This site will remain as an Archive Site, for the foreseeable future, of
all postings made before 23 December 2009. Because of this fact, my domain [thecampofthesaints.com] will still direct
you here for the time being. I have issues to work out with the transference of my archives to the new site that will
take some time.
Thank you for your indulgence and I apologize for any inconvenience or confusion. —Bob Belvedere
It's Time To ROC 'N' ROLL: Restore Our
Constitution & Restore Our Lost Liberties
Dispatches from The Camp Of The
Saints... by Robert Belvedere [DHS-Certified Rightwing Extremist / White House Certified
'Fishy' / Carter-Certified Raaaaacist!]
The TCOTS Rule 5 Compliance Committee, in our infinite
wisdom have decided this week to throw the loving spotlight on a lady who was one of the greatest of the glamourous bombshells.
When you think of female Hiroshimas, she is either the first or the second gal that comes to mind—the other being Marilyn.
Like the tragic Monroe, she died at too young of an age. Unlike her, this lady's end was not brought about through her
own efforts. But enough with the sorrowful. Let us, rather, remember what joy this gal brought to the souls
of men. And let us recall the mischievous twinkle in her lovely eyes. So, without further adieu, it
is with great pleasure that The Committee presents....
JAYNE
MANSFIELD...
There is one song that has long been associated with the lovely Miss Mansfield and, frankly, we can't think of
a better one to provide. Here's a little number originally sung by a somewhat restrained Little Richard and written
by the great Bobby Troup...
If she walks by the men all stand engrossed [She can't help it, the girl can't help it] If she winks an eye bread slices turn to toast [She can't help it,
the girl can't help it] Yes, she's got a lot of what they call the most [She can't help it, the girl can't help
it]
The girl can't help it if she was born to please And if
she's got a figure made to squeeze Oh won't you kindly be aware The girl can't help it
She mesmerizes every mother's son [She can't help it, the girl can't help it] And if she smiles their
steak becomes well done [She can't help it, the girl can't help it] She makes grampa feel like twenty-one [She
can't help it, the girl can't help it]
The girl can't help it if she was
born to please [She can't help it, the girl can't help it] And if I go to her on bended knees [She can't help
it, the girl can't help it] Oh won't you kindly be aware that I can't help it [Just can't help it] Cause oh,
I'm hopin' obviously That someday the answer will be The girl can't help it if she's in love with me
She walks by the men all stand in rows Yes she winks an eye ... Yes she's
got a lot of what they call the most
Well, the girl can't help it
if she was born to please And if she's got a figure made to squeeze Cause oh I'm hopin' obviously That someday
the answer will be The girl can't help it if she's in love with me
You can read my four previous postings on Stacy McCain's trip to New York's 23rd
Congressional District to cover the three-way race there, here and here and here and here.
Since my last posting yesterday evening at 1927 hours....
1) Stacy posted a video containing two short messages from two of th people volunteering to help elect Doug Hoffman to the Congress last night at 2156.
2) At 0154 this morning, Stacy posted a round-up shoe leather report before he hit the road for home:
OK,
so it's now nearly 2 a.m., and I'm poaching the computer at the business center of the Country Inn and Suites in Lake George, N.Y. When I asked for the key to the business center, the manager assumed I was a guest, and I
exercised my right to remain silent. (Advice to would-be reporters: always wear a sports coat.)
Have I
done enough? Can I make it home before 10 a.m.? Say a prayer for me. If you've enjoyed the coverage, just hit the tip jar and I'll try to make it back up here next week.
He made it just a little
before noon. Take that staties!
3) Smitty posted another election round-up this morning, at 1145 hours, with some pictures provided by a reader.
4) Stacy posted about Mr. Hoffman's taking of the 'No Pork Pledge'
at 1207.
5) He analyzed a Research 2000 poll just released at 1248 and then, hopefully, went to bed.
Except for my Rule 5 posting which I'll put up a little later on, I will
probably be off the grid for the rest of today, so please click here to see anything else Stacy may file today or Sunday morning.
A big thank you to Smitty for describing the title
of these postings thusly: 'The 23-Skidoo post also bears mention--great title.' Ah shucks, Smitty, it comes natural to a member of The Illuminati. Can't you see the fnords?
Peter Wehner recently published an article over at Commentary Magazine
on our Fearless Leader and his enemies list. A little background...
Mr. Wehner served in the Bush
II Administration and 'was executive director for policy for Empower America, a conservative public-policy organization. Mr.
Wehner also served as a special assistant to the director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy and, before that,
as a speech writer for then-Secretary of Education Bill Bennett.'
...They spend years as second-teamers in the GOP policy hive, writing other people's
speeches, going from job to job, hired on the basis of being a Republican with good recommendations. Sooner or later, they
become envious of people who are actually out there doingsomething. It is this envy that informs their elitist disdain
of the conservative grassroots and of anyone who is genuinely popular with the grassroots, like Sarah Palin or Rush Limbaugh.
Lords of all they survey -- so long as what they survey is a Beltway think-tank policy shop -- the ambitious policy
geeks look at somebody like Glenn Beck and say, "Hey, why is this bozo on TV? He's never attended any Heritage briefings
and I never see him at the Wednesday morning meetings at Grover's!"
The GOP establishment in Washington has
a surfeit of such parasitical careerists, who think that the Republican Party is about them, and not about all those
millions of grassroots people who are, in fact, the conservative movement.
Now to what Mr. Wehner wrote.
Here's one snippet:
...One of the attractions of Obama during the election -- one
of his attractions to me, who wrote favorably about him several times -- was his tone and countenance, his apparent interest
in a serious engagement with issues, and his professed allergy to politics practiced by those who are bitter and brittle.
We should, he said, "resist the temptation to fall back on the same partisanship and pettiness and immaturity that has
poisoned our politics for so long." He went on to say, "I will listen to you, especially when we disagree."
All impressive and high-minded sentiments. And all, apparently, a ruse.
There's more of this kind of Captain Renault 'I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!' attitude in the article.
Pardon me, but DUH!
Pundette is much more eloquent than I:
I hate to keep repeating it but the evidence
of Obama's Chicago-style "temperament" was available for all to see before the election. Mr. Wehner readily admits
to praising Obama during the campaign but I still find susceptibility to Obama's "charm"
and "eloquence" baffling and frustrating.
I want to state absolutely and for the record that the picture in the immediately
previous post is not actually one taken the morning after Meghan McCain and Conor Friedersdorf met at a margarita bar.
...to my friends and allies out in the ether for not having produced lately as
much linky love as I normally do. Within the next few days I hope to clean out the cache and make partial amends.
As part of my penance, I hereby present, from the 1980's:
THE RESULTS OF BOB BELVEDERE MAKING
THE MISTAKE OF DRINKING HEAVILY ONE NIGHT AND BEING IN A BAR AT A QUARTER TO TWO AM...
Kids, don't make the same mistake I did. If you're drunk in a bar and you're alone and its getting
close to 1:45 AM, get up as steadily as you can and exit the building ALONE immediately.
Believe me, it ain't worth it.
This public service announcement has been sponsored by M.A.D.D [Mofos Against
Drunk Dating].
You can read my three previous postings on Stacy McCain's trip to New York's 23rd
Congressional District to cover the three-way race there, here and here and here.
Since my last posting this morning at 0834 hours....
2) At 1050, Stacy posted the video of Doug Hoffman's appearance on the Glenn Beck Radio Show.
3) At 11:25, Stacy broke the news that the Hoffman Campaign raised $116,000 on Thursday alone:
Given
previous reports that the campaign had raised $210,000 in the week ending Tuesday, and estimating more than $30,000 for Wednesday,
this puts the Hoffman campaign's online fundraising at about $400,000 in the past nine days.
It sure will because you know that the Soros Gang
and Barry's Crew are going to pour even more money into Democrat Bill Owens's coffers so that the Vicious Leftist Smear Machine
can be fully activated.
BTW, don't be puzzled if the Hoffman campaign doesn't make a big deal out of Palin's endorsement. Because she's been so unfairly demonized
by the MSM, Palin's status with independent voters is kind of problematic right now (let's hope Oprah can fix that). So don't
expect to see Hoffman TV ads in NY23 shoving the Palin endorsement in voter's faces....
I think this is
a dumb move on the part of the Campaign. I would bet money that the Owens Campaign will soon be airing ads tying Hoffman
and Palin together like conjoined twins in a freak show. Distancing yourself is the cowardly thing to do.
And we have had more than enough of that from the GOP for quite some time now. Embrace Sarah and hold her close and
show the bastards you're not afraid of them. Now is not the time for weaselly behaviour. What are you? A
man or a newt?
5) Jimmie Bise posted a short update for us at 1412.
7) Smitty has just posted a survey of a number of important races across the country. Please do take the time to click here and check them all out, but here is his spot-on commentary on this race: NY-23:Now that all the cool kids are endorsing Doug Hoffman, the floodgates are starting to open among
the cognoscenti of the conservative movement: Rick Santorum endorsed, and so too did former presidential candidate Michael
Steve Forbes. Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty, who seems like he's still trying to decide whether to be establishment or movement
in 2012, has his finger in the air but said he'll probably endorse and gave a clue by saying he had issues with the way
Scozzafava got the nomination.
Well...that answers my question about Gov. Pawlenty: he should not be part
of the solution; he's shown himself to be part of the problem.
We've got another race where conservatives and libertarians have a candidate they
can get behind. From Eric Dondero, we learn:
In an election stunner! Libertarian candidate Matt Drew placed second in a field
of 3, enough to qualify him for a run-off position on the November general election ballot. He is vying for one of two seats
up for election on the Durham City Council (Research Triangle).
Drew, an IT professional, got 12%. He beat a local
Preacher, well-known in the African American community. This is a straight out Libertarian vs. Democrat race.
No Republican on the ballot and, from the information Eric provides, this is our kind of guy.
If you live in
Durham, North Carolina, please give Mr. Drew your vote. We've reached a point in time where elections at all levels
have become important, so metastasized is the Leftist cancer, it has infected every level of government.
One of the great slapstick comedians is dead. From TheLos Angeles Times, Elaine Woo reporting [tip of the fedora to Dan Riehl]:
Soupy Sales, a comic with a gift for slapstick who attained cult-like popularity in the 1960s with a pie-throwing routine
that became his signature, has died. He was 83.
Sales had numerous ailments and died Thursday at Calvary Hospital
in the Bronx, said Kathy O'Connell, a longtime friend.
As the star of "The Soupy Sales Show," he performed
live on television for 13 years in Detroit, Los Angeles and New York before the program went into syndication in the United
States and abroad.
Ostensibly for children, the show had broad appeal among adults who found Sales' puns, gags
and pratfalls deliciously corny and camp. His cast consisted of goofy puppets with names like White Fang, Black Tooth and
Pookie, and a host of off-camera characters, including the infamous naked girl.
The high point of every show came
when a sidekick launched a pie into Sales' face. Sales once estimated that he was hit by more than 25,000 pies in his lifetime.
It was a great show.
He also will be remembered for a very famous incident that showed the power of television
and appealed to a budding anarchist like I was at the time:
For notoriety, nothing
beat the show that aired New Year's Day 1965, when Sales was producing the program in New York. Told he had a minute to fill,
the comic told the children watching on WNEW-TV to find their parents' wallets and "get all the green pieces of paper
with the pictures of guys in beards" and mail them to him. In return, he said, he would send them "a postcard from
Puerto Rico."
Sales had used the same joke in Detroit and Los Angeles. But this time, the prank elicited some
$80,000 "in Monopoly money," as well as a complaint from a viewer filed with the FCC. Sales' show was suspended,
prompting fans to swamp the station's switchboard with protest calls, mostly from high school and college students who demanded
that their favorite television fare resume. Within a week, it did.
Brilliant.
This must also
be noted:
...He fought in the Pacific theater in the Navy and participated in the
invasion of Okinawa but managed to entertain crew mates with routines broadcast on the ship's PA system.
Following up on my posting yesterday, A POX ON BOTH HOUSES [AND THE WHITE HOUSE], we can most definitely add [as if you ever doubted we could] Nancy Pelosi to the lists of cretinous ignoramuses
in the Congress [tip of the fedora to Gateway Pundit]:
CNSNews.com: “Madam Speaker, where specifically does the Constitution
grant Congress the authority to enact an individual health insurance mandate?”
Pelosi: “Are you serious?
Are you serious?”
CNSNews.com: “Yes, yes I am.”
Pelosi then shook her head before
taking a question from another reporter.
Ah, the sound of the terminally self-important and conceited clown:
its like an ice pick to the brain. One has to wonder if some of the gallons of botox that she's been injected with have
migrated to her brain...naw, you don't have to wonder: it has. To slightly alter what I wrote yesterday: 'Representative'
Pelosi's attitude is shared by most of the Congress and by this Administration. They must be stopped. They will
not cease on their own [too committed are they to their unrealistic bromides and unreasoned ideas], so it is up to us to rid
ourselves of their plague. For that is what they are: a deadly cancerous virus on the American Soul.
I don't know if you heard or read about this yesterday:
Today the White House stepped up its attack on Fox News, announcing that the network would no longer be able to conduct
interviews with officials as a member of the Press Pool. The Pool is a five-member group consisting of ABC, CBS, CNN, Fox
News and NBC organized by the White House Correspondents Association. Its membership is not subject to oversight by the government.
This whole War Against Fox News is so ridiculous that I'm becoming more and more convinced
that it, and things like the War Against Rush, are, as Glenn Beck and others have claimed, diversionary tactics [a sleight-of-hand,
if you will] to keep us from noticing the improper [that's putting very mildly] actions the Administration
and the Congress are taking to ram through unpopular socialist programs like Obamacare and Cap & Trade. With these
slimy bastards, you've really got to keep your eye on the ball at all times.
UPDATE at 1029: Over at Legal Insurrection, William Jacobson was commenting on this
back on Wednesday [apologies for missing that], and doing so much more eloquently. A highlight [a rather extensive one—I
hope he doesn't mind, but this issue is so important]:
While we were following
the Fox News red herring dragged by Rahm Emanuel, David Axelrod
and Anita Dunn across the political trail, the real damage was being done in the other direction.
Organizing for
America, Obama's renamed campaign machine, was flooding Capital Hill with phone calls in support of Obamacare
(we received a phone call at our house yesterday asking us to call our representative in support of Democratic proposals).
Harry Reid was cutting deals with doctors, various states, and anyone else who can be bought or bullied. Nancy Pelosi
was playing number games to get a CBO score below $900 billion based on unrealistic cost control assumptions which never will be put into effect.
All the while the Democrats were touting yet another misleading poll (based on distorted sampling) supposedly showing widespread support for a government plan,
to provide cover for a sell-out by moderate Democrats.
And us? We're talking about Fox News.
Better
get back on the real scent, people. The Democrats plan to destroy our health
care system and personal freedoms through mandates, taxes, loss of private insurance, obsessive regulation, bloated bureaucracy
and out of control costs. Trillion dollar deficits will seem like a fond memory if the Democrats get their way.
Any
day now the biggest, baddest hurt is going to be put on this country. A hurt so bad future generations will curse us for what
we allowed to happen.
And it will happen so quickly, we won't know what hit us.
...is awarded to Doctor Zero who gets it: The GOP is doomed if it holds the course Newt
Gingrich set for it, in the waning days of his troubled tenure as Speaker of the House. It should set a new course, following
the rogue stars rising to starboard. Palin and Hoffman are among the first of those stars. She’s taking a risk by endorsing
him, since her detractors would savor his defeat. That’s good. America needs risk-takers, not undertakers. Newt Gingrich
conceded far too many defeats before the race in New York-23 had even begun, by settling for a candidate he could live with,
instead of backing the one New York – and America – really needs.
Now is not the time to play
it safe. The future of The Republic is on the line.
Did John Adams, Sam Adams, George Washington, John Hancock,
et. al. play it safe? They risked their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor. So must we if we dare to
call ourselves Americans.
You can read my two previous postings on Stacy McCain's trip to New York's 23rd Congressional District to cover the three-way
race there, here and here.
Since my last posting late yesterday afternoon,
1) Stacy filed a report, over at AmSpecBlog,
at 1658 yesterday:
[Conservative Party candidate Doug] Hoffman appeared this afternoon with former
House Majority Leader Dick Armey at a press conference in front of the Federal Building in Syracuse, where the Conservative
Party candidate endorsed the flat tax. "Even though I'm a CPA, the flat tax is the way to create an environment
for economic growth," said Hoffman, noting that simplifying the tax code would result in a substantial loss of tax-preparation
business for his firm.
Armey said that Scozzafava lost the election "the day she was elected," since
her record and policy stances place her far outside the mainstream of the conservative 23rd District. Armey expressed
the hope that "the Republicans will learn a lesson" from the defeat of Scozzafava.
2) He filed
a related report at The Other McCain at 1746 hours.
3) Jimmie Bise published a dispatch on Hoffman's latest radio ad and fundraising news yesterday evening at 1953:
...While the Tea Party movement does strongly disagree with the freedom-strangling,
wastrel policies of President Obama, their protests aren't aimed at him because most of the protesters have very clearly heard
the Democratic Party's message that neither it nor the President are particularly interested in listening to them.
Instead, the protesters have been aiming their most pointed messages at the Republican Party that purports to represent
them....
4) At 2039, Stacy filed a report of Sarah Palin's endorsement [full text provided] of Doug Hoffman [Bravo Mrs. Palin!]. From
Sarahcuda:
...I am very pleased to announce my support for Doug Hoffman in
his fight to be the next Representative from New York's 23rd Congressional district. It's my honor to endorse Doug and to
do what I can to help him win, including having my political action committee, SarahPAC, donate to his campaign the maximum
contribution allowed by law.
Our nation is at a crossroads, and this is once again a "time for choosing."...
Yesterday I mentioned in this postingthat Stacy McCain had hopped in his car and was headed to New York's 23rd Congressional District to report on the three-way
race up there between Democrat [aka Socialist] Bill Owens, Republican RINO [aka ACORNer] Dede Scozzafava, and Conservative
[aka guy in the white hat] Doug Hoffman. Jimmie Bise [of The Sundries Shack fame] has been posting
at Stacy's site, providing updates from our favorite Gonzo reporter. Stacy has posted a few dispatches himself, as well.
The following is a chronicle with some highlights thrown in to tantalize you...
The grassroots. A week ago, Hoffman held a conference call during which he practically begged for national
traction. According to Stacy, Hoffman had two messages: "We have her on the run" and "We need to raise
money to get the message out." Since then, Hoffman's star has been steadily rising, the endorsements have come rolling in, the media outlets have been spinning like they're reporting from a Tilt-A-Whirl, and his Republican opponent Dede Scozzafava
has committed gaffe after asinine gaffe. It's gotten so bad that National Review's Jim
Geraghty has calledfor the GOP to demand its money back and pull back completely from Scozzafava (via memeorandum). Indeed, the conservative flagship magazine has gone "all Hoffman, all the time",
according to a campaign source.
...Stacy informed me earlier this evening that Doug Hoffman will hold a press
conference in the media hub of the region, Syracuse, where he will endorse the flat tax.
That may not necessarily seem like a big deal but consider what I wrote earlier. Hoffman makes a good part of his living off
of navigating the byzantine tax code for people who are overwhelmed by it. A flat tax will cost him business, since you'll
be able to figure out your taxes each year on the back of a postcard. Doug Hoffman is willing to work against his own financial
interest to push something that's in our best interests. When was the last time a politician did that?
3) Stacy filed his first report from the 23rd District at 0126 this morning:
...Because I was on the road for six hours, what I did was to work the phones,
talking to my sources to get the basic landscape as I headed up here to cover the race on the ground.
You've seen
how, in the old black-and-white movies, the court would adjourn at the big trial, and all the reporters would race to the
pay phone, make a call and say, "Get me rewrite!"
The reporter on the scene would be connected to a writer
on the city desk, who would then take dictation from the guy covering the trial -- the quotes, the notes, the facts. The guy
on the desk would then be in charge of turning the raw report into a finished story.
So that's how it was with
me and Jimmie, as I flew up I-81 Wednesday en route to Cicero, N.Y.....
Doug Hoffman today got the official endorsement of former House Majority Leader Dick Armey and likened
his congressional campaign to the U.S. hockey team's upset victory in the 1980 Winter Olympics.
"Let's go
back to Lake Placid," said Hoffman, who worked as a financial officer for the Olympiad near his hometown of Saranac Lake.
"We're going to create a miracle on Nov. 3. . . . That miracle starts today."
After weeks of a low-profile
campaign in the upstate 23rd District special election, suddenly national media attention is focused on the race. Liberal
Republican candidate Dede Scozzafava appears to be in meltdown mode and Hoffman is now riding a "tsunami" of momentum,
one campaign source confided this morning.
"This is a race between the conservative and the Democrat,"
Armey, now chairman of Freedomworks, said in his speech endorsing Hoffman. A standing-room-only crowd of supporters repeatedly
interrupted with chants of "Go, Doug, Go."
I'm sorry, which candidate is closest to ACORN and has the endorsement of the
largest left-wing blog in the world? I have a hard time remembering...
6) Stacy filed another report at 1324 this afternoon and included some insight on proper shoe leather reporting:
When I was a
small-town journalist in Georgia and a local story would make national news, I hated the way the big national media would
come bigfooting into town, treating local reporters like we were bush-leaguers. So when I go out on the road to do reporting,
I like to start out by meeting with local reporters, who deserve to be respected for their hard work and knowledge of facts
that we outsiders often overlook
DEDE SCOZZAFAVA MUST GO! [Updated below: at 1349hrs]
In the race for NY's Twenty-Third Congressional District, Dede Scozzafava
is the Rep Can. She has been endorsed by the Republican leadership in Washington and the likes of Newt Gingrich, and given
money from the national party. Normally this would not be a bad thing, but unfortunately she is the worst kind of RINO and
her campaign has taken actions that are abhorrent to cons and libertarians alike.
As for her beliefs, The Editors at The Wall Street Journal have posted an indictment:
Democrats want to portray
this race as a familiar moderate-conservative GOP split, but the real issue is why Ms. Scozzafava is a Republican at all.
She has voted for so many tax increases that the Democrat is attacking her as a tax raiser. She supported the Obama stimulus,
and she favors "card check" to make union organizing easier, or at least she did until a recent flip-flop. She has
run more than once on the line of the Working Families Party, which is aligned with Acorn. Her voting record in Albany puts
her to the left of nearly half of the Democrats in the assembly. She also favors gay marriage, which is to the left of Mr.
Obama.
Newt
really needs to re-think his support for Dede Scozzafava. This isn't RINO but DIABLO - Democrat In All But Label Only. It's
not one of those "socially liberal, fiscally conservative" bi-swinger deals - not when you're pro-"stimulus",
pro-cash-for-clunkers. And the reductive argument that her sole redeeming value - a willingness to vote for John Boehner as
Speaker - is reason enough to support her is silly in a special election. If he's ever Speaker, Boehner won't be till January
2011, and it's 12 months premature for Newt to be telling voters they need to suck it up and accept that a handful of Jim-Jeffords-in-embryo-form
are necessary for the Republican tide.
But beyond all that there's
now a competence issue: Since the cop-calling and its aftermath, the candidate has demonstrated that there is no case for
her whatsoever. At this stage in the nation's affairs, Washington doesn't need another incoherent buffoon insulated by a phalanx
of thin-skinned twerps already guarding her like a 30-year incumbent for whom routine questions are an outrageous form of
lèse-majesté. By any reasonable measure, this candidate is unworthy of a seat in the national legislature.
The tea parties and town halls
were a response not just to Obama but to the 2006/2008 GOP. If Dede Scozzafava wins, it's a loss - a serious loss - for those
voters who believe irresponsible spending by feckless federal mediocrities will deny future generations any shot at the American
Dream. If Doug Hoffman wins, as I believe he can, great. But, if he doesn't and the seat falls to the Dem, it will be a cautionary
tale for party leaders who, as in NY-23, make choices that confirm everything a disgruntled base thinks of them.
As for the actions of her campaign, one incident stands out. The
Editors of The Washington Times have the details [tip of the fedora to the great Quin Hillyer]:
...on Monday, Ms. Scozzafava moved even further left. A campaign spokesman in September had said the candidate opposes
proposed "card check" provisions that would eliminate secret ballots in union organizing elections, but a union-friendly
Web site reported on Monday that Ms. Scozzafava had told the AFL-CIO that she supports card check after all.
Understandably, Weekly Standard blogger John McCormack asked her after a speech Monday
night which reported position is accurate. After she confirmed her unfortunate solidarity with the union, Mr. McCormack tried
asking several other polite questions, but her staff hustled her away. When Mr. McCormack later spotted her in the parking
lot, he attempted to resume his questioning, but again was rebuffed - and the candidate and her team drove off.
No big deal, right? Mr. McCormack is by all accounts a mild-mannered and polite
young man. By his account, he sat in his car to file his report, only to be accosted a few minutes later by police in a vehicle
with flashing lights, asking for his name and address. Yes, police.
Ms.
Scozzafava's team had called the police on a reporter for asking basic, nonconfrontational questions. The next day, they smeared
Mr. McCormack as if he were a stalker. As Weekly Standard editor William Kristol dryly wrote, "It really would be better
not to start down the road of berating reporters for accurately reporting the facts, or of calling the police when your candidate
doesn't like the questions reporters are asking."
This brazen use of police
power to intimidate reporters is inexcusable. It alone disqualifies Ms. Scozzafava for office. It also indicts every major
Republican who stays on her team.
For whatever twisted reasoning, the national Republican Party
organization has decided to endorse Mz. Scozzafava, but the Republican Party is ultimately not the organization that oversees
its day-to-day operations, the Party is its members. As Stacy McCain puts it:
Here's what the so-called
"leaders" have got to get through their heads: The people are the party. Their votes, their volunteer efforts, and
their small contributions of campaign cash are the very lifeblood of the party.
If you can get to the District,
the Hoffman Campaign can use your help; if you can't make it, any level of donation would be a big help. This is the time to act. Help in the restoration of America.
Stacy's first report from New York can be found here. Here's what I think is the most important bit in it:
[Dick] Armey told them, "This is the big one." And it is. Like they said at Chicago in '68, the whole
world is watching. I told Jimmie [Bise] during our conversation that if Hoffman wins, his campaign here in NY23 will become
the template for hundreds of similar grassroots conservative campaigns nationwide at every level next year.
GET UP,
STAND UP, STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS GET UP, STAND UP, DON'T GIVE UP THE FIGHT
YOU CAN FOOL SOME PEOPLE SOMETIMES, BUT YOU CAN'T FOOL ALL THE PEOPLE ALL THE TIME. SO NOW WE SEE THE LIGHT (WHAT YOU GONNA DO?), WE GONNA STAND UP
FOR OUR RIGHTS! (YEAH, YEAH, YEAH!)
UPDATE: 1349hrs: I am not alone. So far all of these other folks have
called for Dede Scozzafava to pull out of the race...
-Jim Geraghty [He also Tweets that a good source has indicated to him that Sarah Palin will endorse Hoffman; let's hope. (tip of the fedora to Dave at
AOS)]
Either House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer is quite the ignoramus or is one of the
most arrogant members of the Congress [and it takes an awful lot of conceit and self-important feelings to be that].
From CNSNews, Matt Cover reporting:
Hoyer, speaking to reporters at his weekly press briefing on Tuesday, was asked
by CNSNews.com where in the Constitution was Congress granted the power to mandate that a person must by a health insurance
policy. Hoyer said that, in providing for the general welfare, Congress had “broad authority.”
“Well,
in promoting the general welfare the Constitution obviously gives broad authority to Congress to effect that end,” Hoyer
said. “The end that we’re trying to effect is to make health care affordable, so I think clearly this is within
our constitutional responsibility.”
Hoyer compared a health insurance mandate to the government’s power
to levy taxes, saying “we mandate other things as well, like paying taxes.”
...
CNSNews.com
also asked Hoyer if there is a limit to what Congress can mandate that Americans purchase and whether there is anything that
specifically could not be mandated to purchase. Hoyer said that eventually the Supreme Court would find a limit to Congress’
power, adding that mandates that unfairly favored one person or company over another would obviously be unconstitutional.
“I’m sure the [Supreme] Court will find a limit,” Hoyer said. “For instance, if we mandated
that you buy General Motors’ automobiles, I believe that would be far beyond our constitutional responsibility and indeed
would violate the Due Process Clause as well – in terms of equal treatment to automobile manufacturers.”
Hoyer said that the insurance mandate was constitutional because Congress is not forcing Americans to buy one particular
policy, just any health insurance policy.
“We don’t mandate that they buy a particular insurance [policy]
but what we do mandate is that like driving a car -- if you’re going to drive a car, to protect people on the roadway,
and yourself, and the public for having to pay your expenses if you get hurt badly – that you need to have insurance,”
said Hoyer.
Readers having shred #1 of common sense interpret Article 1, Section 8 of the
Constitution as giving a limited set of powers to Congress, as well as enough wiggle room to carry out those powers.
The subsequent Amendment 10 should have been a firewall against this Progressive Hoyer-hooey. But there sits Amendment 16:
Congress has eminent domain over YOUR WALLET. It's a century-old problem....
It's a century-old problem
of attitude and arrogance. It was the Progressives [ie: Leftists] who pushed through the Sixteenth Amendment and it
was they who were relentless in pushing a broad interpretation of it that has been accepted by many.
To any reasonable
person, however, there is no problem even with the Amendment sitting 'on the books' as it were: a broad interpretation of
it [or of any Amendment] is a violation of it because anything can pretty much be interpreted to satisfy your ends
[lawyers are very adept at this and that is one of the main reasons they are so despised in the main].
The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from
whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.
There is nothing in that Amendment that changes the limits on the power of the Congress as mandated in Article I.
It merely gives the legislative branch another source of income. To say, like this clown Hoyer does, that the Congress
has such a mandate is to interpret the Amendment as broadly as the fruited plains. To interpret any document so broadly
is to render it useless and frivolous because you have stripped it of any restricting power it may reasonably be said to have.
That is, of course, what the Left has always advocated. Since there are no absolute truths, there most certainly
can be no legitimate supreme law of the land. Every year is the Year One. The Left are engineers of a new social order who need the room to experiment as they go along, not be restricted by
any rules that could potentially prevent them from immanentizing the eschaton [bringing Heaven on Earth]—God forbid!
'Representative' Hoyer's attitude is shared by most of the Congress
and by this Administration. They must be stopped. They will not cease on their own [too committed are they to
their unrealistic bromides and unreasoned ideas], so it is up to us to rid ourselves of their plague. For that is what
they are: a deadly cancerous virus on the American Soul.
Oh, by the way...I would like to revise and extend
my opening remarks by inserting before the word 'ignoramus' the word 'cretinous' in describing Rep. Hoyer. So ordered
this twenty-second day of October in the Year of Our Lord two-thousand and nine.
Our elected officials have developed a bad habit of not listening to us and taking
the liberty to do whatever they want. They think they can’t be beaten. They think we won’t vote them out. They
think they can label us with bad names and marginalize us and we’ll all just roll over. They think wrong!
If Rush Limbaugh and Stacy McCain are racists, then you might as well mark me
down as one, too.
Me three. I AM RACICUS! [I tried]
Some more wisdom from this enterprising
gentleman:
Stacy and Rush Limbaugh are, I believe, important test cases in the
ongoing initiative by leftwing blogs (and, in Rush’s case at least, the dinosaur media) to isolate conservatives by
trying to tag them with the racism label. The combination of fake quotes, vague, allusive references, and blatant falsehoods
represents a smoke-bomb tossed into the dextrosphere in order to create confusion and distrust. It is a standard Alinsky tactic,
and we will probably be seeing far more of it as the struggle between radicals and mainstream America heads toward a series
of critical showdowns – on health care, Afghanistan, and cap-and-trade, among many other issues.
There's a disturbing report that has been published on conditions in the trenches
and at the homefront on the status of The War Against Fox News. The People's
Cubereports:
THE WHITE HOUSE - Despite the President's promise of a swift and decisive victory,
Obama's War on Fox News has developed all signs of an unwinnable quagmire, making the White House even more isolated in its
unilateral attempts to crush the growing media insurgency. As the war continues to grind on for a second month, public opinion
is shifting towards a quick and complete withdrawal. While many observers still agree that the "War on Limbaugh"
is a "just and necessary war," even the former supporters of the war effort are now labeling the War on Fox an "unnecessary
war of choice" and claim that the cable channel had nothing to do with Obama's falling approval numbers.
Some say that the general in charge, Anita Dunn, greatly underestimated the power of fiery critic Glenn "Muqtada"
Beck and his band of radical followers, who have inflicted heavy casualties on White House forces.
The war has
recently passed an ugly milestone as Obama's hand-picked czar Van Jones exploded in the middle of the battlefield littered
with pencils, notebooks, blackberries, and media tags, sending shockwaves of terror through the ranks of reporters in the
service of the administration.
...
At home, the numbers of mainstream media outlets sending troops to War on Fox News have dwindled. The most notably
absent is the New York Times, which has so far refused to enter the war. A stern-faced and combative President Obama, surrounded
by veterans of press corps and families of donors, denounced their action as an "act of treason," rejecting any
timetable on his war.
But while the President drapes his unpopular policies with concern for the well-being of
American journalism, more and more editors, reporters, and even unionized janitorial staff are beginning to oppose their commander-in-chief for trying to "win" an unwinnable war with their hands, instead of just using executive
powers to ban all dissenting speech.
"I've been in the media for a long time, I signed up because I hate this
right-wing, knuckle-dragging, imperialist system, and I would gladly sacrifice any number of my fellow Americans to advance
my agenda - but this is a dumb war and a rash war," Keith Olbermann of MSNBC told The People's Cube outside a congressional
office he visited to demand a government crackdown on dissidents. "Why must we in the field put our reputations on the
line when this Congress has the power to simply confiscate Rupert Murdoch's assets and put Beck, Hannity, and Coulter in jail?"
he demanded.
The election race in New York's 23rd Congressional District is turning out
to be the most fascinating of this election season. There is an open seat being contested by a Democrat, a Republican
RINO, and a Conservative Party member. Many are thinking this race is a microcosm, a taste if you will, of the battles
that will be waged in the bi-annual Congressional elections next year. I must say, I agree. You have a Obamaite
socialist, Bill Owens, carrying the Banner of the Ass Donkey. You have a ACORN-supporting, government
loving RINO, Dede Scozzafava, running under the Banner of the Stupid Party. And you have the Conservative Party
candidate Doug Hoffman, the underdog who is now surging thanks to the support of conservatives like Fred Thompson and
Michelle Malkin, and who is receiving help and donations from TEA Partiers. There are two fronts in this battle: the
radical Left versus the Americans and the Me-Too-I-Wanna-Be-Loved-By-The-Elites Republican Party Hack versus the conservative/libertarian
alliance.
Over at The American Spectator, Stacy McCain has up a very good report on the race so far. A highlight: However, Hoffman is battling against
major party candidates, with the national GOP spending hundreds of thousands of dollars for Scozzafava -- angering conservatives
like Michelle Malkin -- while the Democratic Party pours cash into the campaign coffers of its candidate, Bill
Owens. With high-profile supporters including Fred Thompson,
Dick Armey, Bill Kristol and the Club for Growth, the Hoffman campaign has become what John Gizzi of Human Eventscalls a "national conservative crusade." Conservatives have had their eye on the Hoffman campaign for weeks, but now major national media are finally taking
notice. "The race the nation should be watching is a special
election in upstate New York," Newsweekmagazine's David Graham wrote yesterday, saying the outcome would show "whether Democrats can hold on to voters who went for Obama in 2008."The question that has puzzled conservatives for weeks is how someone as
far left as Scozzafava -- who has in the past been supported by ACORN -- managed to get picked by the state GOP in this conservative district. Hoffman has said
Republican "party bosses, the lords of the backroom, made this selection."
Stacy has been raising money to go up there and apparently left a short while ago, so he'll be filing reports soon enough.
[I will link them here, but you can keep up by visiting his site, The Other McCain, as well.] He published a great posting before he left—another one of his shoe leather specials.
A choice bit:
...Going out on the road to cover a story reminds me of my glorious
younger days as a small-town sports editor, rolling down the highway en route to a big track meet or basketball tournament. That's just more fun than sitting around
an office all day, and I do better work when I'm having fun....
Over at American Power, Donald Douglas has the straight poop on Dalia Mogahed, who was appointed by our Messiah to be a member of His Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood
Partnerships. After you read what she has to say about how wonderfully women fare under Sharia Law, you'll
laugh until you cry.
She's just another clown [albeit in a burka] in the circus that is this Administration.
In answer to what I wrote in the posting WHAT BEN FRANKLIN SAID,
Eric Dondero, proprietor of the Libertarian Republican, wrote in the Comments section:
Except
from our Libertarian perspective Ms. Scazzofava is not nearly as bad as you Conservatives make her out to be. Yes, Hoffman
is better from our Libertarian perspective, but not by much. You all care that Hoffman is Pro-Life. Fine. I'm Pro-Choice.
So, on that score I side with Scazzofava. She's also quite good on Taxes. Again, Hoffman, overall is better. But not better
enough to justify the blatant hypocrisy of our sometimes Conservative allies. "Childish"? Fine. You can call me
that if you want. But I'm super, super, super pissed off over this whole situation. You Conservatives, are so goddamned hypocritical
on this. APOLOGIZE NOW FOR THE SEKULA-GIBBS FIASCO!!!
This
is my reply:
You once again seem to be calling for all conservatives to apologize for the sins of a few. I was
not involved in any way in the election in Texas of which you speak. I was not blogging back then, nor publishing my comments
in other people's comments sections. I vaguely recall some mentions of the race only from election night on Fox News. I have
nothing to apologize for in this case. I have been critical of libertarians since I started my blog in April or 2008, but
mostly over foreign policy matters where I have always been critical of them [check my archives]. Mr. Dondero, I can only
phrase it this way: I had no involvement in the slave trade, therefore, I have nothing to apologize to black people for. I
had no involvement in this election down in Texas [I was unaware of the controversy], therefore, I have nothing to apologize
for.
As for the Libertarian Party, so you understand where I
am coming from: I have voted for their candidates at the state and congressional level [the only levels where I have been
presented with Libertarians to vote for, other than for the Presidency]. In one instance, I did it to help them get official
ballot status for the next gubernatorial election and I was happy to do it [this was in the 1980's-and they made it, but then
blew it next time around]. As a very young lad, I even helped my brother deliver pamphlets for Roger McBride. I am more than
willing to vote for candidates from the Libertarian Party if the choices of the other two parties are, to paraphrase Harry
Truman, 'between a Democrat and a 'Democrat''. Am I guilty of the sin of voting for a bad Republican because I thought him
or her the lesser of two evils and having ignored the Libertarian Party candidate? Yes, guilty as charged. Before the takeover
of the national government by the radical and committed Leftists that now run it, many of us had that luxury and did it, rightly
or wrongly, out of a belief that 'half a loaf is better than none'. We had the luxury back before 20 January 2009. [I feel
now that I was wrong not to have held to a higher standard as I was so vocal over the years in railing against the creeping
statism that I believed was slowly destroying America.] It should also be noted that many of us voted for the like of George
W. Bush the second time because we believed [quite rightly] that, despite his many leftward leanings, he would fight the War
in a reasonable matter. Such a consideration ultimately out-weighed all others at that point.
Libertarians and conservatives have been battling for years, most especially over the social
issues. The abortion issue is one great example where there has been a great deal of disagreement. It has, from my observation,
caused a lot of ill feelings between the two sides. However, this is one of the areas where conservatives and libertarians
can, actually, work together. Let me digress for just a moment.
I am saying we should be allies in this struggle, not merge-neither group should lose its soul. We should join together
to take over the Republican Party and, once that is achieved, we should have our own friendly camps within the Party where
we join on certain issues and agree to disagree [courteously] on others. We have in common a love of what America stands for.
We should ally. The TEA Party's have shown that this can be done. When you look at the pictures of the protestors you see
all the shades of the Right standing together, united in a common cause.
Back to abortion: the issue illustrates exactly what I am talking about. Conservatives and libertarians agree that the national
government should not be involved in the abortion issue, that it should be left up to the states to decide the legality or
illegality of the practice [I know, there is a conservative faction that would have the U.S. government get involved, but,
frankly they are so small, they can be ignored-or perhaps persuaded to see the light by other conservatives]. Here we can
join to overturn federal involvement in abortion law. Once this is achieved, the pro-life and pro-choice forces can battle
it out on the state level [courteously].
There are issues where
we will stay joined in the fight at all governmental levels and there are ones where we will battle at one or more. We can
keep it civil if we try. Not all will and, when that happens, both camps have to move quickly to denounce the offenders or
persuade them to make amends. It will not be easy, but we have to try.
A key to such an alliance working will be to get rid of the deadwood on both sides. Many, many conservatives are ticked-off
at the GOP establishment for its attitude towards conservatives. We have been subject to constant ridicule, harassment, and
ignoring. The answer is not to grab our marbles and go home, rather, we've got to work to get rid of the aristocrats and their
minions. A good shunning is in order. You libertarians have to do the same thing too.
I was glad to see that you wrote [here] the following:
Payback's a
bitch. But as for me, this will be only a one time deal.
Next 3rd Party Conservative comes along, I'll support them in such a circumstance.
Good, that tells me this one act will get it out of your system,
but then you said:
I'd support
Hoffman right now, if Erickson and the RedState guys would formally apologize to us Libertarians for Smither.
You sacrifice a solid right wing vote in the Congress, for a disagreement you
have with Red State? An organization that Hoffman is not even a member of? You will curse him for the sins
of others? I beg you to reconsider going off half-cocked like this. I empathize with how you feel, having been a conservative
member of the GOP in the Northeast for over thirty years [RINO's everywhere like zombies! Argggh!].
We have a grand potential here to work together to save this country from TYRANNY.
If any of the members of either group, or their sub-groups, are going to resort to such destructive actions, then the Republic
is doomed [believe me, I've taken such actions and they brought nothing but damage]. I like the way oldcrow put it in your comments section:
That is the socialist train a comin and it will run us over and leave a mangled corpse behind it, if you love freedom
and the greatness of this country we need to unite, once we get the liberals out of power then we can argue over it.
I say again: We have to put aside all bad feelings, we libertarians
and conservatives, and work together or we shall all hang [by the Leftist made rope] separately.
Western Civilization is dying in Europe. Many of us do not want to see
that happen [or see it occur anywhere The West lives, for that matter]. Western Civilization has brought freedom,
liberty, and prosperity to the world. At its core used to be a religion that is the light and hope of the world
[it still is in America], but, at the same time, The West has been the only civilization that has promoted religious toleration
under law.
Many of us have been cheered in recent years by the elections of more conservative governments in some
European counties. These more right-ward governments are not as far Right as we would like, and would actually be considered
RINO in America, but they have been steps in the right [pun intended] direction.
However, whatever middling good
news there has been has been trumped by the fact that the stealth Muslim invasion of Europe proceeds apace, with only small
pockets of resistence. But there too, it must be admitted, more are waking up to the threat of Islam than have before.
So, perhaps, this is a good sign.
All of the positive things mentioned above will all be for naught if The
Lisbon Treaty is implemented. What is that you say? Over at The Gormogons, The Czar
Of Muscovy has the details. A highlight:
Pay close attention to the Lisbon
treaty, as it is bad, bad, bad for America and the world.
It creates the foundation for a single, European country
run by liberal progressivism.
Believe it. It establishes a president of Europe (with wiggly ferret Tony Blair as
the leading candidate), and wider powers to a European parliament. It makes European Union treaties, contracts, charters,
and whatnot all legally binding for member nations. And while there is no official requirement for member states to ditch
their individual flags, it does require that they adopt the EU flag and swear allegiance to it (underneath their own, of course,
but still).
One quibble with the mighty Czar: he uses the term 'liberal
progressivism'. For accuracies sake, I would strike the word 'liberal' and replace it with 'Leftist'.
GET UP, STAND UP, STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS [Updated below @ 1401 hours]
The Leftists in Washington have taken effective control of the media [minus the
dastardly and unprofessional Fox News] and are working towards consolidating this power through regulations
and possible legislation. And they are trying to control the content of radio station broadcasts, as well. If
you thought they would stop there, then you must be on something. Face the fact: they will grab as much control [and,
therefore, power] as they can. No grab is too small for these totalitarians. So, did you think the Internet would
be left alone? As Capital Confidential reports over at Big Government:
On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission will consider “a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on policies
to preserve the open Internet.” That’s a long way of saying that the FCC, led by Julius Genachowski, Obama’s
old friend from Harvard Law School, will take its first steps towards forcing through net neutrality, a controversial policy
that critics say would amount to a government takeover of the internet.
Surprised? No, I didn't think
the regular readers of TCOTS would be.
There is some hope that conservatives and libertarians
won't be fighting this battle alone, as the same report reports:
But, with concerns
that the FCC might now act to push net neutrality through, some voices less traditionally associated with opposition to the
policy are speaking out regarding the proposed rulemaking, too. In fact, a number of Democrats and groups typically
aligned with the left—the online component of which has long treated net neutrality as a top three policy objective—seem
to be feeling less than warm and fuzzy about increased government intervention with regard to the internet.
What with the moves to control radio station content and this, it would seem the FCC has become one of the most dangerous
organizations in the national government. Speak up and speak out while you can.
UPDATE at 1401hrs: Over at Red State, Neil Stevens
has up a very good short primer[with great links] on why 'Net Neutrality' is a dangerous endeavour. Here's just one of the reasons:
Well, here's a shocker: another lover of Chairman Mao has been discovered to be
part of this Administration. In this case, its Ron Bloom, Manufacturing Czar and former top echelon thug with SEIU.
The Gateway Pundit has a video clip and some details of what the red lover said, but here's a quote:
We kind of agree with Mao that
power comes largely from the barrel of a gun.
As Jim Hoft comments:
Doesn’t
that make you feel secure?
I just hope—I know, the chances are not good—that this revelation
will finally make sensible people understand that this Administration is filled to the brim with socialists, fascists,
Marxists, Leninists, Trotskyites, Stalinists, and Maoists.
The elusive Paco of Paco Enterprises has done it again and obtained
a transcript some conversatin' in The White House between Underboss Rahm 'Twinkle Toes' Emanuel and Consigliere David
'The Lardbutt' Axelrod. A highlightin' as it were:
David Axelrod: Ya know,
Mr. Emanuel, de more I t’ink about it, de more it seems like Fox Nooz is jus’ a bunch a’ right-wing shills.
Rahm Emanuel: Oh, f****n’ A, Mr. Axelrod! Why, Glenn Beck is pra’tically
a Joseph Goobles. An’ dat Krauthammer boid; I’d sure like to give himde Tommy Udo treatment! Still, dey
got some hot babes....
Its time once again to thank all of those who linked to the TCOTS Rule
5 postings over the past week and to recommend some of the best Rule 5'ing that's been posted out
in the ether over the same time period.
-The capo di tutti capi of Rule 5 and Commander of the RFTO [Rule
5 Theatre of Operations] Smitty has done his usual great job, over at The Other McCain, especially considering he linked to five TCOTS postings.
Thanks ,good friend. [Don't forget to check out his serialized masterpiece Czar D'Oz
by clicking on the links in the upper right-hand corner of this page].
-The Classic Liberaloffers the many sides [and sights] of Rachael Leigh Cook, along with some fine philosophizin'. TheCl was
his usual commonly good self and gave us much linky love. Thanks much Mike. You are THE Thinking Man's Rule
5'er. Also, he celebrated his birthday earlier in the week with a special Rule 5posting that featured a number of lovely ladies [Miss Egypt is my favorite] and some top-notch food for thought. He also
gave us some all-American linky love and we are quite grateful for that, America, and The Classic Liberal.
-Three Beers Later serves up the delicious Senta Berger and, in conjunction with the TCOTS Sophia Loren posting, serves an appetizer of one restaurant's tribute to the ageless beauty. We are well sated, thanks.
-Over at Eye Of Polyphemus,
Jamie Jeffords treated us to the delightful Jenna Fischer, a contemplative Ashley Tisdale, and the lovely back of Amy Adams.
-Two's company, three's a crowd, but an all gal orchestra is all right with me: Paco provides the music with Thelma White and Her All Girl Orchestra.
-Over at America's Open Forum, Sal the Octogenarian thinks he's found the perfect Presidential candidate.
-The Amused Cynic has a go-go girl in a glass cage dancing to one of the greatest bands EVAH, The Sonics. He features them doing the classic, Psycho A Go-Go.
Now here's the greatest song The Sonics ever did:
-Time to head on over to Theo Spark's joint for a Bedtime Totty.
I have been advocating since The Anointed One won last Fall that libertarians
and conservatives have to work together to support candidates who are committed to some core principles shared by both groups
and their variants. Separately, we do not have the votes or power to take back the national government from the grubby
hands of the radical Leftists now in power. Stacy McCain and others have been advocating very strongly for the same
thing too, for longer than I have.
This past Saturday, Stacy made the plea regarding the race in New York's 23rd
Congressional District. It is an open seat being contested by a Democrat, a Republican RINO, and a Conservative Party
member. The national GOP and others [like Newt Gingrich] are supporting the RINO. Many conservatives, TEA Party
folks, and people like Erick Erickson of Red Stateare supporting the Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman.
Many libertarians are going to either sit on their hands [and wallets] or are supporting the RINO, partially as a payback
for a 2006 Congressional race in Texas. In his posting, Stacy tries to convince the libertarians to put aside such feelings
and support Mr. Hoffman. A highlight:
Whatever happens in the future, or whatever happened in the past, it is absolutely
vital in this time of crisis that all friends of liberty focus laser-like on doing now the things that must be
done now. I can't fix what went wrong in 2006 and, if there is still any bad blood between my friends Dondero and Erickson,
I don't have time to negotiate an armistice.
There are now 17 days until Nov. 3. Let us lay aside everything incidental
and focus all our efforts on doing what must be done now, or our common cause is surely doomed.
Dead.
Solid. Perfect. Stacy's absolutely correct.
Eric Dondero, of the Libertarian Republican,
responded in Stacy's comment section this way [quoted in full; emphasis mine]:
I cannot believe that me - a staunch Rightwing Libertarian -
is on the same side of the Nation's most well-known Leftwing Libertarian Thomas "Knappster" Knapp on this.
You see what you've done Conservatives? You've royally pissed off us Libertarians to the point that the two most passionate
spokesman for the opposite wings of the Libertarian movement, are on the same side of this political battle.
Y'all's
blatant hypocrisy has done this to us.
Let me say straight out: I have absolutely nothing against Mr. Hoffman.
He seems like a fine candidate. (In this Knapp and I disagree.)
What I have a problem with is the damned double
standard you Conservatives are taking on this race.
You screwed us Libertarians royally back in 2006 with Bob Smither.
We had the perfect candidate. We gave you Conservatives the perfect opportunity to once and for all throw your Libertarian
buddies a bone.
And Smither was no "whacky Libertarian" drug legalizer, prostituion-seeker type. He leaned
heavily to the Conservative end of the Libertarian spectrum: Pro-Life, Christian, Crime Victim's advocate, local Hero (his
daughter had been brutally murdered by a local Houston douche-bag which sparked a city-wide volunteer effort to hunt for her
body.)
No, we Libertarians especially us Rightwing Libertarians would be most inclined to support Hoffman in this
race.
But payback's a bitch.
We'll support Scazzofava just on the principle of the thing.
Unless you all come forward right now and pledge to your Libertarian friends, that in the future you will give greater
consideration to Libertarian Party candidates in such special circumstances, than I - as the titular head of the Rightwing
Libertarian movement - will happily join in with my Leftwing Libertarian buddy and sometimes foe Tom Knapp to publicly and
enthusiastically endorse DeDe Scazzofava for Congress.
Eric Dondero, Publisher Libertarian Republican Fmr.
Senior Aide, US Cong. Ron Paul 1996-2003 Founder, Republican Liberty Caucus Fmr. Libertarian National Committee
member 25+ Year Libertarian Party member
[see also, Mr. Dondero's posting on this subject at his own
site here]
Mr. Dondero that kind of attitude is childish. What will your payback get you?
On a petty point, you're willing to let the Left score a triumph--the same people that are, as we speak, seeking to destroy
everything this country stands for.
One reason many have been reluctant in the past to throw support behind
Libertarian candidates is because, in fact, it has usually been the 'sell the streets' types who have run for office [my brother
was actively involved in the Party in the Northeast from the late '70's through the mid-90's and I attended many an event].
That has changed, and, I must say, I've been very happy about that. Libertarians keep conservatives honest; conservatives
keep libertarians feet on the ground. We also now, unlike in 2006, are facing the greatest threat to our freedoms and liberties
since the Founding. We have to put aside all bad feelings, we libertarians and conservatives, and work together or we shall
all hang separately.
There is no principle involved in supporting a RINO. There is a principle involved in saving
America from the destructive force of the Left.
The Battle Rages On...
To paraphrase Barry Goldwater:
It's time to grow-up right wingers!
Many months back in the TERMS Section of the lower right-hand
column of this page, I published a somewhat lengthy definition of Fascism. But Doug Ross has now published a nice, neat, and short definition—with pictures!—that explains it very
well.
Ever feel like you as an individual cannot make a difference? That the problems
confronting America are beyond your individual efforts? That what little you can do will just be a drop in a vast ocean
and ultimately be for naught? I have felt this way many times over the years. Stacy McCain ain't buying it:
Whenever I am invited to speak to gatherings of conservative activists, there
is always that moment afterwards when someone will ask the two eternal questions:
“What the heck is wrong with those Republicans in Washington?”
“What can I do to make a difference?”
Having come to Washington in 1997 at age 38 as a fairly new-minted conservative (as late as 1992,
I was an enthusiastic Democrat with a Clinton-Gore bumper sticker on my ‘78 Chevy Impala), I’ve figured out a
lot about Eternal Question No. 1. The problems of the Beltway GOP infrastructure are complex and deep-rooted, but what’s
basically wrong with the national Republican leadership can be summed up in a single word: “Everything!”
As to Eternal Question No. 2, the answer is similarly simple. If you
ask me what you can do to change things, I will tell you to begin by doing what you can.
One of the problems
that hinders grassroots activists from making a difference is that they see problems so big that they think to themselves,
“What’s the point? I’m just one person. I’m not important. Why waste my time? There’s nothing
I can do anyway.”
Such a self-defeating attitude is a guaranteed formula for failure. If you don’t
believe you can do anything, well, it’s a safe bet that you won’t do anything. On
the other hand, if you will seek out opportunities to do whatever little things you can do, you might be surprised how
much you accomplish.
Being the Number One Cynical SOB, I tend to discount such words, but I must
admit that now is the best chance for what Stacy advocates to work. We've been shown the power we individuals hold at
TEA Parties and townhalls around the country. The momentum is with us and if we all put a shoulder in, we have, I think,
a decent chance of moving the load. [Stacy offers a suggestion on someone we can help here]
Two good people offer ideas on how to approach this. I haven't made up my mind fully on the merits of what
they suggest, so I'll just highlight what they've got to say and link them for you...
-Rep. Thaddeus McCotter: Despite the parallels, one significant difference exists: The Greatest
Generation faced their challenges consecutively; our Global Generation faces our challenges simultaneously. To transcend these challenges,
our Global Generation’s Republicans will lead. Amidst a communications revolution that empowers people to extents
undreamt, we understand America’s indispensible role in the 21st Century is to continue proving and expanding the ability
of human beings to self-govern and control their destinies. The
antithesis of the Left’s antiquated statism that usurps self-government to empower big government, Republicans realize
the decentralization of communications and its concomitant empowerment of individuals must be matched by a decentralization
of government that equally empowers individuals. Pursuing this
imperative goal, we will conserve our cherished way of life and its foundations of faith, family, community and country; and
empower Americans to channel the constructive change needed to transcend our quartet of transformational challenges. In this noble, necessary service, Global Generation Republicans are guided by our party’s
five enduring principles:
1.
Our liberty is from God not the government;
2.
Our sovereignty is in our souls not the soil;
3.
Our security is from strength not surrender;
4.
Our prosperity is from the private sector not the public sector; and
5. Our truths are self-evident not relative.
Understanding “politics is the art of the possible,”
we embrace our members’ variety of opinions regarding the application of these principles to contemporary challenges;
and we never forget that the Left disdains our five enduring principles. Therefore, we do not mimic Leftists’
intellectual rigidity and internecine purges, because they are an anarchic luxury America can ill-afford in this chaotic age.
...“Politics is choice. Politics is not top down, politics is bottom up.”
Ask yourself, do you really want the Republican Party to win? Or is it something else you really want, like liberty?
Because if you really want to beat back the ever growing State, you as an individual have to accept and adopt the
classical liberal philosophy that you are in charge, not the government or its politicians. You support what you really want.
Period. Come hell or high water.
...
Politics, particularly in America, is about you the individual.
And that’s true for each and every one of us. Politics is not about the “party.” It’s about you keeping
the fruits of your labor and living in peace, pursuing your own thing, without the threat of petty government abuse.
'This one was worth
the fight. And it's only one fight in the battle, and we have to keep fighting.' —Doug
Hoffman
The Restoration will not be televised; it will be blogged. —Robert Belvedere
Click The Picture Above For The Latest Updates/Linkage
'Bob Belvedere may have the best compilationof IG-Gate information.' —Robert Stacy McCain
'Robert Belvedere at The Camp
of the Saints appears to be maintaining the definitive index of all things PIG-gate...at TCOTS. ...This is an excellent resource.
We thank you, sir.' —Smitty
'More great commentary and juicy
links on l'affaire IG from Camp of the Saints..' —Paco
Click here and here to find out why I think Robert Stacy McCain is THE CONSERVATIVE
SHAFT
MY KENYAN BIRTH CERTIFICATE
Please Click on the Image to View Full Size
Please click on the image above to learn more from Michelle Malkin.
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
T E R M S
Let us make precise and clear-cut the terms we should be using.
Aristotle wrote that A is A; you may also call it B, but
it always remains A. A thing is what it is and, to say it is something else, is to deny reality. There is a lot of denial
of reality going around these days.
As John Adams wrote: 'Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes,
our inclinations, the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence'.
POINT 1:There is no "War in Iraq"
or "War in Afghanistan".Like the Pacific and Europe in World War II, Iraq and Afghanistan are
just parts of a larger war.Unlike them, they are not separate from each other.Therefore,
they are part of the Middle East Theatre of Operations [METO] as the Pacific was the PTO and Europe the ETO.
POINT 2: Many on the Left and some on the Right want to "end
the War".There are only two ways to end a war: (1) by achieving Victory or (2) by being Defeated.A pullout, before Victory is achieved, is Defeat.They want Defeat.Pullout may
be the best policy―I am not arguing that here―but, leaving without achieving our objective is Defeat.
POINT 3: We are engaged in a War Against Islam.
The term is more correct than "War against Islamo-Fascism" or "War On Terror".
Islam has been at war with all non-Muslims since the
time of its founder, Muhammad [his name be cursed].Like the Hundred Years' War, there have been periods
of peace in this long conflict, but the Muslim has never stopped believing that he is at war with all non-Muslims.He can't: Allah commands that all of the world be conquered in his name and he must submit, in all things, to the
will of Allah [the word Islam means "submission", sometimes rendered as "surrender"].Any
periods of peace we in the West have enjoyed have only occurred after we have dealt them such a devastating blow that they
have not been able to wage their jihad and then have pursued polices that have kept them subjugated.This
began to fade in the latter half of the 20th Century as we forgot the dangers posed by this militant religion and
as they regrouped under new and committed leaders.
If you
doubt that Islam is at war with all non-Muslims, keep in mind this: Islamic apologists
often point out that Islam is not a monolith and that there are differences of opinion among the different Islamic schools
of thought. That is true, but, while there are differences, there are also common elements. Just as Orthodox, Roman Catholic,
and Protestant Christians differ on many aspects of Christianity, still they accept important common elements. So it is with
Islam. One of the common elements to all Islamic schools of thought is jihad, understood as the obligation of the Ummah to
conquer and subdue the world in the name of Allah and rule it under Sharia law. The four Sunni Madhhabs (schools of fiqh [Islamic
religious jurisprudence]) -- Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi'i, and Hanbali -- all agree that there is a collective obligation on
Muslims to make war on the rest of the world. Furthermore, even the schools of thought outside Sunni orthodoxy, including
Sufism and the Jafari (Shia) school, agree on the necessity of jihad. When it comes to matters of jihad, the different schools
disagree on such questions as whether infidels must first be asked to convert to Islam before hostilities may begin (Osama
bin Laden asked America to convert before Al-Qaeda’s attacks); how plunder should be distributed among victorious jihadists;
whether a long-term Fabian strategy against dar al-harb is preferable to an all-out frontal attack; etc.
They have been at war with us for
centuries and we, therefore, have been at war with them.We are engaged in a War Against Islam whether
we want to say so or not.In an interview with a Pakistani TV network on 23 July 2008, Mustafa Abu Al-Yazid,
Al-Qaeda's No. 3 man and top commander in Afghanistan, has this to say: “Islam does not distinguish between the
American people and the American government, since both are in a state of war with Islam”.
POINT 4: The term "Islamo-Fascism" seems
to have been created by Leftists.Since (1) they wrongly place fascism on the Right, (2) they believe [rightly]
Muslims want to establish a theocratic regime on Earth, and (3) anything political that has any connection with religion is
bad and emanates out of rightwing thinking, the term makes sense to them.Therefore, the term is nothing
but a way to associate Islam with the right-wing.Muslims believe in a totalitarian way of governing; in
submission [that word] to an all-powerful Islamic leader or leaders.
POINT 5: As to the term "War On Terror",
it is just plain silly: how can you wage war on a thing?
POINT 6: What is fascism? It is when a government
allows private property to exist, but controls and manages the use and disposal of property in all its forms. Citizens
retain all of the burdens and responsibilities associated with property ownership, but are not allowed to control and shape
its use.
As an economic system, fascism is socialism with a capitalist veneer. The word derives from fasces, the Roman symbol of collectivism and power: a tied
bundle of rods with a protruding ax. In its day (the 1920s and 1930s), fascism was seen as the happy medium between boom-and-bust-prone
liberal capitalism, with its alleged class conflict, wasteful competition, and profit-oriented egoism, and revolutionary Marxism, with its violent and socially divisive persecution of the bourgeoisie. Fascism substituted the particularity of nationalism
and racialism—“blood and soil”—for the internationalism of both classical liberalism and Marxism.
Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through
direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally
private owners. Where socialism nationalized property explicitly, fascism did so implicitly, by requiring owners to use their
property in the “national interest”—that is, as the autocratic authority conceived it. (Nevertheless, a
few industries were operated by the state.) Where socialism abolished all market relations outright, fascism left the appearance
of market relations while planning all economic activities. Where socialism abolished money and prices, fascism controlled
the monetary system and set all prices and wages politically. In doing all this, fascism denatured the marketplace. Entrepreneurship was abolished. State ministries, rather than consumers, determined what was produced and under what conditions. [Source: Sheldon Richman, The Concise Encylcopedia Of Economics,
Liberty Fund, found at http://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Fascism.html]
On the political spectrum, therefore, it is located between modern liberalism
and socialism.
POINT 7: What is socialism? It is when a government
allows no private property to exist, and controls and manages the use and disposal of property in all its forms.
Citizens are not allowed to control their lives and are subject to the whims of bureaucrats and officials. If they
retain freedoms and liberties, they do so at the discretion of them. On the political spectrum, therefore, it
is the next logical stage after fascism; some would argue that it lies between fascism and communism.
POINT 8: What is pragmatism? It is a tool used by Leftists,
or those operating under the influence of Leftist logic, to achieve Utopian ends—heaven on earth through social, political,
cultural, and spiritual engineering. It is merely a tool of ideology, part of the means to an end.
POINT 9:The Big Lie - When confronted with truths that reflect
unpleasantly on them, the Leftists deflect it buy claiming over-an-over ad nauseum that these truths apply to and are products
of the Right. This practice is known as The Big Lie. It has been successfully practiced by the
Left since, at the very least, the French Revolution. Thus, we have the now-widespread belief that the Nazis and the
Black Shirts of Italy were right-wingers when the reality-the truth-is they were both people of the Left. I suspect
the violent objections from the Left to conservatives use of the term 'fascist' arise from the fact that they have spent well
over seventy years trying to convince the world of The Big Lie that it is not and never has been a Leftist
ideology.
How does one practice this distortion truth and why is it effective? In a report issued during
World War II by the OSS, the author provided an explanation for all practitioners by describing how Hitler practiced it:
His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault
or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame;
concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than
a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.
By repeating
their lies over and over, the Left creates a false reality that supplements the real world. In this false reality, the
lie is the truth, the truth is the lie. A is not A. [But we know that A must always be A.]
The Left
also practices a variation of The Big Lie that I like to call The Big Deception which involves
a Big Deflection away from the reality of the situation. None of their policies or actions can survive
direct questioning, so the Leftists must turn the tables on the questioners and make it seem as though the inquisitors have
bad or evil intentions. Overtime and after constant and unrelenting hectoring, the Left's way of thinking triumphs.
They successfully infect enough people so that this diseased mode of thinking becomes chronic, deep-rooted, instinctual. If
the Devil's greatest triumph was that he convinced people he did not exist, the Left's greatest triumph has been to convince
people that the Leftist way of thinking is normal. It is not. It is a perversion of reason and a horribly mutant
form of logic. It is antithetical to human life. Nothing but decay and destruction are left [pun intended] in it's wake.
What They're Saying
About BOB BELVEDERE & The Camp Of The Saints...
'You are contributing to a noble yet futile cause -- the butchification of metrosexuals. TCOTS
roolz!' —Red—
'[H]e takes retro dame blogging to a new, narrative noir level.' —Smitty—
'Staunch Rule 5 aficionado Bob Belvedere, is shameless indeed (I have so much respect for this man)!' —The Classic Liberal—
'Who knew he was such a fan of the undead?' —Smitty—
'We need fighters, and I suspect Beck will fight 'til ev'ry foe is vanquished. Bob Belvedere gets it. Phyllis Chesler gets it. We defend truth and
liberty against lies and tyranny. Every eye is upon us and we are surrounded by enemies as numerous as the grains of sand
on the shore. Let us determine to die here, and we will conquer. WOLVERINES!' —Stacy McCain—
'Bob Belvedere, you're a nasty piece of work.' —Anonymous—
'Lord Fatheringay von Whoopsie of the Dung Heap Hooter' —Anon. —
"...Satan shall be loosed out of his prison and shall go out
to deceive the nations which are in the four quarters of the earth...to gather them together to battle: the number of whom
is as the sand of the sea. And they went up on the breadth of the earth, and encompassed the Camp
of the Saints...and the Beloved City: and the fire came down from God out of heaven, and devoured them...."
2) 
There's more of this kind of 
Soupy Sales, a comic with a gift for slapstick who attained cult-like popularity in the 1960s with a pie-throwing routine
that became his signature, has died. He was 83.
Some say that the general in charge, Anita Dunn, greatly underestimated the power of fiery critic Glenn "Muqtada"
Beck and his band of radical followers, who have inflicted heavy casualties on White House forces.
oppose their commander-in-chief for trying to "win" an unwinnable war with their hands, instead of just using executive
powers to ban all dissenting speech.
