Plus, Pat in Shreveport on White House cluelessness, "What Demonstrations?"
Beck has emerged as the cable TV's Rush Limbaugh. He's now the focus of a giant demonization campaign on the left. And the reason is because few can combine performance art, emotional sincerity, and devastating political commentary as well. And he's dangerous. First Van Jones defeated. Then Yosi Sergant at the NEA. The socialist-left rightly fears who's next. The radical infilitration and ties of corruption go to the highest levels of the White House, so it's no wonder why the long knives are out.
Van Jones is the carefully groomed protégé of a network of radical organizations -- including Moveon.org -- and of Democratic sponsors like billionaire George Soros and John Podesta, former Clinton chief of staff and co-chair of the Obama transition team.
At the time of his appointment as the President’s “Green Jobs” czar – and despite a very recent 10-year history of “revolutionary” activity – Jones was a member of two key organizations at the very heart of what might be called the executive branch of the Democratic Party ....
How did John Podesta and Al Gore and Barack Obama come to be political allies of a far left radical like Van Jones, a 9/11 conspiracy “truther” and a supporter of the Hamas view that the entire state of Israel is “occupied territory?” To answer this question requires an understanding of developments within the political left that have taken place over the last two decades, and in particular the forging of a “popular front” between anti-American radicals and “mainstream liberals” in the Democratic Party.
The collapse of Communism in the early Nineties did not lead to an agonizing reappraisal of its radical agendas among many who had supported it in the West. Instead, its survivors set about creating a new socialist international which would unite “social justice” movements, radical environmental groups, leftwing trade unions, and traditional communist parties – all dedicated to the revival of utopian dreams.
The new political force made its first impression at the end of the decade when it staged global demonstrations against the World Trade Organization and the World Bank. The demonstrations erupted into large-scale violence in Seattle in 2001 when 50,000 Marxists, anarchists and environmental radicals, joined by the giant leftwing unions AFSCME and SEIU, descended on the city, smashed windows and automobiles, and set fire to buildings to protest “globalization” – the world capitalist system.
In the direct aftermath of the 9/11 attacks, the anti-globalization forces morphed into what became known as the “anti-war” movement. An already scheduled anti-globalization protest on September 29 was re-redirected (and re-named) to target America’s retaliation against al-Qaeda and the Taliban. The new “peace” movement grew to massive proportions in the lead up to the war in Iraq but it never held a single protest against Saddam’s violation of 17 UN arms control resolutions, or his expulsion of the UN arms inspectors. It did, however, mobilize 35 million people in world-wide protests against America’s “imperialist war for oil.” The orchestrators of the demonstrations were the same leaders and the same organizations, the same unions and the same “social justice” groups that had been responsible for the Seattle riots against the World Trade Organization and the international capitalist system.
A second watershed came in the run-up to the 2004 elections when billionaire George Soros decided to integrate the radicals – including their political organization ACORN -- into the structure of Democratic Party politics. Together with a group of like-minded billionaires, Soros created a “Shadow Party” (as Richard Poe and I documented in a book by that name) whose purpose was to shape the outcome of the 2004 presidential race. “America under Bush,” Soros told The Washington Post, “is a danger to the world,…” To achieve his goal, Soros created a galaxy of 527 political organizations headed by leftwing union leaders like SEIU chief Andrew Stern and Clinton operatives like Harold Ickes. As its policy brain he created the Center for American Progress.
Soros failed to achieve his goal in 2004 but he went on working to create new elements of the network, such as the Apollo Alliance. Four years later the Shadow Party was able to elect a candidate who had spent his entire political career in the bowels of this movement. Obama’s electoral success was made possible by the wide latitude he was given by the press and the public, partly because he was the first African-American with a chance to be president and partly because his campaign was deliberately crafted to convey the impression that he was a tax-cutting centrist who intended to bring Americans together to find common solutions to their problems. When confronted with his long-term associations and working partnerships with anti-American racists like Jeremiah Wright and anti-American radicals like William Ayers, he denied the obvious and successfully side-stepped its implications.
Just eight months into his presidency, however, a new Barack Obama has begun to emerge. With unseemly haste Obama has nearly bankrupted the federal government, amassing more debt in eight months than all his predecessors combined. He has appeased America’s enemies abroad and attacked America’s intelligence services at home. He has rushed forward with programs that require sweeping changes in the American economy and is now steamrolling a massive new health-care program that will give the government unprecedented control of its citizens.
Among the hallmarks of this new radical regime the appointment of Van Jones stood out for its blatant departure from political normalcy. In his White House role, the radical Jones would have represented the president in shaping a multi-billion stimulus package, which could easily function as a patronage program of particular interest to his political allies in the “Apollo Alliance,” ACORN and the leftwing unions. In the classic manual for activists on how to achieve their radical goals, Obama’s political mentor Saul Alinsky wrote: “From the moment an organizer enters a community, he lives, dreams, eats, breathes, sleeps only one thing, and that is to build the mass power base of what he calls the army.” As the president’s green jobs commissar, Van Jones had entered the trillion-dollar community of the federal government and would soon have been building his radical army. The rest of us should be wondering who his sponsors were within the White House (senior presidential advisor and long-time “progressive” Valerie Jarrett was certainly one). Then we should ask ourselves what they are planning next.
A Phoenix woman in need of a kidney transplant will receive a kidney from the cab driver who drove her to kidney dialysis appointments for two months. Steve Hartman reports.
The United States’ government reacted to to 9/11 and that reaction has been, to my mind, an enormous disaster. Yet those responsible for this disaster have been successful in hiding behind the shock of the crumbling towers, as if support for their dangerous and deadly policies is inexorably implied by feeling deeply the full weight of 9/11’s tragedy. Those most insistent that we “never forget” 9/11 are those who need our continuing collective complicity in the erosion of our civil liberties, in the weakening of the rule of law, in the unjustified invasion of unrelated foreign countries and the murder of their people, in the policy of state-sanctioned torture. The difficulty many Americans have in separating remembrance of an act of terror from an endorsement of the war on terror may turn out be George W. Bush’s great legacy.Notice the part about how backers of a firm stand against modern terrorism "need our continuing complicity" in the erosion of rights, blah, blah, blah. It's totally unoriginal, in any case. Glenn Greenwald, Andrew Sullivan ... these guys are a dime of dozen. They claim to be libertarian, but the result is that folks like Wilkinson end up joining with the anti-Americans on the radical left, and ultimately with our Islamist enemies who remain out there, intent to kill and maim as many regular Americans that they can. Meanwhile, these same libertarian-leftists can sit tight while railing away (stoned) at the criminal justice system and the war on drugs, using their platform attacking the Bush administration to earn special treatment as water-carriers for Barack Obama.
The resolve of the American people to fight overseas is quickly weakening. Americans seem content to believe that our post-9/11 efforts have sufficiently weakened the enemy and therefore that their rhetoric shouldn’t be taken as seriously. Those that try to raise awareness about the threat are dismissed or even attacked, as the Christian Action Network learned after releasing its Homegrown Jihad documentary earlier this year about radical Islamic compounds in the U.S. that have been used for paramilitary training.
The government’s current attitude towards gathering threats seems to reflect a decreasing concern about terrorism and the growth of extremist networks at home. Just by being a little craftier than al-Qaeda, groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and governments like that of Khamenei and Ahmadinejad and Assad are able to appear moderate and flexible. The FBI decided to end its relationship with the Council on American-Islamic Relations following its designation as an “unindicted co-conspirator” in the Holy Land Foundation trial, only to continue ties with the Islamic Society of North America, another “unindicted co-conspirator” in the same trial.
The media and American people certainly do remember the events of 9/11 in terms of history, but the impact and lessons of 9/11 have been forgotten. On that day, we realized that enemies seeking the most horrid of goals come in different shapes and sizes, and use different strategies and tactics. By dismissing each case of terrorism and extremism as “isolated,” rather than yet another example of the reach of radical Islam in all its forms, enormous portions of the media, the government, and the American people have forgotten what 9/11 taught us. One day we will be taught again.
This video shows jumpers from the Twin Towers:
Ralph Peters has an even stronger condemnation, "Betraying Our Dead":
Eight years ago today, our homeland was attacked by fanatical Muslims inspired by Saudi Arabian bigotry. Three thousand American citizens and residents died.
We resolved that we, the People, would never forget. Then we forgot.
We've learned nothing.
Instead of cracking down on Islamist extremism, we've excused it.
Instead of killing terrorists, we free them.
Instead of relentlessly hunting Islamist madmen, we seek to appease them.
Instead of acknowledging that radical Islam is the problem, we elected a president who blames America, whose idea of freedom is the right for women to suffer in silence behind a veil -- and who counts among his mentors and friends those who damn our country or believe that our own government staged the tragedy of September 11, 2001.
Below: "Palestinians were dancing in the streets in celebration of 9/11." (via Bare Naked Islam):
See also, "CNN Poll: Terror Concerns Dropping."
Why did Andrew Sullivan get special treatment from the U.S. Attorney? As the Collings statement makes clear, other similar offenders have regularly been hauled before the court, and forced to pay the fine if found guilty. In Sullivan’s case, there are other far more important implications.More at Memeorandum.
Andrew Sullivan has moved from the stance of a fierce conservative to that of a liberal supporter of the Obama administration. When Obama met after his election with liberal journalists, Sullivan was part of their group—not among those of the conservative journalists who met the President-elect. He regularly blasts conservatives, especially those having anything to do with the Bush administration, and stands among the group constantly demanding fierce punishment for Cheney and company for authorizing torture of Gitmo detainees.
Now, more than ever, it appears that the United States Attorney is repaying a debt to Sullivan for his support to the administration. Why else would he be singled out for exclusive treatment? And doesn’t it also mean that Sullivan now will be more careful than ever to continue giving the administration his approval, at least until after he becomes a citizen? A debt paid leads to a debt owed.
The threat came when a man called the FreedomWorks main line and told the organization's female receptionist: "I put a bomb in your building, bitch."
The FreedomWorks staffer who spoke with ABC News said that the organization has received multiple threats but that for some reason, the DC Metro police thought that this one was credible enough to evacuate the building.
**********
From Brendan Steinhauser( and here, here, and here):
President George W. Bush plans a quiet day in his Dallas office Friday in his first Sept. 11 since leaving the White House.Thank you President Bush.
In a statement issued by spokesman David Sherzer, the former president said:
"Eight years ago, our nation and our freedom came under attack. On this solemn anniversary, Laura and I hold the victims and their families in our thoughts and prayers. We honor those who volunteer to keep us safe and extend the reach of freedom — including members of the armed forces, law enforcement officers, and intelligence and homeland security professionals. Their courage, service and sacrifice is a fitting tribute to all those who gave their lives on Sept. 11, 2001. On this day, let us renew our determination to prevent evil from returning to our shores."
Sherzer says the former president would make no public appearances nor give any interviews Friday.
The full essay is at the link. Also, Sarah Palin's Facebook page, "Sarah Palin: Remembering 9/11: We Are Americans."It has been eight years since the United States suffered the worst attack on our soil since Pearl Harbor. As we look back, we should take stock of what has transpired since then. We have sent our nation's soldiers into battlefields far from home to defend us. These brave men and women live in treacherous conditions, facing improvised roadside bombs, suicide bombers and other attacks. Yet they fight on in their mission to defend the United States and all of us without complaint ....
As we look back to that tragic day eight years ago we take pride in the fact that we came together as a nation in the days, months and years that followed. We rose to the challenge that fateful day and we still can. And why shouldn't we believe that? We are Americans.
I thank all our servicemen and women, in and out of uniform, for keeping us safe over the last eight years in the face of enormous odds.
Please thank a veteran today. They certainly do not look for those thanks, but they have more than earned it.
- Sarah Palin
But remember:
Van Jones isn't Alger Hiss. There's nothing covert about him. He didn't snooker Obama into bringing him aboard. He is who he is, and that's why Obama wanted him. Having a Communist in that job was perfect since the "green jobs" initiative is an important part of the hard Left's agenda to use environmentalism as an additional justification for usurping command of the economy.
And not only that. Like the "race card," the "new McCartyism" is a catch-all smear leftists deploy to allege fascism is coming to America. Here's this from 2002 at the Progressive:
Welcome to the New McCarthyism. A chill is descending across the country, and it's frostbiting immigrants, students, journalists, academics, and booksellers.Keep in mind that the Progressive piece is from January 2002, just three months after September 11. Now here we are 8 years later, the Democrats are in power, and they're attempting to complete the historical revisionism that the United States bears the blame for the worst attacks on U.S. soil in history.
"I'm terrified," says Ellen Schrecker, author of Many Are the Crimes: McCarthyism in America (Princeton University, 1999). "What concerns me is we're not seeing an enormous outcry against this whole structure of repression that's being rushed into place by the Bush Administration."
"I've been talking a lot about the parallels between what we're going through now and McCarthyism," says Nadine Strossen, president of the ACLU. "The term 'terrorism' is taking on the same kind of characteristics as the term 'communism' did in the 1950s. It stops people in their tracks, and they're willing to give up their freedoms. People are too quickly panicked. They are too willing to give up their rights and to scapegoat people, especially immigrants and people who criticize the war."
Also, Doug Power, "White House Whitewash: 9/11 Was No ‘Tragedy’."Add another Obama insult to injury on 9-11. First, he desecrated the memory of 9-11 with his planned proclamation of his mandatory civilian service on 9-11, which he has designated a "National Day of Service." And now 9-11 has yet another title: State Department personnel are supposed to pray with Muslims on the newly declared "Interfaith Day of Service," whatever that means on 9-11.
September 11, which should be a somber day of mourning and reflection (on how the hell we got here), will be a day when Obama -- in a celebratory mode -- makes his big announcement. The whole thing is depraved. And yes, it really is mandatory. The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act - the GIVE Act - calls for a commission to study "whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed" ....
Obama means to erase the meaning of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks from the American psyche and convert September 11 into a day of leftist self-congratulation, the advance of government power, and Muslim pandering.
September 11th, 2001
--------
September 11th, 2009
Founding Bloggers will return September 12th.
On September 10, 2009, doctors, nurses and other medical professionals came to Washington, D.C. from across the country to show their opposition to Obamacare. This rally exploded the government-created myth that there is unanimity amongst health care professionals for Democrat plans to take over health care. The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons came to D.C. to present a petition from doctors to lawmakers. The AAPS has been a voice for private physicians since 1943. Their motto is omnia pro aegroto, “all for the patient”. The doctors met with the representatives from their respective states and argued for a platform that avoids unnecessary bureaucratic intervention in health care.
Dr. Steven Ellison [below], a cardiologist from Georgia, displays graphically how doctors feel about being targeted by a party and president that slander and demonize them. On the podium, speaker after speaker talked about the slurs President Obama has made about doctors performing unnecessary amputations and tonsillectomies out of greed. Not only is it untrue that doctors profit from these procedures, but the premise that they would do such harm to their patients is an insult to doctors:
Dr. Phil Gingrey, U.S. Congressman from Georgia addresses the Rally:
Howard Long, from Pleasanton, California is “a country doctor”:
Dr. Michael Schlitt, a neurosurgeon from Seattle. He spoke about a woman in England who had an aneurism and was told by the National Health Service that there was nothing they could do for her. They told her to enjoy her last few days. She came to the U.S. and was treated by Dr. Schlitt and is fine today. “Show me a place where patients can get MRI’s the same day.” and the crowd responded with a rousing “U.S.A.! U.S.A.!” ”Who’s got the best medical care in the world?” “U.S.A.! U.S.A.!”:
Gateway Pundit has more, "Pro-Life Protester Shot & Killed in Michigan in Apparent Hate Crime-- Waiting For Obama Announcement."
Especially pay attention to the Maddow's question to Professor Melissa Harris-Lacewell at 4:20 minutes: "What's the connection between disrupting the president during his speech about healthcare and the day after 9/11?" Professor Lacewell's response is typically despicable, that the healthcare crisis, like September 11, is "similarly facing down our country," and it's a time to be "supporting our president regardless of ideology."
5PM – P2+ (25-54) (35-64)The numbers are striking. Bill O'Reilly often boasts on air about Fox's ratings dominance, but the data flash on screen so quickly that one might miss the significance of Fox's pummeling of the competition.
Glenn Beck– 2,610,000 viewers (704,000) (1,140,000)
Situation Room—761,000 viewers (143,000) (255,000)
Hardball w/ C. Matthews —548,000 viewers (142,000) (267,000)
Fast Money—151,000 viewers (a scratch w/32,000) (70,000)
Prime News–237,000 viewers (75,000) (100,000)
Watching the Glenn Beck show this past month, one might have assumed that Van Jones had assaulted Beck, insulted his wife, and stolen his kids' lunch money. Beck devoted time on a whopping 16 shows to crafting a distorted, despicable portrait of Van that few who know him would recognize. As political smears go, it was as serious as it gets.Whoa! That's crack analysis! You think Beck really wants to derail Obama's progressive agenda? I'm shocked!
But make no mistake: this attack was not about Van Jones. Beck, in league with big business groups, is seeking to derail the President's progressive agenda, and taking out Van became the vehicle for undermining clean energy and green jobs.
There is no doubt that Glenn Beck has a big platform. But what supports his platform is advertising dollars, and that support is crumbling. To date, 62 companies have pulled their ads from Beck's show, including six new companies announced yesterday -- Aegon, Ashley Furniture, Humana, Luxottica Retail (parent of LensCrafters and Pearle Vision), United States Postal Service and Wyeth Consumer Healthcare. These aren't liberal activists wringing their hands over Beck's distortions. These are the bastions of American capitalism saying they don't want their brands associated with Glenn Beck's extremism. The only companies left are direct marketers (think Egg Genie and gold coins) and a handful of private companies headed by right-wingers.These numbers are being touted on the left as some kind of powerhouse indicator of progressive influence to shape the structure of cable news advertising. But the fact remains, not even the most socially progressive business concern will long forego a lucative advertising market. Glenn Beck's program is sheer dominance. And contrary to Firedoglake's fantasy that Beck's heading over to the "permanent fringe," the reality is that Van Jones' resignation was a major defeat for the administration; and with Congress back in session, political conflict is swinging back to full battle-stations mode. I'm betting Beck's numbers get even better as things move forward. Just today Obama-flunky Yosi Sergent was removed as communications director at the National Endowment of the Arts, and this is being chalked up as another win for Glenn Beck.
The exodus of major advertisers makes a powerful statement about how far Beck lies from the mainstream. Which is why it's so important to keep the heat on. Advertisers walking away for a week or two is one thing. But as weeks turn to months, and Beck becomes increasingly isolated, it renders his rants permanently fringe. Why would anyone (the White House or otherwise) respond to someone whose views are too toxic for any respectable corporation?
For the last two years Johnson has been like the crazy old man who tries to alienate his family, but in his case he has been throwing bloggers out of his site. For some of them like Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer he not only cast them asunder, but he has continued to attack them.Check the whole thing, here. It turns out that Robert Spencer has a new post up just hammering Johnson in what's the latest, but certainly decisive, offensive in the ongoing anti-jihad blogger wars. See Spencer's post here: "Libelblogger Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs Digs Deeper, Adding New Lies to His Original Ones."
The sad part of it is that he used to be a blogging giant, and when it comes to traffic, I am sure he still is. But with the growing list of people that he has banned from his site for the simple reason of disagreeing with his opinions or maintaining friendships with people he didn't like, Charles is losing the respect of much of the community.
One must step back and wonder: what is this man's game? Why would he make up lies, see them refuted by people who were present at the events he claims to know about, and then instead of backing down or at least falling silent, pile more lies upon his original ones? Inevitable questions arise about why he has embarked on this desperate smear campaign, intent on demonstrating that I and others are "fascists" or "fascist sympathizers," without a shred of actual evidence that I sympathize with or agree with any positions that are fascist, racist, etc., associate with any people who really are those things, or hold any positions other than the ones I have publicly avowedSpencer provides personal testimony from folks who ultimately destroy Johnson's credibility, so be sure to check the post. But I love this concluding flourish:
He's a conscience-free smear merchant, a thuggish paranoid and a liar, but at least Charles Johnson is good for a few laughs.I've actually been meaning to write something about recent flame war between Ace of Spades HQ and Johnson's Little Green Footballs. See AOSHQ, "And There You Go: Charles Johnson Spins for Van Jones," and "White House Politely Declines to Express Support in Van "Astronaut" Jones ... Bonus: Charles Johnson's Dan Rather Moment."
Also, The Swamp reports that GOP Rep. John Shimkus walked out on the speech. The dude bailed with just a couple of minutes left. It's disrespectful, sure. But given the general consensus on how brutally partisan was Obama's speech, I don't blame the guy. Decorum's not what it's all cracked up to be when you're supposed to be showing deference to a habitual liar.
What we learned in the last month is that people who have been energetically organizing, filling town halls and high-school gymnasiums, and staging protests for most of their lives are more than a little dismayed to find out that the other side can do it, too. There will always be a risk of unrest at any political protest, left or right, and that risk increases with the emotion and energy surrounding the debate. And it will always be important to call for civility in heated debates, and to treat public forums and our right to speak in them with the respect they deserve.Read the whole thing, here.
Mark Tapscott discovers a nugget in the analysis provided by the Congressional Research Office on HR3200, the House version of ObamaCare coming to the floor. While Barack Obama insists that the idea that ObamaCare will cover illegal immigrants is a "myth," the CRS points out that the bill does nothing to prevent it. Since HR3200 doesn't require people to establish citizenship or legal residency before applying to exchanges for health insurance, including the public option, taxpayer money will certainly flow to illegal immigrants:Plus, check William Jacobson's report, "The House Bill Does Cover Illegals."
Congressional Research Service (CRS) says this about H.R. 3200, the Obamacare bill approved just before the recess by the House Energy and Commerce Committee chaired by Rep. Henry Waxman, D-CA:
"Under H.R. 3200, a 'Health Insurance Exchange' would begin operation in 2013 and would offer private plans alongside a public option…H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens—whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently—participating in the Exchange."
"Under H.R. 3200, a 'Health Insurance Exchange' would begin operation in 2013 and would offer private plans alongside a public option…H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens—whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently—participating in the Exchange."
Also at Political Indoctrination & Dismantling Liberalism, "Obamas ACORN Pimps Black girls."
Two out of three Americans who watched President Barack Obama's health care reform speech Wednesday night favor his health care plans — a 14-point gain among speech-watchers, according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation national poll of people who tuned into Obama's address Wednesday night to a joint session of Congress.More at the link and Memeorandum.
Actually, the whole speech is clever. He’s trying to re-brand himself as the great compromiser, and everyone else as partisan. And, as I predicted earlier, he’s emphasizing the good things about the plan and not answering any the criticisms in any detail or substance. If you believe he’s an honest broker and telling the truth, it sounds great—who wouldn’t be for affordable and better health care for all? He’s banking on the fact that many people still want to like him and are disposed to believe him, as well as the economic ignorance of most Americans.Also, from Dan Collins, "Obama’s Health Care Speech, Condensed":
People who say bad things about my health care plan are liars and dreadful human beings. There needs to be more civility in this discussion. Bush caused 9-11. People who say bad things about my health care plan are trying to scare people, and everybody’s going to die if we don’t get this thing passed now.Added: Gateway Pundit, "Congressman Yells "Liar" as Obama Spews Talking Points to Congress (Video)."
Representative Charles Boustany of Louisiana, a surgeon, has delivered a brief Republican response. He has the same problem typical of those who deliver such responses (and not, in his case, just relative anonymity) — he is standing by himself somewhere, without the animation that comes from interacting with a live audience ...
I cannot begin to tell you how this is exactly the argument that was made by American fans of Mussolini in the 1920s. It is exactly the argument that was made in defense of Stalin and Lenin before him (it's the argument that idiotic, dictator-envying leftists make in defense of Castro and Chavez today). It was the argument made by George Bernard Shaw who yearned for a strong progressive autocracy under a Mussolini, a Hitler or a Stalin (he wasn't picky in this regard). This is the argument for an "economic dictatorship" pushed by Stuart Chase and the New Dealers. It's the dream of Herbert Croly and a great many of the Progressives.The whole thing is at the link.
The only thing I’d add to Friedman’s analysis is ... that it is a little inaccurate to describe the Democratic Party as singular or unified in any ideological sense. In reality, or at least as far as congressional Democrats are concerned, the Democratic Party is more of a loose coalition between a broadly center-left party (based in the Northeast and the West Coast) and a broadly center-right party (based in the Rust Belt, and rural areas throughout the West, Midwest, and the South). For liberals, this isn’t particularly good. Under a functional legislative system, where majority rule was given deference, this wouldn’t pose too much of a problem; the center-left party could rely on the center-right party to help craft and pass broadly acceptable legislation (while the right-wing party languished in irrelevance). The way it stands however, the right-wing party has pretty significant veto power over nearly every piece of legislation, which effectively means that any given piece of progressive legislation has to go through two conservative filters.For those in the know, the Westminster model is often referred as an "elective dictatorship." The prime minister is drawn from the majority in the Commons, and the party in power can fall on a vote of no confidence. There's really no incentive for MPs to pull down the government, however, since that means that they'll have to go before the voters in a new election. Sure, it's a long way from Westminster to an authoritarian one-party regime. But what's interesting in Jamelle's case is the outright hostility to American constitutionalism. A solid reading of James Madison or the Federalist Papers indicates that the structure of American political insitutions works to prevent tyranny. To do away with the presidential model is revolutionary AND authoritarian. No serious analyst makes such proposals. And this mention of abolishing the filibuster is more hostility to the protection of minority rights. Leftists just don't care about democratic safeguards - they're all about power, the more demonic the better. Jamelle's piece is a good indicator of just how whacked are the folks at Ordinary Gentleman. The rank attacks on conservatives we see over there, including Sarah Palin, reveal not only a total alienation from genuine heartland values, but a mean-spiritedness that's inherent to leftists politics.
To take it back to Friedman’s point though, the fact of our tri-party legislature acts as yet another obstacle to one-party governing, since there simply isn’t enough ideological cohesion and group loyalty within the Democratic Party to pass anything approaching ambitious legislation. The real solution, of course, is a complete restructuring of our legislature into something approaching a Westminster-style parliamentary system, with multiple member districts and executive branch drawn largely from the legislature. However, since that is also incredibly unlikely, we’ll probably have to look for other ways to make Congress more responsive to the majority party (like eliminating the filibuster, or revamping the committee system!).
The lesson the war supporters have learned from all of this is that the Rules Of Engagement suck ....Readers may recall that Newshoggers backed "the resistance" in Iraq, and literally cheered al Qaeda's use of mentally-impaired female suicide bombers as a "brilliant" strategic adaptation against American forces.
For the few who still remember Vietnam this should sound very familiar. Once you got out of the major cities in Vietnam the war wasn't about communism VS western capitalism it was about occupation by foreign troops. They supported the Viet Cong because they saw them as freedom fighters.
The lesson should be that we are in another quagmire - fighting another war that can't be won without killing most of the population.
Then, compare that rant to now-departed "green jobs czar" Van Jones' comments on American imperialism, "Obama 'Czar' on 9/11: Blame 'U.S. Imperialism'! White House 'Rowdy Communist' Held Vigil for Muslims."
The city's already spending $4 billion on infrastructure repairs to the area's underground pipe system, but soon enough we'll see some leftists use the incident in making the case for another Obama stimulus. Will Matthew Yglesias answer the call?
In case your only source of news is ABC, CBS, NBC and/or The New York Times or, as the White House was hoping, you were out doing things with your family this long weekend and didn't check the news (which was released after midnight Sunday so it wouldn't be in any papers) the green jobs "czar," special adviser to the president, Van Jones has resigned.
But here's The One Thing: My phone, e-mail and Twitter were hammered all weekend with people offering congratulations. First, let me say I'm not the one to congratulate. I can go on and on about this stuff, but if you don't care and it doesn't connect with the American people, what I say doesn't matter.
So let me start with the good news: You still have power and clout in Washington. In many cases, your representatives in Washington knew nothing about Van Jones. You were educating them and it wasn't until late last week that a few brave political people began to speak out.
But here's the bad news: When this came out and people started to say congratulations, my first response was: You still don't get it. This was a victory of sorts, but only for those playing political games. I'm not doing that and I don't think you are either.
You are trying to protect and defend the Constitution. President Obama was hoping that this would go away. One of the headlines from the Politico this weekend was: "Beck Up, Left Down."
You are trying to protect and defend the Constitution. President Obama was hoping that this would go away. One of the headlines from the Politico this weekend was: "Beck Up, Left Down."
I read the article a couple of times. Van Jones said this was a vicious smear campaign. Van Jones was able to resign, not be fired. And, during his resignation, he placed the blame on others, not himself.
What Van Jones doesn't understand is that I didn't bring down Van Jones; you didn't bring down Van Jones; Van Jones brought down Van Jones.
Is it a smear campaign to quote Van Jones' own words?
The job market for political scientists, like the markets for most academic fields, is a lot tighter this year than in the recent past. The American Political Science Association, which held its annual meeting here over the weekend, didn't release data on the job market, but everyone here agreed that things have gotten tight.Read the whole thing, at the link.
At a session for graduate directors, one woman talked about how she is trying to help not only those finishing up their dissertations find jobs, but those from last year who are working as adjuncts, with little by way of a living wage or job security. She said she found herself wondering when she should tell her students or graduates, if they can't find tenure-track jobs, that "this just isn't going to work out" and they should look for work elsewhere.
It was a sense that the job market just isn't what it used to be (and not only the scarcity of jobs) that led the political science association, for the first time at its annual meeting, to bring graduate directors together to hear from a panel and to trade ideas about the job market. The meeting was a mix of trend analysis, philosophical debate and tips for how to better prepare graduate students to find jobs in the field. In discussing tips, many times the political scientists found themselves recommending actions that might help on the job market, but that they weren't sure were ideal for graduate education.
