Squaring the Culture

"...and I will make justice the plumb line, and righteousness the level;
then hail will sweep away the refuge of lies,
and the waters will overflow the secret place."
Isaiah 28:17

10/10/2011 (10:08 am)

Occupy Washington

An acquaintance of mine made the observation that no mention of Occupy Wall Street should fail to mention the collusion and corruption that they are protesting. This guy thinks that Wall Street is responsible for the woeful economic condition of the US. He’s an idealist, and also, in my estimation, a dupe. The real cause of the meltdown is in Washington — and so is the real cause of Occupy Wall Street.

I have some expertise in finance, and did a fair amount of digging during the meltdown in 2008 and 2009 to be sure that I understood the underlying causes. There was collusion, and Wall Street was complicit with it at the end. Suffice to say, it’s mostly the result of ill-formed government policy aimed at noble-sounding goals, with some criminal profit-taking in the mix — from politically-connected financiers in Washington.

The important thing to remember is that buying politicians does not benefit anybody so long as government is not involved in the market. If Washington was not overreaching into financial markets, there could be no collusion between government and finance. That’s one of the main reasons why some of us are so adamant about reducing the size and reach of government — and why any protest about it should take place in Washington.

Occupy Wall St. will not focus on Washington, though, because Washington organized it. My acquaintance is idealizing the protesters, but I’m pretty sure they’re astroturfed — that is, they’re organized and orchestrated by a political machine with political goals.

The Tea Party, a genuine grass-roots movement, rose in clear opposition to the bailouts; that was the real grass-roots reaction to the collusion and corruption. It threatens to remove power from entrenched interests in Washington, and in early elections seems to be having an enormous effect that Washington cannot control. The President and his party cannot retain power in the 2012 election without neutralizing the Tea Party, and all of their efforts to demonize and marginalize it — and there have been several — have failed.

So the President did the one thing at which he seems genuinely competent: he organized a protest. The goal is to seize the news cycle, steal the sincere initiative from the Tea Party, and give the Democrats a chance to retain power in the 2012 election. Occupy Wall Street is, in brief, the Democrats’ Anti-Tea-Party.

The protesters don’t realize it; they hold debates in the street discussing what they’re there for, which means that they don’t have a clue. But Progressive street activists do what they’re told. If political activists suggest a demonstration on Wall Street, Progressives demonstrate on Wall Street. They don’t know why; they just do it. Listen to their words, and you’ll hear lots of references to 1968 and the Vietnam war. They’re idealizing themselves. They do it on the fly, ad hoc, because they genuinely don’t know why they’re protesting.

But their organizers do know why they’re there; they’re there to neutralize the Tea Party. The Left has always known how to manipulate the crowd. It’s how they obtain and keep power. They sow the seeds of the protest in the right places, the echo chamber starts, the people move, and voila! A movement.

The real demonstrations not only belong in Washington, they have already taken place; that’s what the Tea Party was, and is. Occupy Wall Street is the response to the Tea Party by the entrenched, political interests who stand to lose if the Tea Party succeeds.

With that in mind, let’s take a moment to review why the meltdown occurred in the first place.

The Meltdown: Let’s Remind Ourselves

There are almost a dozen separate causes of the financial collapse of 2006. Yes, 2006. FNMA artificially postponed the most direct effects for 2 years by acting as the entire secondary market for mortgage loans, doubling its holdings in that brief, 2 years. They amplified the worst effects by doing so.

The Community Reinvestment Act, during the Carter administration, began as a limited initiative affecting only inner city banks. It was the first direct cause of the rise in housing prices, but it was small.

The CRA became national policy under the Clinton administration, when FHA was instructed to loosen their loan criteria and $1 trillion was dumped into the secondary market for mortgages by the federal government. Suddenly, the loose lending standards of the CRA were no longer small. Loose lending + instant liquidity = increased demand for housing. Housing prices started rising rapidly.

Then the Fed set interest rates artificially low in 2001 to counter the recession caused by the Internet bubble collapse, the Enron/Worldcom/auditing crisis, and 9/11. The favorable mortgage rates and eagerness to lend generated a whole lot of speculation in housing, driving prices up even more. The Democratic party prevented any serious investigation of FNMA and FHLMC, while they provided easy liquidity for marginal loans — this is where the criminal collusion occurred. Government-subsidized rating agencies completely missed the weakness in mortgage securities that infiltrated due to the relaxed lending criteria, and new federal regulations in Sarbanes-Oxley forced banks and financial institutions to invest artificially large sums in AAA-rated securities (look up “Recourse Rule.”)

When land prices started dropping, as the price of any artificially-inflated commodity must, major holders of mortgage-backed securities were forced by yet another Sarbanes-Oxley provision (“mark to market”) to write down the value of their holdings, and then to try to borrow enough to meet federal reserve requirements. This sucked all the air out of the capital markets. Most of the financials couldn’t get the loans to cover their reserve requirements, so they had to declare insolvency. Then the bailouts started — more collusion.

Count the number of times “federal” gets mentioned in that thumbnail description. This collapse was manufactured by brainless federal policy. The claim by progressives that the collapse was caused by “a failure of capitalism” and “deregulation” is a joke without a punchline; the economists saying it know they’re lying, and most of the people repeating it are too ignorant to understand why they’re making idiots of themselves.

Yes, we can complain about the hippies protesting capitalism, but that’s not what needs to be said here. What needs to be said is that Occupy Wall Street is the Obama White House’s response to the Tea Party, and that it is an organized, political movement that represents the political interests that caused the collapse in the first place. The protesters are helping the very people they protest. The real, public objection to the corruption that caused the meltdown in 2008 is the Tea Party.

10/24/2010 (6:16 pm)

Visual Explanation of the Reason For Tea Parties

Deroy Murdock published his personal contribution to mid-term electioneering at National Review Online, and it’s worth a look. Basically, he provided three visual aids. The first two I’ve posted here, below. The first, from the Bureau of Economic Analysis, explains how much federal workers earn compared to private and state workers, and the second, from the Heritage Foundation, compares how much the public and private sectors have grown or shrunk since the beginning of the recession. It’s a good time to be a bureaucrat, but the gravy train is destroying the economy. No economy can afford to swell the bureaucracy so, because bureaucracy does not produce anything; it’s dead weight. Growth in the size and wealth of government and government paychecks always comes at the expense of private wealth. Look:

You’ll have to read Murdock’s column to get the description and the link to the third graphic. It’s a full-size representation of the relationships between government entities in the new Health Care “Reform” Act. A graphic like this one helped to kill the last attempt at nationalizing health care, the Clintons’ miscue in 1993, so somebody’s always attempting to draft the new health-bill-killing graphic. It truly is frightening, but the real perfidy of the health care “reform” is not just its size and complexity; it’s a combination of coercion, arrogance, and cost, at a time when saving the robustness of the economy requires austerity beyond the imagination of the most ardent cost-cutting conservative Representative. The people who jammed this atrocity through Congress should be impeached and required to spend 5 days in the stocks in each of a dozen major US cities.

04/27/2010 (10:41 am)

Dems Flout Godwin's Law and a Few Other Things

Does anybody here recall the ungodly flap that was made by Democrats over alleged Tea Party comparisons between Barack Obama and Adolph Hitler? How for weeks, Tea Party activists had to defend themselves against charges of overheated, over-the-top rhetoric that endangered the public by inciting potentially violent activists? How Tea Partiers were responsible for (gasp) Tim McVeigh (who bombed the Murrah Building more than a dozen years before the first Tea Party?)

Roll forward about 2 weeks now — yes, their complaint is that fresh, although it started ‘way back in the summer of ’09 and probably earlier — and listen to US Representative Jared Polis (D, CO) regarding Arizona’s attempt to enforce US border policy:

A Colorado Democrat says Arizona is on its way to becoming a “police state” and its new immigration law is “reminiscent” of Nazi Germany.

“It is absolutely reminiscent of second class status of Jews in Germany prior to World War II when they had to have their papers with them at all times and were subject to routine inspections at the suspicion of being Jewish,” Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo), who is Jewish, told POLITICO…

“I think it’s a very fair comparison and I hope that we’re not headed on the same trajectory that Nazi Germany was,” Polis said. “But this was a very recent experience for Jewish Americans and Jews worldwide and it’s something that when we see similarities we start ringing alarm bells.”

This may be just a minor flouting of Godwin’s law, but it signals a much deeper rejection of Natural Law, the laws of decency that God lays on all humankind.

I sincerely hope nobody here needs an explanation regarding how checking papers to determine whether a worker is in the United States legally is dissimilar from checking papers to determine whether a person is a registered member of a deprecated minority. Immigration policy is enforced by every nation on the planet except ours; if enforcing it puts a nation “on the same trajectory that Nazi Germany was [sic],” then the entire world is on that trajectory. American citizenship is not a universal right, it’s a privilege appropriate for those who obey the laws that govern it. The national government refuses to enforce a perfectly reasonable law; Arizona is stepping up and doing it for them. Good on ’em, say most of us.

Official_Photo_Congressman_Jared_Polis_3-9-2009What we should notice here is who’s calling “Nazi.” Polis is 1) a US Representative, and 2) Jewish. That makes this far from the random fringe-moonbat holocaust reference; this is a deliberate move by the Democratic party to float a new sound bite and see how it plays in public. It has the key element of the Democratic party tactical maneuver: identity politics. Polis is a member of a class whose invocation of Nazi Germany is supposed to be irrefutable. It would be insensitive to call him a flaming, mindless idiot for the comparison. Of course he has every right to be afraid. And he’s anonymous but highly placed; he has a ready platform from which to speak, but few know him personally, so he can recede into obscurity if the sound bite doesn’t work, his career uninterrupted and his reputation unsullied.

And of course, Politico has every reason to be calling up Rep. Polis out of the blue and asking his opinion of Arizona’s law, right?

We now have sound evidence that they don’t really believe there’s anything morally wrong with making Hitler comparisons. They were just engaging in yet another Alinsky tactic — make the adversary live up to their morals, while you, yourself, have none.

That’s the key, right there. They have no morals; they are above them. They will literally do anything they can get away with, moral or immoral, legal or illegal, to secure their power to control. They believe that their vision for the world is so irrefutable, so obviously superior, that no tactic is too vicious or too low if it will result in the ultimate good — the good of their own control of everybody’s lives, to make of us all the slaves that build their Utopia, like the Israelites built Pithom and Rameses for Pharaoh. Human rules do not apply to them. They are gods.

Somebody made a comment in another thread on this blog playing the leftist meme on Tea Parties (I originally mistyped it as “Parities,” an apt mistype,) observing that while both sides of the American political divide have their violent elements, the incendiary talk on the left comes only from the farthest fringes, while the incendiary talk from the right comes from the mainstream. This is precisely backwards from reality: the dangerous people on the right are a few, literally insane people, and the comparable talk on the left comes from core strategists of the Democratic party. This is not the first Nazi comparison we’ve heard from a Democratic Congressman.

The left’s complaint about Tea Parties is a result of the fact that the Democrats are deliberately and systematically trampling core liberties. Tea partiers are the best of America: law-abiding, civil, and productive citizens who have to use up vacation days from stable jobs to engage in protests, who actually take the Declaration of Independence seriously. Leftists should hardly be surprised that an enormous cadre from middle America are rising up and showing their support for core American liberties, and yet, surprised, they are.

They were living in a fantasy world (and I’ve said so many times before.) Having taken control of the White House and Congress on what amounted to a Vote of No Confidence against the Republican party, in barely more than a year they flouted campaign financing rules, nationalized or began micromanaging half a dozen industries, ran up more than a trillion dollars in new, annual deficits, advocated laws violating the consciences of doctors and spending tax monies on abortions, started redistributing income in a manner reminiscent of communist countries, demonized ordinary American citizens over several issues, engaged in open corruption, apologized for American exceptionalism around the world, dismissed our allies, coddled our enemies, and recently told the majority of the American people “Oh, shut up already” while gulping 1/7 of the economy and turning health care into a government-dominated, bureaucratic nightmare. Now good people are starting to object en masse, and the Democrats are saying “What? What did we do?” as though they didn’t know they were deliberately snuffing out the American system of government and replacing it with something more similar to Stalinism.

I actually think they don’t know. They’re that completely out of touch with reality. They’re that completely out of touch with themselves. They really think they should be regarded as heroes, and not as the overweening tyrants they are at heart.

Jared Polis is a front man on an experimental sound bite. If nobody swallows it (they won’t) he’ll disappear. But make no mistake: the act he’s engaging in represents the very core of the Democratic party, and their ongoing war against civility and honesty in American politics. Real communication is not possible with such people. They are the rot at the heart of the American tree of liberty. It makes no sense to continue to cooperate in a political venture with such people. Liberty requires partition.

04/09/2010 (4:52 pm)

…and Why The Republican Party Will Be Replaced By the Tea Party

Moving on from yesterday’s excursion into the frank and deliberate dishonesty of the media in support of the Democratic party’s habitual character assassination, today we get to see why the Republican party continues to shrink.

W. James Antle III at the American Spectator censured Sen. John Cornyn (R, TX), the leader of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, for backing down from “Repeal and Replace” with respect to the Democrats’ shove-it-down-our-throats crap sandwich called, misleadingly, “health care reform.” Granted, his basis for doing this was yet another dishonestly-written AP article, this one by Charles Babington and Philip Elliott, attempting to cow Republicans into going along with their fellows who are backing down from “Repeal and Replace” on the advice of — wait for it — Democratic party strategists.

Still, it appears that Cornyn has backed off his staunch repeal platform, opting instead for one that focuses on the immediate economic impact of the bill to which several corporations have attested. This may be a tactical shift rather than a strategic retreat. As the AP article finally notes starting in paragraph 20:

Republican strategist Kevin Madden said the repeal message is “a call to action” that excites many conservative voters, who will be important in November. But the risk of talking only about repeal, he said, “is you only define your position by what you’re against.”

Madden said GOP candidates should advocate “repeal and reform,” which will let them discuss alternative ways to control health care expenses, quality and access. Because an actual repeal is unlikely, he said, candidates should not get bogged down in the mechanics of how it might work, and focus instead on issues such as costs.

“The legislative track is largely finished,” Madden said.

The point about stating an alternative strategy — the “reform” part of “repeal and reform” — is well taken, but let’s hope that’s all he means. Even if there are portions of the bill that make sense, the Republican party needs to repeal the entire bill, then go back and pass the parts they want as individual measures. They don’t know all that the Democratic party intends with this Everest of paper with its Machiavellian flood of subterfuge, and I doubt their ability to figure it all out.

In particular, the Democrats are attempting to talk Republicans into claiming that they’ll keep the measure that forbids insurance companies from refusing customers with pre-existing conditions; if that measure remains in force, health insurance is dead as an industry, as the right to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions constitutes the very heart of insurance underwriting.

This seems to be the Democratic party strategy: make the Republican candidate commit to repealing the bill, which they believe will eventually be more popular than it is now.

Menendez said Democrats in many states will ask their GOP opponents why they want to restore insurance companies’ ability to deny coverage to people with medical problems and to young adults who otherwise can stay on their parents’ health plans until age 26.

Candidates seeking the GOP nominations in many states, Menendez said, “are facing tremendous pressure from the tea party, from the party base” to embrace a position that could hurt them when more independent and moderate voters go to the polls in the general election.

Republicans who listen to this deceptive pap will pay for it. Recall Gingrich’s speech that I posted a few days ago. He observed correctly that the 2006 and 2008 elections were a referendum on Republican governance, and resulted in a profound vote of no confidence. If the Republicans back off from repealing the health care tyranny, that result will be repeated. Conservative voters will not settle for tyranny on the installment plan, nor will they accept Republican candidates who lack the spine to stand up to tyrants. If civil war is going to be avoided, it must be by decisive action to roll back unacceptable measures using traditional means.

The Tea Party as a group is popular with a much larger number of Americans than is the Republican party. The recent revelation of misspending among high-ranking offices in the Republican National Committee was damaging enough, but if the party consents to the new health care regime with only an attempt to adjust a few items, we’ll probably see the Republican party representing fewer than 20% of the voters within the next year or two. While most of us have spent a lifetime believing that a third party was not a real possibility in American politics, we may actually be watching a major shift in party loyalty, such that the Republican party will disappear and be replaced by a party representing the traditional Constitutional view of American politics

04/08/2010 (7:46 am)

Another Dishonest Democrat Wages Dishonest Race War

Yesterday’s Washington Examiner contained an article from Associated Press reporter Valerie Bauman discussing the presence of blacks among Tea Party groups. The fact of their existence, of course, rebuts one of the favorite memes floated by certain, demented leftist personalities (Olbermann and Garofalo come to mind.) But read through this fascinating report from the AP and see if you can discover that the insults hurled at black Tea Partiers are hurled by Democrats.

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.

Johnson and other black conservatives say they were drawn to the tea party movement because of what they consider its commonsense fiscal values of controlled spending, less taxes and smaller government. The fact that they’re black — or that most tea partyers are white — should have nothing to do with it, they say.

“You have to be honest and true to yourself. What am I supposed to do, vote Democratic just to be popular? Just to fit in?” asked Clifton Bazar, a 45-year-old New Jersey freelance photographer and conservative blogger.

Oops. The reporter just gave us a our first clue — after five paragraphs — where the insults are coming from. Blacks are popular if their tout the Democratic party line. They are unpopular if they tout the Republican line. Who’s calling them “Oreos?” Who’s calling them “traitors?” Did you see the word “Democrats” anywhere?

Bauman continues:

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.

But these black conservatives don’t consider racism representative of the movement as a whole — or race a reason to support it.

Opponents have branded the tea party as a group of racists. But the racist epithets are being flung by the tea party’s opponents — the same opponents who are calling other people “racist.” Does Valerie venture to mention why the people who are actually calling black people names are not “racists?”

More to the point, does she place this pair of paragraphs where she does deliberately to assist careless readers toward drawing the conclusion that it’s the tea partiers themselves who are calling blacks names? After all, she just spent five paragraphs describing how poorly they’re being treated by somebody unnamed. Then she tells us that somebody has been branded racist. Doesn’t it follow that it must be the people being called “racist” who are calling blacks names? Actually, it doesn’t follow at all, and it isn’t true; but Ms. Bauman (I assume “Valerie” is a female, although the name has been used for males on occasion) is playing the common media game of avoiding any mention of her favored party when their behavior is reprehensible, and is in fact manipulating the reader into thinking it’s the tea partiers who are committing the racial fouls. This is deliberate deception, carefully constructed to permit the defense “We never said tea partiers were calling anybody names.” Valerie Bauman is a clever liar.

“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?”

From whom did the statement come? Hiding their views from whom? Why did Ms. Bauman’s editor permit these horribly passive constructions to remain in the piece? Apparently the unnamed editor is guilty along with Ms. Bauman of the deception and the game; never call a Democrat a Democrat when one has done wrong. And by all means, don’t admit that it’s Democrats who are forcing blacks to “pass” these days, ’cause that might lead people to think that racism is alive and well in the Democratic party — where it has always thrived, throughout American political history.

No, we can’t have people telling the truth about Democrats, and saying out loud that the Democratic party is, to this day, the only party in America where racism is common. We can’t acknowledge that Democratics’ love for entitlement programs that deliberately and disproportionately favor blacks is about assuaging their guilt, and not really about actually helping anybody (because, in fact, few things hurt the black community as badly as those hell-inspired entitlement programs).

Because if Democrats don’t continue indefinitely to dupe 85% or more of the black community in to voting Democrat year in and year out, no Democrat will ever be elected to any office, anywhere. And wouldn’t that be just awful?

The Associated Press is not a news reporting organization, it is a propaganda adjunct to the Democratic party. Valerie Bauman and her editor are not reporters, they are propagandists, and they should not have jobs in the news business.

04/05/2010 (1:16 pm)

Democrats Provoke Krystalnacht!

The Democrats’ willing lapdogs in the dying mainstream press treated us to a week of hyperventilating about how how violent, how dangerous were those Tea Party activists… and now we’re seeing vandalism directed against the Republican party.

Charlottesville, Albemarle County, Virginia was the place where some imbecile posted the wrong address for a Democratic US Representative, and some criminal vandal sneaked into the indicated yard and sliced a hose on a barbecue grill. Then on BushBulletMarch 26, bricks were thrown through the window of the GOP headquarters there — thick, double-pane windows, so they were thrown with considerable force. Last week somebody broke into Republican candidate John Koster’s office in Everett, WA, stole two laptops full of donor information and heaved a printer through their window from inside. And now the GOP office in Marion, OH has been vandalized, with a brick wrapped in a piece of notebook paper with “Stop the right wing” scrawled on it.

The Charlottesville incidents were probably related to each other, and neither vandal displayed much intelligence — one got the wrong person, another somehow confused “Tea Party” with the Republican party. But it seems likely that the Charlottesville retaliation was goaded by the press hysteria, there’s little question that the Ohio and Washington incidents were provoked by the fervid news reporting. Or if there is some question, we can safely ignore it, the way the press ignored such questions last week, right?

How many other incidents have gone unreported? These three incidents were only reported in local newspapers, unlike the “Tea Party” hysteria that made national news. The only reason I know about these three incidents is that bloggers and commenters picked up the local reports and repeated them.

There was no violence to speak of at the Tea Party meetings. They were not stirring up acts of hatred; they were expressing outrage at the abuses of power, abandonment of core American principles, and violations of the US Constitution perpetrated by the Democrats in Congress and the White House. The charge that the meetings were stirring up violence was remarkable for its disconnection with reality; hell, the Tea Party movement produced a march in Washington that may have totaled more than a million people back in September, and the city barely even needed to clean up after them. The movement has been remarkable for its restraint and good manners. That would be true even if we could not compare the Tea Party rallies to 8 years of spittle-spewing rage against George W. Bush; when compared to the unhinged vitriol from the left during the first decade of the 21st century, the dishonesty of these press fulminations about Tea Party “violence” becomes that much more shocking.

The title on this post is overblown and provocative, on purpose. I’m mimicking what I saw in the press last week. The only difference is, the press actually did provoke violence, where the various Tea Parties did not. When will the reporters be brought to trial?

On a related note, Michael Moynihan at Reason invokes Godwin’s Law in highly literate fashion on the left’s hysteria, and Jack Cashill produced a clear rebuttal of the faux racial incident from the eve of the health care bill passage. Four minutes, 56 seconds.

03/21/2010 (9:56 pm)

Democrats Eager to Distract, Manufacture Racial Incident

On the eve of managing to bully, buy, or bluster their way into passing a bill so odious that they have not told the truth about it for an entire year, Democrats launched a stink bomb in the form of a manufactured racial incident.

Members of the Congressional Black Caucus walked through a crowd of Tea Party demonstrators outside the US Capitol Building Saturday, and shortly thereafter lied to reporters about being spit on and called “Nigger” by members of the crowd. Reporters from AP, Washington Post, and McClatchy swallowed it whole, and then regurgitated it uncritically. Here’s AP’s version:

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…

Rallies outside the Capitol are typically orderly, with speeches and well-behaved crowds. Saturday’s was different, with anger-fueled demonstrators surrounding members of Congress who walked by, yelling at them.

“Kill the bill,” the largely middle-aged crowd shouted, surging toward lawmakers who crossed the street between their office buildings and the Capitol…

Rep. Andre Carson, D-Ind., told a reporter that as he left the Cannon House Office Building with Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., a leader of the civil rights era, some among the crowd chanted “the N-word, the N-word, 15 times.” Both Carson and Lewis are black, and Lewis spokeswoman Brenda Jones also said that it occurred.

The short walk was captured on video by members of the crowd. No spitting. Not a single N-word, nor any chanting that might have been taken for it. Listen for yourselves:

Here’s a longer video, obviously taken by somebody who did not know how to keep a camera steady, so you might get a bit seasick watching. Still, you can see for yourselves just how “ugly” this crowd was — which is to say, not even a little. They booed Congressmen supporting the bill, and cheered those opposing it. It was a well-behaved crowd.

The false charges are really no surprise. “October Surprise” has been part of the Democratic party play book for decades, and their consistent tactic regarding Tea Parties has been false accusation. Moreover, no part of the Democrats’ run-up to the health care reform bill has been honest; every single statistic quoted, every deal made, every tactic considered, has been an affront to honest governance. So it was par for the course when the Black Caucus members made their accusations.

Moreover, it is clear that the Black Caucus members planned to make the charges in advance of the incident. The stories of multiple members match, even though recordings of the event reveal that their charges are false. This was a coordinated lie.

PowerLine and some other conservative blogs are saying that if the Black Caucus members cannot produce proof of their charges, they should apologize. I disagree. People’s lives are ruined by false charges of racism. The viciousness of the charge and the premeditation make this an impeachable offense; these Congressmen are a disgrace and should be thrown out of Congress. Furthermore, I plan to write to the editors of the newspapers that reported this false charge and demand that the reporters who uncritically repeated these falsehoods be fired. Manufacturing false charges that can ruin lives is a serious breach of journalistic ethics, and the reporters who participated should never work in the news business again.

This is just another instance of the “October Suprise,” which has become a Democratic party habit. In 2006, it was the release on Sept. 28 of damning evidence that Rep. Mark Foley had made passes at under-age interns — a fact Democrats had known since April of that year. In 2004, it was the release of a story that George W. Bush had received favors from his commanding officer in the National Guard in 1973, and did not serve his full term. In 2000, it was a news story stating that George W. Bush had been arrested for drunk driving in 1976, released 4 days before the election. In 1992, Special Prosecutor indicted Caspar Weinberger just days before the Clinton-Bush election, for an offense that was quickly dismissed — after the election — as being beyond the statute of limitations. Meanwhile, every election season delivers charges by Democrats of the impending “October Suprise” the Republicans are cooking up. Somehow, these never materialize.

The New Republic is attempting to extend the farce, noting that a handful of Congressmen in the House cheered a disruptive on-looker who started shouting “Kill the Bill” as he was being escorted from the chamber. Rep. Barney Frank (D, MA) is bloviating about the incident, trying to make political hay and drive a wedge between Republicans and Tea Party activists. Frank is the only person who might reasonably have a complaint, apparently having heard some epithets recalling his sexual deviancy. If I had been there, I would not have have mentioned his sexual issues, which are beside the point; I would have called him one of the worst humans on the planet, personally responsible for $2.5 trillion worth of the national debt, and deserving of a prison term. When he apologizes for his corruption and willingly delivers himself to prison, I will apologize for the handful of idiots who called him the wrong names.

02/19/2010 (4:37 pm)

Tea Party Anniversary Day, and A Little Reminder

fireCommemorating the day when Rick Santelli first called for a Tea Party in Chicago, the mainstream press and its friends on the hard left are attempting to pin a lone murder/suicide on the Tea Party movement.

A software engineer with a grudge against the IRS went postal yesterday and flew his Piper PA-28 airplane into the IRS office building in Austin, TX, killing himself and at least one other person. Before taking the action, though, he posted a fervid rant on the Internet and burned his house down. Steve Spruiell at the National Review predicted a knee-jerk attempt to pin the action on the Tea Party movement a few minutes ahead of the first MSM report doing exactly that. More attempts followed.

I suppose it’s not impossible that the demented fellow attended a rally or two, but it’s not all that likely. His rant includes accusing corporate capitalists of committing “scores of atrocities,” calls those who organize religion “monsters,” accuses the American medical system of committing murders, and compares the IRS to the Catholic Inquisition. If this sounds “similar to the alienation we’re hearing from the extreme elements of the Tea Party movement” to Capehart at the WaPo, it’s probably because he has a bigoted and ill-informed view of that movement.

Of course, the left has similarly been attempting to discredit the Tea Party movement from the beginning. Just yesterday I posted regarding the Clintonistas planning their slam attacks, but that’s just the latest in a long string of ineffectual fulminations. Michelle Malkin’s cheat sheet on the Tea Party movement’s origins from last April included this little summary of the early attempts to pooh-pooh the obviously genuine grassroots movement:

And along the way, detractors have fumbled and bumbled over how to discredit the Tea Party organizers — first blaming a cabal tied to CNBC, then jeering at the amateurishness of the participants before crying “astroturf,” then claiming the events were “financed by Fox News” or (fill-in-the-blank) conservative conspiracy, then smearing the protesters as crazed gun nuts (FNC’s Bob Beckel) and racists (FNC’s Geraldo Rivera).

A handful of psychologists might provide some interesting clues regarding why they feel the need to do this, but I think it’s a combination of snobbery and envy. Leftists disdain the average American, thinking him an under-educated, unthinking dolt incapable of managing his own life (and “clinging to guns and religion…”) If the Proles are restless, it must be something really stupid that they’re restless about, right? But then again, the energy of the Tea Parties is so real that it exposes leftist agitation for the put-on that it is; leftists spend a great deal of their emotional energy affecting rage over issues that were relevant no more recently than 1972. They’re jealous of those who belong to a movement that’s actually relevant. Remind yourselves of FireDogLake’s Jane Hamsher’s sour-grapes denunciation from her failed attempt to counter with a leftist anti-Tea-Party last April (hat tip to Frank Strategies for the vid):

Sad and pathetic. “Financed by Fox News” turns out to mean “reported by Fox News,” in a little demonstration of FDL’s journalistic ethics (follow the Frank Strategies link above the video). Not to mention that Hamsher has about the scariest eyes I’ve seen in a year; there’s something wrong with that woman.

hellno_IneedHowever badly they want to make the entire Tea Party movement look loony, they can’t, because it’s not loony; it’s authentic grassroots Americana. The Tea Party movement, at its core, is simply individuals who have taken the basic soundness of the political system for granted most of their lives, but who have come to realize that the entire system is failing them. They stand for simple, straightforward virtues like individual liberty, fiscal sanity, limited government, free markets, and reward for honest labor. They believe that neither party represents those interests reliably, that both parties have abandoned them in favor of personal nest-feathering and ideologies headed in the wrong direction. They have chosen to exercise their Constitutional right as the People from whom the authority of government arises, and are petitioning the government for redress of their grievances. Gatherings totaling everything from a dozen to a million have met peacefully all over the nation to make these petitions public. If that’s loony, then God bless us for a nation of loons, ’cause that seems sane, decent, and appropriate to me.

It frightens the government because it threatens their jobs and their power. It frightens the left because it stands directly in the path of the progressive march toward neo-fascist statism and says “hell no.” Neither is reacting well.

Let’s all remind ourselves how it started: an outraged reaction against the government bailing out distressed and possibly undeserving mortgage-holders using hundreds of billions of dollars that simply were not available (speaking of how we got a $1.6 trillion deficit). A handful of home-schooling moms around the country organized rallies, footing the $50 municipal permits out of their own pockets, and a movement was born. A few days later, Rick Santelli of CNN made his famous rant from the trading floor of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange:

My own reaction was here.

If you think of it, offer a prayer of thanksgiving and blessing toward the “professional organizer” who started the whole thing rolling, Keli Carender. Better yet, why not get involved yourself in the next Tea Party gathering? This is America, after all, and even if the dollar is toast, We the People are still the sole source of authority here.

12/16/2009 (10:39 am)

A Message to US Delegates in Copenhagen and the Rest of the World

Today is the 236th anniversary of the Boston Tea Party.

Tomorrow morning, delegates at the Copenhagen climate change summit will read in the newspaper of the meeting the following message from the people of the United States, courtesy of American Solutions:

In America, We Have a Constitution.
It Begins: “We the People”

Our Constitution Requires International Agreements to
Be Agreed Upon By our Senate

Our President Does Not Have Support in our Senate for
Binding Carbon Emissions Limits

Our Environmental Protection Agency Recently Asserted It Has the
Power to Impose Carbon Emissions Limits

Such Action would be Tantamount to our Executive Branch Taxing the American People without
Approval from the Elected Representatives in our Legislative Branch

That’s Called “Taxation without Representation” and
We Will Not Stand for it

The American Revolution and a Famous Tea Party in
Boston in 1773 Was About Rejecting Taxation without Representation

We Reject Taxation without Representation even if it
is attempted by our President through an international “political” agreement like the Copenhagen 15

Through Our Election Process, our Presidents, Representatives, and Administrators Are
Accountable to the American People

Unlike Other Countries, We Do Not Have a Democracy Deficit

In America, Mesdames and Messieurs, We the People Govern


Appropriate thanks to Newt Gingrich at American Solutions. This is a clear declaration, and I’ll stand by it.

11/04/2009 (8:18 am)


Christie won in New Jersey, and McDonnell won in Virginia. Hoffman lost to Democrat Bob Owens in the New York 23rd. But it was a conclusive win for conservatism.

Allahpundit at Hot Air has what I consider a sound analysis of the exit polling produced by CBS. As predicted, the questions asked by the networks aimed at answering the question “Was this a referendum on Obama?” with “No.” It’s the wrong question, because lots of people who answer these polls separate the individual from his policies. Few people said Obama was the main factor, and those who did, split evenly over whether he was a positive or negative factor; but nearly everybody said the economy was their largest concern, and — note this carefully — said so in the same concentration as they said it a year ago. The point is, they voted for Obama a year ago because they were concerned about the economy, and they voted against Democrats this time because they were concerned about the economy. Conclusion? Last year they thought the Democrats might improve the economy, this year they don’t.

Hoffman’s narrow loss in New York is a disappointment, but again, Allahpundit has the correct take: the point was made to Republican leadership that the base will only accept fiscal conservatives, and that point was driven home whether Hoffman won or lost. And since Hoffman was not running as a Republican, a further point was made: at least at this juncture in American history, people are unlikely to vote for 3rd parties. The correct strategy for conservatives has to be to retake the Republican party and shift it to the right. As Rush Limbaugh has been pointing out for a while, Republican identification is down, but conservative identification is at an all-time high — over 40% of the nation, with liberal identification near 20%. The losses in 2006 and 2008 were largely the result of the Republican party regulars driving away their base. To win again, they need to earn it back.

Christie’s win in New Jersey is the most important to me. Chris Christie appears to be an honest man with intentions of cleaning up the state. The most important shift that can take place in America is the shift toward righteousness. Ending corruption in politics must take priority. I do not imagine his task will be easy, and I wonder if it’s even possible, but my prayers will go with him.

Jonah Goldberg adds this little gem about the New Jersey race:

Wow. That’s just amazing. I don’t see how the White House can spin it away. Remember, their explanation for Deeds’s loss was that Deeds didn’t embrace Obama enough. Corzine hugged Obama and made the election about Obama in a state Obama carried by 15 points and where Dems outnumber Republicans by a wide margin. And he lost.

That’s gotta hurt.

The first battle has been fought. Now let’s mobilize and tell our representatives that we will not accept the destruction of the economy or the republic in a vain attempt to violate the laws of human nature and make government health care work better than the best medical care system the world has ever seen. ObamaCare will be a disaster on every level. Let’s kill it.

Older Posts »