Wednesday, April 28, 2010
This say everything you need to know about the agenda of the MSM and the intelligence of its perpetrators.
Thanks to theblogprof.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
The Language of Love
They're a bit overboard on this language thing, however.
Not Even in South Park?
Russ Douthat - NYT
This is what decadence looks like: a frantic coarseness that “bravely” trashes its own values and traditions, and then knuckles under swiftly to totalitarianism and brute force.'South Park' and the Informal Fatwa
Ayaan Hirsi Ali - WSJ
...do stories of Muhammad where his image is shown as much as possible. These stories do not have to be negative or insulting, they just need to spread the risk. The aim is to confront hypersensitive Muslims with more targets than they can possibly contend with.RTWTs
Another important advantage of such a campaign is to accustom Muslims to the kind of treatment that the followers of other religions have long been used to. After the "South Park" episode in question there was no threatening response from Buddhists, Christians and Jews...
Monday, April 26, 2010
If we don't act like inconsiderate jerks, the terrorists will have won!
He describes an epiphany on the subject, occasioned by an Ann Althouse post. I extensively quote Mr. Taranto's thoughts here because I have reactions to many of them.
The "South Park" Muhammad meshugass in turn inspired a joke that is being taken too seriously. MyNorthwest.com, the Web site of three Seattle radio stations, reports that Seattle cartoonist Molly Norris "wanted to counter the fear. She has declared May 20th 'Everybody Draw Mohammed Day.' " The story reproduces Norris's strip, which depicts an anthropomorphic teacup declaring, "I am the real likeness of Mohammad" and other household items--a cherry, a domino, a spool of thread--claiming that, no, they are the prophet's image.First of all, "Everybody draw Mohammed Day" could be a joke if death threats weren't involved. However, that isn't the case, and self-censorship is not how we encourage moderate Muslims living in our culture to speak out against their fanatic co-religionists. What's the message for moderates? What's the message for the fanatics?
Blogress Ann Althouse notes that commentators across the political spectrum--Glenn Reynolds, HotAir.com, Dan Savage, Reason magazine--are endorsing the idea, apparently in all seriousness. Which prompts an update to the MyNorthwest.com story:
After the massive response to the cartoon Norris posted this on her website:
I make cartoons about current, cultural events. I made a cartoon of a "poster" entitled "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day!" with a nonexistent group's name--Citizens Against Citizens Against Humor--drawn on the cartoon also. I did not intend for my cartoon to go viral. I did not intend to be the focus of any "group." I practice the first amendment by drawing what I wish. This particular cartoon of a "poster" seems to have struck a gigantic nerve, something I was totally unprepared for. I am going back to the drawing table now!
Our reflexive response to "Everybody Draw Mohammad Day"--which we too thought was serious, not having seen Norris's cartoon or her disclaimer--was sympathetic. But Althouse prompted us to reconsider. Here is her objection:Depictions of Muhammad offend millions of Muslims who are no part of the violent threats. In pushing back some people, you also hurt a lot of people who aren't doing anything. . . ....Until 1989, it was a crime in some states to burn the American flag as a political statement. In Texas v. Johnson the U.S. Supreme Court held that this is protected symbolic speech. In ensuing years members of Congress repeatedly tried to propose a constitutional amendment permitting the criminalization of flag burning. It is the view of this column that flag burning is and should remain protected speech. We deplore it nonetheless, and we think holding an "Everybody Burn the Flag Day" would be stupid, obnoxious and counterproductive if one seeks to persuade others that flag burning should be tolerated.
I don't like the in-your-face message that we don't care about what other people hold sacred. ...
At the same time, real artists like the "South Park" guys or (maybe) Andre Serrano should go on with their work, using shock to the extent that they see fit. Shock is an old artist's move. Epater la bourgeoisie. Shock will get a reaction, and it will make some people mad. They are allowed to get mad. That was the point. Of course, they'll have to control their violent impulses.
People need to learn to deal with getting mad when they hear or see speech that enrages them, even when it is intended to enrage them. But how are we outsiders to the artwork supposed to contribute the the [sic] process of their learning how to deal with free expression?
...[W]e would not endorse or participate in an "Everybody Shout a Racial Slur Day" or an "Everybody Deny the Holocaust Day" to make the point.
Why is "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" different? Because the taboo against depictions of Muhammad is not a part of America's common culture. The taboos against flag burning, racial slurs and Holocaust denial are. The problem with the "in-your-face message" of "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" is not just that it is inconsiderate of the sensibilities of others, but that it defines those others--Muslims--as being outside of our culture, unworthy of the courtesy we readily accord to insiders. It is an unwise message to send, assuming that one does not wish to make an enemy of the entire Muslim world.
Second, the question of racial slurs and Holocaust denial are trademarks of those very Islamist fundamentalists being defended because of their association with Muslims who neither foam at the mouth, nor open it to complain about their brethren.
If fanatic Muslims can say these things in America, I'll be damned if I'll accept the idea we can't say they are idiots. If they can enforce this and other death penalty offenses in their own countries then they live in inferior cultures, and I'll be damned if I'll encourage them to intimidate ours.
Third, for Taranto's main analogy to hold we would be talking about death threats over a drawing of somebody burning our flag. Tangentially, we might consider the insult to our culture they display in stomping on our flag. It's a bigger deal for them than burning, as I understand it.
Fourth, I would say of flag burning, as has SCOTUS, "Get over it."
Fifth, maybe the "millions of Muslims who are no part of the violent threats" should push back on those Muslims who are part of violent threats. That way Islam might only be subjected to the same frequency and intensity of ridicule that every other religion has experienced at the hands of South Park. Oh, wait, that would be a lot worse wouldn't it?
Sixth, May 20th is still “Everybody Draw Mohammed Day” even if the originator of the idea has withdrawn from fear of beheading.
Finally, we don't, in fact, "care about what other people hold sacred," when it arises from the same spirit and intellectual rigor as voodoo. We do insist, "[T]hey'll have to control their violent impulses." And why should they not control their violent impulses whether the offender is a "real" artist or not?
We can burn our own flag because that only offends some of us, but we'd better not be offending others to whom we offer the privilege of burning our flag and protection for calling us infidels who deserve to die.
"The problem with the "in-your-face message" of "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" is not just that it is inconsiderate of the sensibilities of others, but that it defines those others--Muslims--as being outside of our culture, unworthy of the courtesy we readily accord to insiders." Yes it does define those who advertise, or acquiesce to, the idea that a drawing is worthy of death as "outside our culture." What's wrong with that?
If we grant the power to ridicule, then we grant the power to ridicule. That's how it is in our culture. As Mark Steyn points out:
...In a more culturally confident age, the British in India were faced with the practice of "suttee" - the tradition of burning widows on the funeral pyres of their husbands. Gen. Sir Charles Napier was impeccably multicultural:Instead of cultural confidence, we have Ann Althouse writing this:
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: When men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks, and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."
In pushing back some people, you also hurt a lot of people who aren't doing anything (other than protecting their own interests by declining to pressure the extremists who are hurting the reputation of their religion).Allowing your religion to come into disrepute is "protecting" your interests? I'd call it a cultural judgment with which you acquiesce through your silence. Not unlike those in India who were quite happy to watch suttee. Or as Martin Niemöller said of the Nazis, "First they came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews..." Do these moderate Muslims think they are not targets just as soon as practicable?
And Althouse goes on to this, reminiscent of Della Sentilles,
...how are we outsiders to the artwork supposed to contribute the the [sic] process of their learning how to deal with free expression?Well, they've had several hundred years to acclimate. I mean, we assimilated algebra, but there hasn't been much since.
It's - "Get a life. When you moderate Muslims rise up and call farce on the Islamic leaders who urge a new holocaust and describe America as the Great Satan, then maybe we'll think about observing your loosely held 12th Century iconographic distinctions." Of course, if you get that far, we probably won't have to.
(For the Andre Serrano reference, see TOC's own effort to offend every religion here.)
Regarding the third point: Actually, we would be talking about death threats over a drawing of somebody burning a bear suit rumored to contain our flag, but didn't.
Sunday, April 25, 2010
Saturday, April 24, 2010
I will be applying my non-existent artistic skills and will probably produce a stick figure labeled "Mohammed'" so that you'll know what it is supposed to depict.
Anyone else is welcome to submit their drawings and I will post those, too.
Mark Steyn properly conflates Comedy Central's cowardice and Bill Clinton's demonization of tea partiers.
...[I]n the end, in a craven culture, even ... the brave, transgressive comedy network was intimidated into caving in and censoring a speech about not being intimidated into caving in. ...RTWT
Terrific. You can see why young, urban, post-modern Americans under 57 get most of their news from Comedy Central. What a shame 1930s Fascist Europe was so lacking in cable.
Fifteen years ago, Bill Clinton set out to hang Timothy McVeigh around the necks of talk radio and, with a further stretch, Newt and the congressional Republicans. ...
Which works fine when you're up against phantom enemies of the kind Clinton preferred to take on, while giving real threats the run of the planet. If the Tea Partiers were truly the murderous goons they've been portrayed as, they would draw the obvious lesson from the kid gloves with which Comedy Central strokes Islam. They would say, "Enough with peaceful rallies where we pick up the litter afterwards. Let's just threaten to decapitate someone. You get more respect that way. At least from the media."
If one had the time to do the searching and analysis, it seems very likely that the tea parties have garnered more negative North American press and more negative Democrat comment - since February 2009, than have Islamists in plain view - since September 2001. Thuggish organizations like Iran, Syria and CAIR, as well as demented individuals like Anwar al-Awlaki, the imam who mentored the man who perpetrated the Fort Hood massacre as well as three of the 9/11 hijackers, and now this idiot with the death threats against the creators of South Park - get a pass (it's America's fault) while Clinton, the Obama Apparatus and our MSM are vilifying Americans who disagree with the expansion of government.
In short, GM is using government money to pay back government money to get more government money. And at a 2% lower interest rate at that. This is a nifty scheme to refinance GM's government debt--not pay it back!RTWT
GM boasts that, because it is doing so well, it is paying the $6.7 billion five years ahead of schedule since it was not due until 2015. So will there be an accelerated payback of the rest of the $49.6 billion investment? No. That goal has been pushed back, as it turns out.
Friday, April 23, 2010
RTWT: Borrowing from Peter To Pay . . . uh, Peter
Government Motors took lots of money from your left pocket. Then it took some more from your right pocket and put that into your left pocket. GM even added interest taken from your children's pockets, and has been bragging about it in TV ads.
Now, don't you feel better? You've been paying the general government to administer this loan, and they've gotten results.
It's just like the misleading ads from the bank formerly known as GMAC.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
I know, half-miler, but there's only so much I'm willing to spend making fun of Earth Day. If the idiots promoting it got behind market forces instead of government fiat, they'd have more success.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Vacationing a human right, EU chief says...makes me an anti-human rights activist.
The European Union has declared travelling a human right, and is launching a scheme to subsidize vacations with taxpayers' dollars for those too poor to afford their own trips.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
And check out Carpe Diem's note:
1. On average, men work 5.6 more hours per week than women—the equivalent of seven additional weeks of full-time work per year (see chart above). That would put “Equal Work Day” at the end of February, symbolizing how far the average women would have to work into 2010 to equal the same number of hours that the average man worked in 2009.Maybe they would, but they never mention it.
2. The unemployment rate for men has been greater than the jobless rate for women for the last 40 months, and job losses during the depth of the last recession were four times greater for men.
3. There were 1,277 male occupational fatalities in 2008 for every 100 female work-related deaths, a ratio of almost 13:1.
An important question then for women on Equal Pay Day: Would perfect labor market equality really be worth it if it meant working 280 more hours per year, having a much greater chance of being unemployed during recessions, and being significantly more exposed to work-related injury and death?
The decision is the biggest departure yet from Canada's long-standing policy that "cultural" industries like book and music publishing should be controlled by Canadian companies.Canadians just became a bit more free and, predictably, protected industries are upset about it. Amazon in Canada angers McNally
...Canada is trying to position itself as a champion of free trade and open markets...
...Canada also announced last month that it plans to eliminate all tariffs on the import of machinery and other manufacturing parts, making it the first developed country to do so.
Support for multi-culturalism apparently has its limits, but the bigger story is elimination of machinery and parts from the tariff list. Good move. The US should follow it.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Every time you pick up another rock along the winding path that led to the financial crisis, something else crawls out. Subprime mortgages were sold as a way to give low-income people a chance at homeownership and the American Dream. Instead, the mortgages turned out to be an excuse for predatory lending and fraud, enriching the lenders and Wall Street at the expense of subprime borrowers, many of whom ended up in foreclosure."...that sort of thing." Mr. Nocera must think the Dutch government was subsidizing tulip buyers who couldn't afford the flowers, because one sort of thing he fails to mention is government regulation. It's the main "sort of thing," and I do not mean there was too little. Without the government policies structured to punish banks if they did not lend to people who could not pay, synthetic C.D.O.’s would never have existed. Compounding that was the direct Federal intervention via Fannie and Freddie, as well as the lying about their stability:
The ratings agencies, which rated the complex investments that were built with subprime mortgages, turned out to be only too happy to be gamed by firms that paid their fees — slapping AAA ratings on mortgage bonds doomed to fail. Lehman Brothers turned out to be disguising the full reality of its horrid balance sheet by playing accounting games. All over Wall Street, firms pushed mortgage originators to churn out more loans that were doomed the moment they were made.
In the immediate aftermath, the conventional wisdom was that Wall Street had simply lost its head. It was terrible, to be sure, but on some level understandable: Dutch tulips, the South Sea bubble, that sort of thing.
"These two entities -- Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac -- are not facing any kind of financial crisis. The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing."When Mr. Frank said this, George Bush was President. Frank was the ranking Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. He was not alone in defending the sub-prime debacle.
-Rep. Barney Frank, D-MA
"I don't see much other than a shell game going on here, moving something from one agency to another and in the process weakening the bargaining power of poorer families and their ability to get affordable housing."Mr. Watt was reacting to a Bush Administration proposal to increase oversight on Fannie & Freddie. It might well have affected the "ability" of some to buy houses they couldn't afford and which have been repossessed since.
-Rep. Melvin Watt, D-NC
It wasn't just Wall Street urging the Fed to keep the housing bubble going, either:
Among the groups denouncing the proposal today were the National Association of Home Builders and Congressional Democrats who fear that tighter regulation of the companies could sharply reduce their commitment to financing low-income and affordable housing.The corporatist whores and the vote buyers all asked for Federal intervention on top of Federal intervention - and they got it. Mr. Nocera could have written a complete article if he had acknowledged this.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
New Hampshire Democrats are engaged in a statewide search for liberal activists willing to attend so-called tea parties on Thursday and carry signs expressing racist or fringe sentiments, a Democratic source with knowledge of the effort tells NowHampshire.com.In Michigan: Tea Party Saboteurs
The Web site, www.crashthetteaparty.org, is advertising that it will infiltrate the Tea Party movement and "exaggerate their least appealing qualities (misspelled protest signs, wild claims in TV interviews, etc.)."So what do you call those who carry racist signs to a tea party rally? Apparently, you call them left-wing ideologues - or a tight "affiliation of racists, homophobes, and morons ...", or maybe just "Democrats." Seems fair.
The Web site calls the Tea Party movement a "loose affiliation of racists, homophobes, and morons ..."
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
The short answer is lying scumbags.
If you are attending a tea party rally, be sure to bring a camera. If you see displays of outrageous behavior, get a picture or a video. We'll track the fraudulent perps down later. They'll shrivel in the light.
Sunday, April 11, 2010
Saturday, April 10, 2010
Friday, April 09, 2010
”It’s like the back of the refrigerator. You see all these wires and the rest,” said Pelosi. “All you need to know is, you open the door. The light goes on. You open this door, you go through a whole different path, in terms of access to quality, affordable healthcare for all Americans.”I was inspired to imagine: “A Conversation with Nancy Pelosi”
Me: Madam Speaker, let me begin by thanking you for taking time from your busy schedule to speak with me. I understand you have a botox top-up appointment in half an hour, so I'll get right to it: You recently compared the health care bill to a refrigerator. I quote, “It’s like the back of the refrigerator. You see all these wires and the rest. All you need to know is, you open the door. The light goes on. You open this door, you go through a whole different path, in terms of access to quality, affordable healthcare for all Americans.”
My first question is, How do you know the light goes off when you close the door?
Pelosi: All scientists and economists agree that the light goes off when you close the door, and I personally know because when I opened the door and went down the path, I closed the door behind me. I had to go back for a flashlight.
Me: Madam Speaker, speaking of being inside a refrigerator, you are old enough to remember the 1960s elephant joke fad. There was one that asked, “How can you tell if there is an elephant in your refrigerator? Answer - You can smell the peanuts on his breath.” How can we tell if there's a
Pelosi: First of all, you would never find a Republican in the health care fridge, although it would be just like a Republican to endanger those with peanut allergies by breathing noxious fumes at them and burdening our health care system with unnecessary costs. As the President has said, it would probably be done by a doctor... who is also a Republican.
As to a Democrat in the fridge: Except for a few fringe refrigerator repair fanatics the American people do not see health care in partisan terms. The better question is “How can you tell if there's a Fed in your fridge?” There are several indicators, 1) the 25 watt incandescent light has been replaced with a 5 watt delayed-start CFL, 2) the maraschino cherries have been individually micro-laser engraved with nutrition data, and 3) aside from the cherries the only food in the fridge is groats.
And none of that is a joke.
Me: Groats. That reminds me that some disagree with your contention that the light goes off when you close the door. For example, at least one refrigerator model has been described thusly, "Two shelves where none are needed and, close the door and the light stays ON!"* Isn't that actually more like your health care bill?
Pelosi: Well, if any such refrigerators exist it is an affront to all right thinking Americans and is probably a conspiracy between power companies and refrigerator manufacturers. Sounds like Congressman Waxman will need to hold hearings and bring General Electric on the carpet.
Me: What other appliances resonate with your legislative agenda?
Pelosi: Before I answer that, let me flesh out the refrigerator analogy a bit more. In addition to not needing to know how a fridge works, you don't need to know what's in it. Further, health care reform is also like the back of the inside of a refrigerator; You know, where old food goes to die.
Finally, the freezer section – have you ever noticed the expression of permanent surprise on a whole frozen trout – can be compared to the “freezing” of flesh through botox treatments that I am proud to have secured as a right for working-class Americans.
So, to your question: Upright Freezers are like “Cap and Trade”. And chest freezers are like immigration reform.
Me: Aren't freezers much the same as refrigerators? How can they represent such different bills? And how can upright freezers differ so drastically from chest freezers?
Pelosi: Simple, all freezers are very cold, and as we all know that's a sign of global warming. Also, General Electric makes freezers and they are one of the biggest rent seekers in promoting carbon trading.
Chest freezers, while similar to uprights, do make it more difficult to find things as they migrate to the bottom. Just ask my good friend former Congressman William Jefferson. In this way, the chest freezer represents jobs Americans won't do and the undocumented immigrants lost at the bottom of our society.
Me: OK, but when you open the freezer door, what path are you taking?
Pelosi: The path of access to quality, affordable, carbon-offset, frozen Mexican-grown groats for all Americans.
Me: Getting back to the refrigerator analogy, why mention the back of the refrigerator? You'd have to be in front to open the door, wouldn't you? And what fridge has wires all over the back of it? Did you mean cooling coils? They haven't made fridges like that in decades.
Pelosi: The back of the refrigerator is where the dust bunnies of neglect accumulate, it's the hidden tragedy perpetuated by Republicans, but finally ended with the vacuum of our new bill. And, look, anything that you don't understand could serve as analogy for most all of our legislation. I just needed some common household object with a bunch of extraneous stuff that made it seem complicated to turn a light on and off.
As to wires and stuff, I already told you you didn't need to know how it works. That goes for my analogy, too.
Me: Thank you, Madam Speaker. Your insights on these matters are truly a reflection of Congressional diligence.
*Apologies to George Leroy Tirebiter.
H/T James Taranto, Best of the Web Today. You can subscribe to his column via email, free.
Wednesday, April 07, 2010
Andrew Breitbart at Big Journalism (and at Big Government) has been on this for awhile. No one has collected the $100,000 he offered for proof of the racist epithets the Congressional Black Caucus has been advertising.
When George W. Bush was president, dissent was patriotic. Now dissent is racist, or so you would believe if you listened to President Obama's supporters in Congress and the media. An example of the latter category is this lead paragraph from an Associated Press dispatch of March 20, written by Alan Fram:House Democrats heard it all Saturday--words of inspiration from President Barack Obama and raucous chants of protests from demonstrators. And at times it was flat-out ugly, including some racial epithets aimed at black members of Congress.
The claim that protesters had shouted racial slurs was irresistible to journalists, partly because, if true, it would have had real news value. It's the 21st century; people simply don't shout racial slurs anymore. But it's reasonable to suspect that journalists passed along these rumors of racism in part out of ideological animus. After all, such reports give ammunition to those seeking to demonize dissent.
That last observation, by the way, is not original. We borrowed it from Valerie Bauman, herself an AP reporter:Opponents have branded the tea party as a group of racists hiding behind economic concerns--and reports that some tea partyers were lobbing racist slurs at black congressmen during last month's heated health care vote give them ammunition.
Bauman's dispatch, filed late yesterday, is a useful corrective in other ways to the poisonous dissent-is-racist narrative. Her piece is a profile of black leaders in the tea-party movement. Here's how it starts:They've been called Oreos, traitors and Uncle Toms, and are used to having to defend their values. Now black conservatives are really taking heat for their involvement in the mostly white tea party movement--and for having the audacity to oppose the policies of the nation's first black president."I've been told I hate myself. I've been called an Uncle Tom. I've been told I'm a spook at the door," said Timothy F. Johnson, chairman of the Frederick Douglass Foundation, a group of black conservatives who support free market principles and limited government."Black Republicans find themselves always having to prove who they are. Because the assumption is the Republican Party is for whites and the Democratic Party is for blacks," he said.
"Oreos," "Uncle Toms," "spook at the door": it turns out people are "lobbing" racial slurs! When Johnson speaks of the assumption that "the Republican Party is for whites and the Democratic Party is for blacks," does anyone doubt the accuracy of his perception?
It is Democrats, not Republicans, who hold this race-based assumption. And it doesn't actually go both ways. No white American today suffers the indignity of being labeled a "traitor" to his race; the supposedly liberal assumption is that blacks, and only blacks, are expected to think a certain way because of the color of their skin. As Bauman reports:Black conservatives don't want to have to apologize for their divergent views."I've gotten the statement, 'How can you not support the brother?' " said David Webb, an organizer of New York City's Tea Party 365, Inc. movement and a conservative radio personality.Since Obama's election, Webb said some black conservatives have even resorted to hiding their political views."I know of people who would play the (liberal) role publicly, but have their private opinions," he said. "They don't agree with the policy but they have to work, live and exist in the community. . . . Why can't we speak openly and honestly if we disagree?"
This impulse to close ranks is understandable in the context of history. Blacks in America, after all, have experienced a few decades of full equality after centuries of slavery and segregation. Jim Crow is still a living memory. On the other hand, it is only a memory; there is no danger of its return. Today the defensive demand for ideological conformity is an obstacle to racial equality rather than a guarantor of it.
This may be changing, however. Bauman notes that 37 black Republicans are running for Congress this November. She tells a story from one of them, Charles Lollar:A tea party supporter running against House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md., Lollar says he's finding support in unexpected places.The 38-year-old U.S. Marine Corps reservist recently walked into a bar in southern Maryland decorated with a Confederate flag. It gave his wife Rosha pause."I said, 'You know what, honey? Many, many of our Southern citizens came together under that flag for the purpose of keeping their family and their state together,' " Lollar recalled. "The flag is not what you're to fear. It's the stupidity behind the flag that is a problem. I don't think we'll find that in here. Let's go ahead in."Once inside, they were treated to a pig roast, a motorcycle rally--and presented with $5,000 in contributions for his campaign.
This is a lovely little parable of racial progress. A black politician with counterstereotypical views overcomes his prejudices and is welcomed with open arms by a white, Confederate-flag-displaying crowd. Among other things, it's a sign of generational change: At 38, Lollar does not have the experience of being treated as a second-class citizen on account of his race.
It was probably inevitable that when Obama ran into political troubles, his supporters would try to stir up fears of racism in an effort to discredit dissenters. Yet when even a sympathetic media organization like the AP stops playing along, we can conclude that this tactic isn't working. If liberals and Democrats hate racism so much, why are they so eager to find it in their opponents? It would be unfair to accuse them of being totally insincere, but moral vanity and cynicism surely are a big, and increasing, part of the answer.
You'd think there was at least one CBC member who could use the money for the upcoming campaign or who might be inclined to use truth as a defense.
Tuesday, April 06, 2010
Thursday, April 8th at 6:30 pm
605 West Hwy 2 (Lead Street)
Friday, April 9th at 12:00 noon
Ludington Park Band Shell
744 Lake Shore Drive
Escanaba, MI 49829
Sault Sainte Marie, MI
Friday, April 9th at 6:00 pm
Sault Sainte Marie, MI
Saturday, April 10th at 8:00am
Washington Park, Downtown Cheboygan
124 N. Main Street
Cheboygan, MI 49721
Saturday, April 10th at 10:30am
Emmet-Charlevoix County Fairgrounds
1129 Charlevoix Avenue
Petoskey, MI 49770
Traverse City, MI
Saturday, April 10th at 11:00 am (express will be arriving a little later, but rally begins at 11)
Grand Traverse Civic Center Pavilion
1213 W Civic Center Dr
Traverse City, MI 49686
Big Rapids, MI
Saturday, April 10th at 2:45pm
14905 220th Avenue
Big Rapids, MI 49307
Grand Rapids, MI
Saturday, April 10th at 4:00 pm
Riverside Park (Band shell)
2401 Monroe Avenue NE
Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503
Saturday, April 10th at 7:15 pm
Michigan State Capitol
100 North Capitol Avenue
Lansing, MI 48933
Sunday, April 11th at 10:00 am
CIVIC CENTER PARK & HISTORICAL VILLAGE
40700 Romeo Plank Rd
Clinton Township, MI
Monday, April 05, 2010
For a pithy review of high-powered-Democrat R-card play see The Democrats' Fake Hate Crime. And visit BigGovernment.com, where you can claim $100,000 if you can produce a video of the n-word the Black Caucus claims was screamed at them "15 times" as they eschewed the tunnels they normally use and sashayed over to vote for Obamacare in plain view. In daylight. They were carrying video cameras aimed at the crowd, some carried two cameras. Not one captured what they claim was said.
Sunday, April 04, 2010
What do you do when patient petitioning, protest marches and court orders fail? What do you do when all the protocols and cheat codes of democracy fail? This is what you do: you reclaim the language of democracy from the twisted bunch that have hijacked, cannibalized and subverted it.Or, it would sound like a tea party, except for this threat:
We know who you are. We know where you live. We know where you work.It's actually a post by
And we be many, but you be few.
...a genuinely peaceful guy who believes in the power of peaceful protest to change the world.It's Gene from Greenpeace India!
The "cheat codes" bit might have tipped you off that something wasn't right. The weird grammar might also have given you a clue. Gene be two quarts of ethanol short of a gallon of E-85.
In any case, I have this to say to Gene; There actually are far fewer of you than there are of us, which is why you're frustrated the cheat codes of democracy failed you. I don't know where you live and I won't care unless you show up at my house with your threats. In which case, where you live may become irrelevant to both of us.
I bet we have much better personal armories.