through empathy first. High on the evidence of empathy list? She struggled with childhood diabetes.

And this a Supreme Court justice makes. "

Lopez quotes Jeffrey Rosen:

"Over the past few weeks, I've been talking to a range of people who have worked with her, nearly all of them former law clerks for other judges on the Second Circuit or former federal prosecutors in New York. Most are Democrats and all of them want President Obama to appoint a judicial star of the highest intellectual caliber who has the potential to change the direction of the court.

Nearly all of them acknowledged that Sotomayor is a presumptive front-runner, but nearly none of them raved about her. They expressed questions about her temperament, her judicial craftsmanship, and most of all, her ability to provide an intellectual counterweight to the conservative justices, as well as a clear liberal alternative."

Long:

"Judge Sotomayor is a liberal judicial activist of the first order who thinks her own personal political agenda is more important that the law as written. She thinks that judges should dictate policy, and that one's sex, race, and ethnicity ought to affect the decisions one renders from the bench.

She reads racial preferences and quotas into the Constitution, even to the point of dishonoring those who preserve our public safety. On September 11, America saw firsthand the vital role of America's firefighters in protecting our citizens. They put their lives on the line for her and the other citizens of New York and the nation. But Judge Sotomayor would sacrifice their claims to fair treatment in employment promotions to racial preferences and quotas. The Supreme Court is now reviewing that decision.

She has an extremely high rate of her decisions being reversed, indicating that she is far more of a liberal activist than even the current liberal activist Supreme Court."

Rick Moran has the best summary so far:

"She's a woman, an Hispanic, and not as liberal as the left would like but too liberal for the rest of us."

All in all, it's just what we would expect from an Obamanation SCOTUS appointee: A Barack Obama clone when it comes to philosophy.

In other words, business as usual.

#

The coming discontent of the voting and motoring public about vehicles and driving under the Obamanation

"Car Crazy" describes the coming disaster completely.

Let's sum up what is now readily apparent about this situation:

1.Obama and his cronies are running two American car companies now.

2. By default, he's proposed draconian design parameters with his "pick a number out of the air" fuel mileage mandate.

3. His energy and tax policies are going to raise the cost of transportation by an unbearable amount while NOT solving any "( non-existent) climate change" or "energy shortage" problem.

4. There is every likelihood that, given his proclivity for thugishness and strong-armed tactics, he will force you out of your older, non-Obama conforming vehicle, and.....

5. His economic "stimulus" plan isn't, and in fact will extend and probably deepen the economic distress in more ways than meets the eye, one of which is the eventual complete failure of GM and Chrysler.

And those are just the cluster f**ks I anticipate off the top of my head.

Excerpts from the WSJ article:

"Mr. Obama's fleet-mileage partners yesterday included the two auto companies that have fallen into his arms, Chrysler and GM, still-independent Ford, the major foreign manufacturers, United Auto Workers chief Ron Gettelfinger, and beaming representatives from the Sierra Club, Environmental Defense Fund and the Union of Concerned Scientists.

All that's left to arrive at the President's new destination for the American way of driving are huge, unanswered questions about technology, financing and the marketability of cars that will be small and expensive."

....and:

"These public goals notwithstanding, it still looks as if Ford, Chrysler and GM will be making cars they can't sell, or can't sell profitably. That might not be a problem if you're now Gettelfinger Motors. But still-independent Ford has private shareholders and creditors to answer. While GM and Chrysler attempt to meet the new standards with taxpayer money, Ford will have to do so on its own........One thing seems certain by 2016: Taxpayers will be paying Detroit to make the cars Americans don't want, and then they will pay again either through (trust us) a gas tax or with a purchase subsidy. Even the French must think we're nuts."

Indeed.

#

Common sense prevails in the Senate on GTMO

They're NOT going to let Obama move GTMO detainees stateside.

Key point:

"Senate Democrats sought last week to include an initial $50 million in funding for Guantanamo's closure, but they quickly retreated in the face of the Republican outcry.

With few alternatives, some are even echoing the GOP assertion that the state-of-the-art facility should remain open. 'We spent hundreds of millions of dollars building an appropriate facility with all security precautions on Guantanamo to try these cases,' Sen. James Webb (D-Va.) said Sunday on ABC News's 'This Week." Webb added, 'I do not believe they should be tried in the United States.'

McConnell taunted Democrats yesterday for their rapid capitulation on Guantanamo. 'I understand our friends on the other side of the aisle are -- shall I say? -- moving in our direction rapidly.' "

Imagine that!

Camp X Ray will remain OPEN, as well it should be.

The Obamanation's GTMO nonsense is OVER.

#

Pelosi's inexcusable lies

....and the Democrats continuous enablement of her shameful behavior.

Noteworthy:

"As Joe Scarborough clearly understands, it simply reminds people of some of the worst traits of today’s Left — from its almost reflexive disdain for the CIA to its angry and bitter tone. It doesn’t help Shrum’s case that the current CIA director, Leon Panetta — formerly a Democratic Member of the House from California’s delegation, as well as Bill Clinton’s chief of staff — wrote a memo not only directly contradicting what Shrum says, but also — by the force and logic of Panetta argument — accusing Speaker Pelosi of herself lying."

Her's her bizarre press conference:



She needs to go.......NOW!

#

The state of American politics today

"We live in a world where people like Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, and Barney Frank are actually taken seriously.

We live in a world where a nobody 'community organizer' with no accomplishments and who freely admits he is a blank screen on which others can project their fantasies, can become President and leader of the Free World.

Don't waste your time looking for any sense or consistency in the contradictory demands and rhetoric of these political postmodern demagogues. They will say whatever they need to say in order to obtain and keep power.

In Obama, the political left finally has the opportunity to translate their postmodern therapeutic psychobabble into real political action...."

-- Dr. Sanity, who has much more to say in the post.

#

Pelosi, Rockefeller KNEW about the interrogation methods

Those two need to stop telling lies about what they knew and when they knew it.

In addition to what Porter Goss has said about Pelosi and Company's awareness, there's this:

"Ms. Pelosi's denials are also difficult to square with a chronology of 40 CIA briefings to Congressional Members compiled by the CIA and released this week by Director Leon Panetta. For the September 4, 2002 meeting, the CIA's summary of the discussion reads: 'Briefing on EITs including use of EITs on Abu Zubaydah, background on authorities, and a description of the particular EITs that had been employed.' We emphasize the verb tense to underscore the contradiction with Ms. Pelosi's categorical denials of last month."

....and:

"On February 4, 2003, Senators Pat Roberts and Jay Rockefeller of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence were given a briefing in which 'EITs [were] "described in considerable detail,'including "how the water board was used."' The process by which the techniques were approved by DoJ was also raised.' The document also adds that Mr. Rockefeller, the Committee's ranking Democrat, was later given an 'individual briefing.'

Nor was that the only time Mr. Rockefeller, who chaired the Committee from 2007 to 2009, heard from the CIA. The West Virginian was briefed at least 12 times more about interrogation techniques, legal authorities and other aspects of the program. The last, in June 2008, was offered to 10 members of the Senate Intelligence Committee and covered "discussion of EITs and the OLC [Office of Legal Counsel] opinions. Specific mentions of waterboarding numerous time.' "

....finally:

"....perhaps the CIA should release whatever notes they kept of the briefings. Our guess is that's one pile of memos Speaker Pelosi & Co. aren't especially eager to declassify."

Yes, let's see them.

Don't hold your breath.

So where's the call from "principled" Dems for Pelosi's resignation?

Again, don't hold your breath.

Excerpt:

"The excuses trotted out in her defense so far are pretty pathetic. See this anonymously authored Center for American Progress post as a good example. One talking point--that Pelosi wasn't specifically informed about waterboarding--is particularly laughable. As Goldfarb notes below, Rep. Hoekstra says there are documents showing otherwise, and Allahpundit points out that Pelosi was briefed just a month after Zubaydah was waterboarded repeatedly: 'Consider the context of when the briefing was held — one week before 9/11/02, when fears of an anniversary attack were sky high — and ask yourself why the CIA wouldn’t have told Pelosi they had waterboarded Zubaydah?'

It certainly looks like Pelosi knew about waterboarding, and if she didn't she was certainly briefed about other interrogation techniques. Do her apologists think that waterboarding is the only technique that qualifies as torture?"

On the other hand, most of us think that the phrase "principled Democrats" is an oxymoron of the highest degree.

#

So where will YOU cut your budget (or increase your income) to cover YOUR household's share of 'cap 'n trade' costs?

It's up to $3900.00 per year, and counting.

I suppose one way to cover it would help support yet another of the "Progressive" agenda items: Stop making tithes to your evangelical Christian church, so as to further marginalize the faith.

After all, why should you support God's work, when the New Messiah's Hope 'n Change theology has better plans for you than the out-of-favor Christian one's does?

#