An appeal to my reasonable conservative friends:

If you are not reasonable and open-minded, don’t read any further. I’m not looking for “zots.” I’m looking for reasonable people who are serious about making the right choice. When I know I’ve chosen wisely, I feel at peace, without doubt in my mind, and start to get excited – like Chrissy Mathews, I get “that tingle.” How do you feel when you know you’ve made the right choice?

At this point, you’ve been following the primary race for months, and that means you are looking to make the right choice. Are you aware of how important making the right choice is in this primary process? I agree, and that’s why it is important to keep an open mind. That’s why you’ve read this far, so you might as well hear me out.

Obama has made it clear that he is pinning his reelection efforts on class warfare. So, think about whom you would want the GOP nominee to be if you were Obama, and you needed a target for class warfare? I agree – Mitt Romney. Understand that Obama uses Alinsky tactics, and Alinsky tactic 13 is “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.” Simply put, it is much easier to attack an organization or an idea if you can ‘put a face on it’. If you can find a single individual who both represents your opponent, and who, given the right spin, can be portrayed as the face of evil, you can use this person as a proxy for your attacks on your adversary. What face would you put on the 1%? Mitt Romney.

You may think that Mitt Romney is a great guy, and a great example of success, and I agree with some of that (and certainly applaud his success), and I would add that you should have no doubt in your mind that this is exactly what Obama will do (stick a big, fat 1% on him), and you can imagine that he is licking his chops in anticipation of doing it. If Mitt Romney is the nominee, this is what the general election will look like. Click Here. No matter what he says or how well he says it, he will not be able to shake that label. How does that make you feel about Mitt? And it doesn’t help that he has a habit of making mistakes and saying the wrong thing. Click here. Even Romney booster John McCain no longer believes Romney can win. Click Here.

Besides the “1%er” card that will be played against Romney, the Democrats also have their old favorite: the race card. Mitt is a very committed member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, aka the Mormons, and until 1978, Mormon theology relegated blacks to a kind of second-class membership in the church. After considerable social and political pressure, the church’s “living prophet” declared a new “revelation” changing the previous position which had been held since the church’s inception. Already, many on the Left are raising a stink about this. We can be sure that if Mitt were the nominee, this ugly issue would only get uglier — much uglier. The Democrat-Media Complex will make sure of that.

Obama’s second trick is throwing “red meat” distractions to keep us from discussing the areas where he is most vulnerable, such as economic and foreign policy. The biggest distraction so far has been the contraception controversy. And Rick Santorum took the bait — big time. Rick Santorum is a great father with great moral values, but he is also a one trick pony. Social issues are important, but he just can’t stop talking about them, and that has gotten him in a ton of trouble. The issue isn’t that he talks a lot about social policy, the issue is that he just can’t change gears quickly enough to avoid the damage caused by Obama’s intentional deceptions and sleights-of-hand. Consider how many distractions Obama will throw out there if Rick is the nominee. We’ll be talking about birth control all the way through November. By the time Rick manages to shift the debate back to Obama’s weak points, it may be too late.

Rick also tends to make serious, and very public, mistakes. For example, he loses his cool very quickly. Click Here. Cringing? He also gets confused regularly – in this instance, he gives Obama credit for CREATING jobs, publicly, on CNN! Click here. Just imagine if he makes even ONE mistake like this in the months between the nomination and the general election. Understand the very real risk with Rick. How do you feel about that, given the stakes?

The issue of contraception is problematic for Santorum not only because the Left is skillfully and shamelessly using it to sidetrack discussion away from Obama’s staggering malfeasances in both foreign and domestic policy — but for another, more subtle but perhaps more important reason: The driving force behind Obama is the “Shadow Party” funded by George Soros, who has an obsession with population control. Soros and other Agenda 21 promoters believe that world population must be reduced by literally billions of people. Remember the Left’s over-the-top, hysterical, screaming reaction to the VP nomination of Sarah Palin? Her being the mother of five children, one of whom has Down’s Syndrome — a genetic disorder to which many leftists believe abortion is the only appropriate response — was a huge component in that. It may not have been openly admitted in the “mainstream” media, but Left-wing blogs were full of unimaginably cruel, sick attacks on little Trig Palin and the mother who bore him. Rick Santorum, the father of seven children, one of whom has Trisomy-18, has the Left’s bull’s-eye on his back.

That leaves Newt.

Newt is a flawed man, but recognize that his flaws are less subject to substantive attack. For example, Freddie and Fannie? It may be a big deal in the Republican primary, but Democrats do NOT want to go there! Yes, he’s had multiple marriages, but how many times has Rush been married? Do you still listen to Rush, at least here and there? And, of course, Democrats cannot launch credible attacks on the subject of adultery.

Nevertheless, we know that the Left will demonize Newt just as viciously as they would Romney or Santorum — because, after all, that’s what the Left DOES. A key difference, however, is that Newt fights back. Like the late, great Andrew Breitbart, Newt is a “happy warrior” who both understands the Left, and loves taking them on. Plus, like Breitbart, Newt understands that Big Media is every bit as much our opponent as is the Democratic Party. He is smart, articulate and confident enough to be able to answer their attacks on the spot, without hemming or hawing. People in media continually try to nail Newt with their “gotcha” questions — but they never succeed, do they?

Newt realizes, in a way few others do, that America’s very survival is threatened not only by terrorism and rogue states outside our borders, but by two major enemies within: communism and radical Islam. Yet, no other candidate besides Newt even mentions Saul Alinsky, Bill Ayers and George Soros. Newt is the only one who seems to recognize — or at least, will publicly say — that Obama is not a misguided incompetent with well-meaning intentions, but rather a Marxist radical who believes America is more evil than good, and who is committed to destroying the freedoms that have made America great.

As for radical Islam, while Rick Santorum recognizes the threat from Iran, and is very knowledgeable on national security matters, only Newt will tell you about the giant strides that sharia (Islamic law) has already made right here in the U.S., thanks to CAIR, ISNA, ICNA, MAS, MSA and the whole alphabet soup of Muslim Brotherhood-spawned groups that, despite proven connections to Hamas and other terror groups, are presented as legitimate “moderates” in our media and have infiltrated our government at high levels, including within the Department of Homeland Security.

We look around and see a perfect storm of economic collapse, national-security threats and inflamed social passions converging on us. America is — whether or not we yet realize it — in as much danger now as Britain was in the spring of 1940. Almost too late, the British people finally recognized that Winston Churchill — whom they’d previously despised as “impulsive” and “arrogant,” and castigated for his “poor judgment” and “grandiose ideas” — was actually the best man, perhaps the only man, who could lead them through the crisis. I’m not saying Newt is Churchill — but having studied Churchill, I am struck by the remarkable parallels between the two. Just as Churchill saw who Hitler really was long before most of his countrymen woke up, Newt understands the dangers to America that many people have so far been unable or unwilling to see. Newt will help open their eyes — because, like Churchill, Newt has a gift for explaining things in ways people can understand. Just as importantly, Newt has the bulldog tenacity and unabashed can-do attitude that the nation needs in its leader if we are to make it through the tough times ahead. As we saw so clearly during the South Carolina debate — when standing ovations kept erupting as Newt spoke — Newt has, as Churchill did, the power to inspire.

Before I close, I urge you to do one thing, and one thing only… please watch this video – click here. You’ve read this far, so another minute or two won’t kill you. Click here. Now, how do you feel about this man going up against Barack Obama?

As Thomas Sowell has said, “This is not just another election.” This is about the survival of our Constitutional Republic. That is why Sowell, as well as Gov. Rick Perry, former Sen. Fred Thompson, former Congressman J.C. Watts, Herman Cain and Michael Reagan, among many others, have endorsed Newt Gingrich to be our next President. He’s not perfect — but neither was Winston Churchill. Newt Gingrich, like the Prime Minister during the Battle of Britain, is the right man at the right time.

Earlier this week, Governor Perry released a campaign ad which contained a line about gays being able to serve in the military, but children not being allowed to pray in schools. The theme of the ad was ending President Obama’s ‘war on religion.’  It was, of course,  met with the usual and expected responses from various quarters. I’m not going to defend nor bash the ad; it’s neither here nor there to me. What I found most disturbing, and most telling, was GOProud’s reprehensible, bullying and bigoted response to the ad.

A report surfaced that Governor Perry’s Chief Pollster, Tony Fabrizio, was opposed to the ad. GOProud jumped on that and ran all the way to Vileville with it, exposing their belief that all gay people must think the same way. Granted I’m one of those icky breeders, but I’m fairly certain that gay people are, you know, individuals. With thoughts and beliefs of their very own.  Not so, according to GOProud! Stray too far, and we will shame you into lockstep! You see, in the midst of a stompy foot temper tantrum, GOProud’s true colors came out – and the colors are so not fabulous:

Between updates he made on his Twitter feed and an interview he gave to The Huffington Post’s Sam Stein, the co-founder and executive director of the gay GOP group GOProud, Jimmy LaSalvia, appears to be claiming that Rick Perry’s top pollster Tony Fabrizio is gay — and using an ugly antigay slur to describe him….

Reached for comment and offered to appear on my radio progam to discuss the comments, LaSaliva passed, saying that what he said to Stein said enough and that he didn’t want to “play in the outing sandbox.”

Um. You can’t say that you don’t want to ‘play in the outing sandbox’ while playing in the outing sandbox. Further, the anti-gay slur appeared on his twitter feed and is pictured below:

He followed that up with a tweet confirming that he “was talking about Rick Perry’s pollster/strategist.” He reaffirmed both today, including his use of the F word which I can now only assume is fair game, as it has been GOProud Approved ™. Not content with just putting themselves in identity politics-laden boxes, they decided to ‘out’  Tony Fabrizio in a contemptible attempt to force him into the box they made for him. This is a typical Leftist tactic and one that cannot be tolerated by, or on, the Right.

Make no mistake; what GOProud did is a typical leftist tactic. ‘Outing’ is used as some sort of brave action defending the ‘gay community’, for which the outers pat selves on back for being so true to the cause ™ and exposing the alleged ‘hypocrisy’ of the outees. But there is no hypocrisy! One can be gay and also be opposed to gay marriage or the repeal of DADT, for example. That is allowed; people have this pesky habit of thinking for themselves. So, in actuality the bullying ‘outing’ tactic is in no way honorable; it is simply disgusting, nasty, vindictive and super assy. The sole intent is to attempt to shame and marginalize those who don’t bow to a liberal agenda and stray too far from the plantation (just as they constantly try to sexualize or dehumanize conservative women). See, even the slightest hint that gay people don’t all think and believe the same things is a danger to the Left, much like how they believe all African-Americans should think the same.

Remember Barbara Boxer, Ma’am questioning Harry Alford, the chair of the National Black Chamber of Commerce and being all ‘but… but … the NAACP disagrees! How can you not think the same as they do?!” She was shocked and in disbelief that he could possibly disagree with the NAACP and the 100 Black Men of Atlanta. How can this be? This does not suit! All y’all must think the same – race politics are our bread and butter! Or when Harry Reid was flabbergasted at the very thought of a Hispanic being a Republican. Harry Reid is someone whose ivory tower should be padded. He said “I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican.” Think independently?! Unheard of.

In the same way, gay activists, liberal and faux-conservative alike, want people to believe that political ideology and sexuality are somehow magically and permanently tied together and cannot be separated. One’s sexuality MUST DICTATE whether or not one believes in gay marriage legislation and the like. The same way that a fancy womb MUST DICTATE whether or not one is pro-abortion (you are gender traitor if you disagree). Outing is the blackmail and ‘punishment’ for not toeing this revolting line. And it’s disgusting. It’s vile when the Left does it and it’s even more vile when an alleged Right group does it.

I’ve supported GOProud in the past and this greatly disappoints me. It would have been one thing had GOProud simply denounced the ad. I would have expected that, even if it had shown them to be a one-note organization. That’s to be expected with identity politics groups. It’s kind of the purpose of  organizations founded upon some sort of group identity, no matter how forcefully such groups try to proclaim – or even try to be - otherwise. But they didn’t stop there and they’ve supported similar bullying tactics before. They support Human Rights Campaign and their gestapo tactics against Cleta Mitchell, wherein they are going after her law firm for daring to have an attorney at their firm who is openly against gay marriage. Funny how *some* people aren’t supposed to be “living openly and honestly“, huh?

You know, this is not the way to make nice-nice and convince people that you are right on an issue. All they’ve done is engaged in a circle of jerks smugly back patting – we expose the supposed hypocrisy of men who DARE to be both gay and socially conservative!

But, in reality, all they’ve exposed is the reprehensible tactics of gay activists and the Left. Which is, evidently, redundant.

Earlier this week, Governor Perry released a campaign ad which contained a line about gays being able to serve in the military, but children not being allowed to pray in schools. The theme of the ad was ending President Obama’s ‘war on religion.’  It was, of course,  met with the usual and expected responses from various quarters. I’m not going to defend nor bash the ad; it’s neither here nor there to me. What I found most disturbing, and most telling, was GOProud’s reprehensible, bullying and bigoted response to the ad.

A report surfaced that Governor Perry’s Chief Pollster, Tony Fabrizio, was opposed to the ad. GOProud jumped on that and ran all the way to Vileville with it, exposing their belief that all gay people must think the same way. Granted I’m one of those icky breeders, but I’m fairly certain that gay people are, you know, individuals. With thoughts and beliefs of their very own.  Not so, according to GOProud! Stray too far, and we will shame you into lockstep! You see, in the midst of a stompy foot temper tantrum, GOProud’s true colors came out – and the colors are so not fabulous:

Between updates he made on his Twitter feed and an interview he gave to The Huffington Post’s Sam Stein, the co-founder and executive director of the gay GOP group GOProud, Jimmy LaSalvia, appears to be claiming that Rick Perry’s top pollster Tony Fabrizio is gay — and using an ugly antigay slur to describe him….

Reached for comment and offered to appear on my radio progam to discuss the comments, LaSaliva passed, saying that what he said to Stein said enough and that he didn’t want to “play in the outing sandbox.”

Um. You can’t say that you don’t want to ‘play in the outing sandbox’ while playing in the outing sandbox. Further, the anti-gay slur appeared on his twitter feed and is pictured below:

He followed that up with a tweet confirming that he “was talking about Rick Perry’s pollster/strategist.” He reaffirmed both today, including his use of the F word which I can now only assume is fair game, as it has been GOProud Approved ™. Not content with just putting themselves in identity politics-laden boxes, they decided to ‘out’  Tony Fabrizio in a contemptible attempt to force him into the box they made for him. This is a typical Leftist tactic and one that cannot be tolerated by, or on, the Right.

Make no mistake; what GOProud did is a typical leftist tactic. ‘Outing’ is used as some sort of brave action defending the ‘gay community’, for which the outers pat selves on back for being so true to the cause ™ and exposing the alleged ‘hypocrisy’ of the outees. But there is no hypocrisy! One can be gay and also be opposed to gay marriage or the repeal of DADT, for example. That is allowed; people have this pesky habit of thinking for themselves. So, in actuality the bullying ‘outing’ tactic is in no way honorable; it is simply disgusting, nasty, vindictive and super assy. The sole intent is to attempt to shame and marginalize those who don’t bow to a liberal agenda and stray too far from the plantation (just as they constantly try to sexualize or dehumanize conservative women). See, even the slightest hint that gay people don’t all think and believe the same things is a danger to the Left, much like how they believe all African-Americans should think the same.

Remember Barbara Boxer, Ma’am questioning Harry Alford, the chair of the National Black Chamber of Commerce and being all ‘but… but … the NAACP disagrees! How can you not think the same as they do?!” She was shocked and in disbelief that he could possibly disagree with the NAACP and the 100 Black Men of Atlanta. How can this be? This does not suit! All y’all must think the same – race politics are our bread and butter! Or when Harry Reid was flabbergasted at the very thought of a Hispanic being a Republican. Harry Reid is someone whose ivory tower should be padded. He said “I don’t know how anyone of Hispanic heritage could be a Republican.” Think independently?! Unheard of.

In the same way, gay activists, liberal and faux-conservative alike, want people to believe that political ideology and sexuality are somehow magically and permanently tied together and cannot be separated. One’s sexuality MUST DICTATE whether or not one believes in gay marriage legislation and the like. The same way that a fancy womb MUST DICTATE whether or not one is pro-abortion (you are gender traitor if you disagree). Outing is the blackmail and ‘punishment’ for not toeing this revolting line. And it’s disgusting. It’s vile when the Left does it and it’s even more vile when an alleged Right group does it.

I’ve supported GOProud in the past and this greatly disappoints me. It would have been one thing had GOProud simply denounced the ad. I would have expected that, even if it had shown them to be a one-note organization. That’s to be expected with identity politics groups. It’s kind of the purpose of  organizations founded upon some sort of group identity, no matter how forcefully such groups try to proclaim – or even try to be - otherwise. But they didn’t stop there and they’ve supported similar bullying tactics before. They support Human Rights Campaign and their gestapo tactics against Cleta Mitchell, wherein they are going after her law firm for daring to have an attorney at their firm who is openly against gay marriage. Funny how *some* people aren’t supposed to be “living openly and honestly“, huh?

You know, this is not the way to make nice-nice and convince people that you are right on an issue. All they’ve done is engaged in a circle of jerks smugly back patting – we expose the supposed hypocrisy of men who DARE to be both gay and socially conservative!

But, in reality, all they’ve exposed is the reprehensible tactics of gay activists and the Left. Which is, evidently, redundant.

Leftists hate free enterprise. Yep. They hate the free market, and Hollywood leftists ESPECIALLY hate it.

I know, I know. It’s ironic that those Hollywood types, who make SO MUCH MONEY in the free market that is the entertainment business, are so ignorant of, blind to, and quick to bite the hand that feeds them. More on that in a minute.

You know something that leftists love? Again, especially Hollywood leftists? They love royalty. Any royals will do. Hollywood types recently sucked up like leeches to two young newly-married British people who, as it turns out, know something about leeches, as their whole lives will be spent sucking up resources from the taxpayers of Great Britain.

Anyway, the reason leftists love royalty is because that’s the role they envision for themselves in the coming utopia they want to build. (For more on that, see my article Heaven on Earth Comes with a Hellish Price Tag.) After all, someone has to run things, don’t they? And who better than the people who are prettier and therefore better than the rest of us? By the way, they LOVE it when the media calls them “Hollywood royalty” for this very reason – in their minds, it’s a preview of a most alluring coming attraction.

But I digress. Why does Hollywood, and why do leftists, hate free enterprise?

Because the free market means that they cannot control you – and control is what they need to create that perfect world they’re so longing to impose on the rest of us.

But the liberating power of free enterprise means that instead of being forced to do something (like, say, buy health insurance), you can sit back and let different businesses compete for your dollar. Each one of those businesses has to respect you, compete for your attention, persuade you – because their very existence depends on you.

So do you feel respected at the DMV? (As Bill Whittle asks in his outstanding DVD “Firewall: What We Believe.”) Or do you feel respected at the post office? The post office is actually a good example, because in some ways, the free market has brought a ray of cleansing sunshine to that operation. FedEx and UPS have made a lot of money because people (even leftists!) always seek the cheaper, more efficient, and more pleasant alternative. There are no options to the DMV; nothing cheaper, nothing more efficient, and nothing more pleasant. That’s your tax dollars at work.

Government cannot compete with free enterprise, because the genius of free enterprise is that it channels what could be a negative – human self-interest – and makes it work for the good of society. I want more money. I want you to buy my product so I can have more money. So I will make the best product I can and sell it at the best price I can and provide the best customer service I can – all so I can get your business. And my competitor down the street, if he’s smart, will do the same thing.

Who wins? You do, Mr. Customer. You do. And all of society does. Because if my competitor starts getting too much of my business, I will have to innovate and come up with a new, great idea that serves people in another way. And then everybody’s better off again due to my new idea. And on and on it goes.

This, my friends, is how we got cell phones and laptops and iPads, and gourmet ice cream, and plush hotel rooms, and 92,403 TV channels to choose from, and… well, everything that makes our lives better than pretty much any other people in any other time.

I wish the people who are so all-fired insistent on being pro-choice when it comes to a woman’s right to kill her baby were pro-choice in all things market-related (to be fair, some of them are… but most of them aren’t). Pro-choice in the market means you support all of us having more choices, which means we have more power over our own lives, which means we have more liberty.

When the government runs things, we’re stuck. We have no choices, no power to change the situation, and no freedom to go elsewhere. Just imagine that endless line at the DMV, the bored and unmotivated workers behind the counter who will never lose their jobs no matter how incompetent their performance (special shout out to public sector unions!), and the absolute certainty of knowing that you could actually be arrested and put in jail if you don’t stay in line like a good little sheep and get your license.

That grim picture… or people competing to make you happy.

Only a crazy person would opt for the former when they could have the latter. Or a person who craves power over others and envisions being in charge. Or a person who’s a true believer in utopia and is willing to pull the oars in the slave ship.

And without exception, everyone who hates free enterprise falls into one of those three categories. The good news: They’re not all crazy! The bad news: The power-hungry – and the True Believers – are a lot more sinister than crazy people. And the DMV is only a little preview of a most appalling coming attraction.

Leftists are lining up to blame the riots that began in London last week after the fatal shooting of a man by police but quickly spread to other parts of Great Britain in the days thereafter on the austerity measures that have supposedly been implemented by the Liberal-Conservative Government. That is “supposedly” because whereas cuts have been planned, most have yet to be enacted.

Writing for Foreign Affairs, Matthias Matthijs observes that the London riots are “set against the backdrop of Britain’s ongoing fiscal and sovereign debt crisis and the coalition government’s politics of austerity. They illustrate the critical connection between class politics and fiscal retrenchment,” he suggests.

The problem with [slashing public expenditure] is the unequal burden that such cuts put on various parts of the United Kingdom’s income distribution.

Whereas the country’s top earners can afford alternatives to state largesse and thus do not feel the weight of fiscal austerity, fiscal retrenchment hurts those at the bottom who directly rely on government services such as welfare, public education and transportation.

Nowhere throughout his article does Matthijs bother to mount an intellectual defense of the welfare state that has so obviously failed in Britain. Nowhere does he suggest how the country might otherwise emerge from fiscal ruin if not by spending cuts that “hurt” the poor. Nor does he offer any evidence for his preposterous claim that somehow, budget policy compelled the dissatisfied youth of London to riot and plunder.

Time‘s Tony Karon similarly blames a retrenchment of the state for the unrest without backing up his claim. He believes that “an Austerity Intifada is sweeping Europe” because “neoliberal economic policies have funneled most of the wealth created in recent decades to a small, already wealthy elite, while shrinking the middle class.”

Whether they respond with disciplined protest or nihilism and criminality, millions of young people in Europe today see playing by the rules of the socioeconomic and political status quo as offering them no decent future.

Karon even comes close to apologizing for the widespread looting, noting that demonstrators “accuse the Western world’s bankers of doing the same to the state, demanding bailouts to save them from the consequences of their catastrophic mistakes.” Right. They did it too!

Both authors completely ignore what’s at the root of London’s riots which is an utter lack of self-esteem that the very welfarism that they insist be perpetuated has fostered over decades.

Prime Minister David Cameron hinted at this on Wednesday when he pointed out that “people [were] allowed to feel that the world owes them something” in the desolate neighborhoods that have recently been stricken with violence. The conservative leader added that a country has a “moral problem” when a “sick” part of its society believes that it has only rights and no responsibilities.

He’s right. The British rioters aren’t guided by any particular ideology or well defined frustration. Their anger has nothing to do with austerity measures that haven’t even come into effect yet! Their anxiety reflects an entitlement mentality that is under threat. They and their parents were told by generations of politicians that they had a “right” to welfare provisions paid for by the productive segments of society and now that promise is falling apart. They were never taught to take care of themselves and soon, they might be forced to.

It’s tough adjusting to reality. But that’s not an excuse to take it out on your neighbors who always did just try to make a living.

The western organizations that agitate for Hamas are preparing for the next Flotilla circus, in which they plan to breach Israel’s blockade of Hamasistan (aka Gaza).  This 15-ship fleet includes a vessel that will carry 36 American leftists.  The ship is appropriately named The Audacity of Hope, as a tribute to the most pro-Palestinian leader of the free world.  No, they are not bringing hope and change to the region; they are bringing deadly chemicals to throw on the Israeli soldiers who will inevitably board the ship.  Now, six Democrats are asking the State Department to protect the American leftists while they offer aid and comfort to our enemies.  This from the Jerusalem Post:

The six members of Congress to sign the letter regarding the American presence are Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich, Missouri Representative William Lacy Clay, California Representatives Sam Farr, Bob Filner and Barbara Lee, and District of Columbia Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton. Kucinich initiated the letter.

“We request that you do everything in your power to work with the Israeli government to ensure the safety of the US citizens on board,” the letter reads, saying that the signatories “urge all parties to practice maximum restraint and avoid violence.”

Yes, we all remember the absence of violence from last years’ flotilla.

The irony about the disquiet directed toward the Israeli blockade is that there is no longer a need to challenge the blockade. There essentially is no blockade ever since the Egyptian provisional government, the wonderful product of the cherished Arab Spring, promised to open the Rafah border crossing at the Egyptian border with Gaza.  Yes, it wasn’t only the Israelis who didn’t want the Hamas lunatics running amok in their country; Egypt didn’t want them either – at least not until they threw out our ally, Mubarak.

One would think that members of Congress have better things to do than collaborate with Hamas supporters.  Then again, the deepest, darkest corners of the Democrat caucus have always harbored that constituency.  Seven Democrats sit on the board of one of the flotilla supporters; Progressive Democrats of America.   Last week, one of the members, extremist Rep. Lynn Woolsey, who will thankfully retire next year, was caught on tape chanting dorky anti-Israel slogans at a Code Pink rally.  Toward the end of this video, Woolsey heaps praises upon the Code Pink activist who disrupted Israeli PM Netanyahu’s speech before a joint meeting of Congress.

(HT The Blaze)
It’s just a shame that these Congresscritters won’t be on the ship when all the action takes place.

The western organizations that agitate for Hamas are preparing for the next Flotilla circus, in which they plan to breach Israel’s blockade of Hamasistan (aka Gaza).  This 15-ship fleet includes a vessel that will carry 36 American leftists.  The ship is appropriately named The Audacity of Hope, as a tribute to the most pro-Palestinian leader of the free world.  No, they are not bringing hope and change to the region; they are bringing deadly chemicals to throw on the Israeli soldiers who will inevitably board the ship.  Now, six Democrats are asking the State Department to protect the American leftists while they offer aid and comfort to our enemies.  This from the Jerusalem Post:

The six members of Congress to sign the letter regarding the American presence are Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich, Missouri Representative William Lacy Clay, California Representatives Sam Farr, Bob Filner and Barbara Lee, and District of Columbia Representative Eleanor Holmes Norton. Kucinich initiated the letter.

“We request that you do everything in your power to work with the Israeli government to ensure the safety of the US citizens on board,” the letter reads, saying that the signatories “urge all parties to practice maximum restraint and avoid violence.”

Yes, we all remember the absence of violence from last years’ flotilla.

The irony about the disquiet directed toward the Israeli blockade is that there is no longer a need to challenge the blockade. There essentially is no blockade ever since the Egyptian provisional government, the wonderful product of the cherished Arab Spring, promised to open the Rafah border crossing at the Egyptian border with Gaza.  Yes, it wasn’t only the Israelis who didn’t want the Hamas lunatics running amok in their country; Egypt didn’t want them either – at least not until they threw out our ally, Mubarak.

One would think that members of Congress have better things to do than collaborate with Hamas supporters.  Then again, the deepest, darkest corners of the Democrat caucus have always harbored that constituency.  Seven Democrats sit on the board of one of the flotilla supporters; Progressive Democrats of America.   Last week, one of the members, extremist Rep. Lynn Woolsey, who will thankfully retire next year, was caught on tape chanting dorky anti-Israel slogans at a Code Pink rally.  Toward the end of this video, Woolsey heaps praises upon the Code Pink activist who disrupted Israeli PM Netanyahu’s speech before a joint meeting of Congress.

(HT The Blaze)
It’s just a shame that these Congresscritters won’t be on the ship when all the action takes place.

I blog for another site that is dominated by leftist commenters who will rarely exhibit the ability to listen to reason in my view.  I like to give them things to chew on that will keep them busy and “entertain” them.  I thought I’d share it here…

Okay, until now, I have NEVER written a blog with either Palin’s or Bachmann’s name in the title.  At most, I’ve posted one blog with a passing mention of Bachmann in the main blog note, but focused on something else (Chucky, the Senator that needs a teleprompter, to be exact).  But now, donkeys are flying (yes, pun intended there) and I’m putting a spotlight on them (Palin and Bachmann, not the donkeys).  And I’m giving the left a twofer by talking about both of them.  (Oh and uh, cue all the kneejerk vile statements about Palin and Bachmann now that I’ve mentioned their names.  Hey, just to get it all out of your system: George W. Bush.  Better yet, figure out how to blame Bush for Palin and Bachmann.)

So, anyway, I’ve often thought of the left as much like the fictional Borg on Star Trek.  I’ve noticed an increase in hysteria about Palin and Bachmann around here and elsewhere.  And of course, the campaign machinery of Mr. “Hope and Change” just announced he is running again in 2012.  It’s almost like it’s on cue.  The left suddenly start going on and on about Palin and Bachmann right before a presidential incumbent with a “D” after his name announces that he wants to win a second popularity contest.  Let’s face it, if the Democrats ran the teleprompter itself (without the human mouthpiece), the left would be mesmerized by it, cheer for it, and vote for it.

But really, if we are to listen to the left’s rhetoric about either of these women who dare to disagree with the Democrats’ mandatory template for the views they expect and insist on women having, neither of them have any chance of winning.  The left routinely lists a plethora of insults for these two primarily because they do not tow the Democrat party line.  If we are to take the left seriously (note: today is not April 1st) and assume all these insults are true, then these two simply could not be elected to anything, never mind win a presidential election.

We know the left wants a Democrat in office.  But there are other potential Republican candidates such as Romney, Huckabee, Pawlenty (oh, sorry, it’s rude to fall asleep in the middle of writing a blog).  Yet the left does not even bother saying anything about these or a number of other candidates mentioned in the media.  Why waste time on the likes of Palin or Bachmann?  The left has said they cannot win, so rest confidently in that.  Smile.  Be happy.  Enjoy life.  No need to stress about something which, according to the left, will never happen.

Seriously, both Palin and Bachmann were promoted by the left.  Without the nastiness and vile messages the left posts about them, they would not be known.  In fact, while each do have their fans among conservatives, their stardom is created by the left, not the right.  The more the left attacks them in such vile and hateful ways, the more they promote them.  Afterall, if bitter clinging leftwingers, who cling to the failed policies of the past (hat tip to none other than Obama himself and the bitter clingers script on his teleprompter) are wasting so much energy putting them down, others are going to become interested in them.  Again, the left does not give any time to Romney, Huckabee, or Pawlenty.  (On a side note, that just seems so unfair.  Since leftwingers like to legislate fairness, can’t they come up with a big, multithousand page bill that nobody has time to read, requiring that all Republican office seekers be insulted equally by the left?  Can’t we just pass it to see what’s in it?)

Finally, when the left shows such attention to any given politician, that politician becomes a huge fundraiser.  Really, if the left wants to ruin the political careers of Palin and Bachmann, the best thing is to dismiss and ignore them.

The National Lawyers Guild (NLG) featured Bernadine Dohrn as its keynote regional conference speaker APRIL 2.   The NLG is a progressive bar association funded in part by George Soros’ Open Society Institute.  While the NLG claims to be a civil rights organization, its focus lies elsewhere.  In fact, the NLG’s anthem “human rights shall be held more sacred than property interests” only thinly disguises it’s radical leanings.

Bernadine Dohrn is known for her involvement with the Weather Underground.  At one point, the FBI placed her on its list of 10 most wanted.  Her husband, Bill Ayers, was co-founder of this revolutionary group.   In a 2011 interview with the NY Times, Ms. Dohrn’s husband reiterated,  ”I don’t regret setting bombs…I feel we didn’t do enough.”

As a fugitive, Ms. Dohrn remained a leader in the Weather Underground as it continued to plant bombs at government buildings in an effort to mount a communist revolution.  Three people were killed as a result of the organization’s bomb-making activities in 1970.

By selecting a communist revolutionary so closely involved with past domestic terrorism as a keynote speaker, the National Lawyers Guild further reveals its true agenda of gradually transforming this country through the legal system.

Since the Left seized on civility as the solution to all problems political, it’s been fascinating to see them in action. The public union uprising, especially, has produced some revealing moments (everything from punching, swearing, pushing, yelling, denial of service attacks). And now, the incivility has extended to threatening Republicans on Facebook.

In this most recent case, Michael Sarge Piotrowski who self-identifies on his LinkedIn page as being the General Counsel to the Ohio Fraternal Order of Police, threatened sitting Ohio Republican Senator Frank LaRose [click to enlarge on new page]:

Here’s what he says:

“Funny thing about cops, they hold a grudge,” says Piotrowski on a Senator’s Facebook page. That seems to be awfully threatening rhetoric directed at a public official and just more evidence of creating the climate of hate. And, according to this lawyer, the words “union thug” is equivalent to the “n-word”. Only in the lefty universe where there’s a racist around every conservative corner would “union thug” be considered racist. (For information about what has Piotrowski so upset, please read Moe Lane’s post about Ohio SB5.)

After Piotrowski was challenged by other commenters about his threatening statement, he seemed to realize how it sounded and walked back by saying this:

“I am not a cop. But I also hold a grudge. There will be a multitude of opportunities for public sector employees to pay back the Republican Party for their scapegoating and general lying on this issue. None of them will involve violence.”

Still not a friendly statement, but clarifying that no violence will occur. Well, that’s a relief. What will happen, then? He doesn’t say.

Piotrowski’s statement continues like an Obama stump speech–all class warfare and division.

If it seems petty to bring up the tirade of some lawyer representing the Ohio police union, please realize that had Senator La Rose made a comment on this lawyer’s page, the press would be all over him for contributing to the “climate of hate” and decry the incivility of it all.

The civility street goes both ways, but not for leftists and the press. Only Republicans are held to the civility standard. In the absence of evidence, we’ve seen the press and leftist politicians make up stories to support the narrative that the Tea Party is a racist, bigoted group. Any person who disagrees with President Obama must be racist, they say, with straight faces. They blame Sarah Palin for creating a climate that would produce a sociopathic killer. They do all this with no evidence whatsoever.

In the last few weeks, example after example of incivility and even outright violence have been ignored, minimized, and diminished by the press. So, here’s another example, recorded as evidence that demonstrates that the true violent rhetoric and climate of hate is being fostered and encouraged by the left.