Partisan Backlash Erupts Over Obama's Non-Accomplishments

Here's the RNC's response to the DNC's response to Michael Steele's response to President Obama's Nobel Prize:

“Like most Americans, the DNC can’t think of one achievement that the president has accomplished, so they resort to their predictable response and standard playbook of demonizing those who disagree with them. First they call Americans concerned over health care ‘rabid extremists’ and ‘angry mobs.’ Now, when challenged to answer the question of what the president has accomplished, Democrats are lashing out calling Republicans terrorists. That type of political rhetoric is shameful.”

More at Memeorandum.

See also, Dana Loesch, "DNC Says That People Who Question Obama’s Accomplishments Are Terrorists or Something."

Image Credit: The People's Cube, "Now Everyone Can Have A Nobel Peace Prize."

Obama to Accept Nobel Peace Prize: 'A Call to Action'

Allahpundit's post was the first I saw, and it's a good thing, because I thought it was a joke: "Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize. No, Really."

The president's excited, it turns out. See Mary Katharine Ham, "Obama 'Looking Forward' To Accepting Prize in Oslo." Also, the Politico, "President Obama: I Will Accept as 'Call to Action'."

Of course, this what it's really all about:

Perhaps the fact that Obama actually escalated the Afghan deployment is an oversight. So much for "peace," I guess?

There's something to be said for Obama's peacenik branding, in any case: "The United States is the most admired country globally thanks largely to the star power of President Barack Obama and his administration, according to a new poll."

Jennifer Rubin sums up my thinking on this farce: "There is no better illustration of the debasement of the “international community” and the fundamental unseriousness of what passes for international elite opinion." Also, from Phil Kerpen, "Obama Wins Prize for 'Hope' and 'Change'." And, a roundup at Berman Post, "Obama Wins The Nobel Peace Prize."

Additional reactions:

* Althouse, "'How can he now send 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan?'."

* Astute Bloggers, "KOOL-AID DRINKING NOBEL COMMITTTEE JUMPS SHARK, GIVES OBAMA PEACE PRIZE!"

* Betsy's Page, "The Nobel Peace Prize: What a Joke!"

* Blazing Cat Fur, "Whaddaya Gotta do to Win a "Peace Prize" These Days?"

* The Blog Prof, "You've Got To Be Kidding Me..."

* Cold Fury, "Nobel Peace Prize Revamped."

* Chicks on the Right, "We’re Practically Too Speechless To Even Address Today’s Most Unbelievable News."

* Gateway Pundit, "Vote For Infanticide --- Win a Nobel Peace Prize."

* John Hawkins, "What Exactly Did Barack Obama Do To Win A Nobel Peace Prize?"

* Instapundit, "OBAMA WINS NOBEL PEACE PRIZE?"

* Jules Crittenden, "Peace In Our Time," and "One Other Thought."

* Michael Graham, "What Do Barack Obama And Yassir Arafat Have In Common?"

* William Jacobson, "Yes, The World Has Lost Its Mind."

* Les Jones, "Did Someone Slip Me a Crazy Pill ... ?"

* Dana Loesch, "Obama gets Nobel Peace Prize … For What?"

* Nice Deb, "Bam Wins Nobel Peace Prize."

* Flopping Aces, "Obama Awarded Nobel Peace Prize."

* Michelle Malkin, "Story of Obama’s life: “Rather Than Recognizing Concrete Achievement…”."

* The Monkey Cage, "Obama's (First?) Nobel Prize."

* Pirates Cove, "World Stunned As Obama Wins Peace Prize."

* Pundit & Pundette, "Nobel Committee feeds Obama Ego with Peace Prize."

* Riehl World View, "NO FREAKIN' WAY!: Obama Wins 2009 Nobel Peace Prize."

* Ruby Slippers, "Obama Awarded Nobel Prize for being Barack Obama."

* So It Goes in Shreveport, "And Now We've Entered Into a Parallel Universe."

* Sundries Shack, "Just Consider This the Obamessiah Version of the Triumphal Entry into Jerusalem."

* Carolyn Tackett, "The Nobel's Affirmative Action Commitee."

* Theo Spark, "Theater of the Absurd."

* TrogloPundit, "Too Bad the Norwegian Nobel Committee Wasn’t in Charge of Handing Out the Olympics."

* His Vorpal Sword, "Dumb and Dumbererere."

* Wizbang, "Obama Wins Nobel Peace Prize."

McCain Continues to Prove Himself the Enemy of the Grassroots

My latest essay at Pajamas Media is up today, "McCain Continues to Prove Himself the Enemy of the Grassroots":

The timing was impeccable. On the day after HarperCollins released the cover photo for Going Rogue — Sarah Palin’s highly anticipated autobiography — Steve Schmidt, John McCain’s former chief campaign advisor, predicted that if Palin were to win the 2012 GOP nomination, “we would have a catastrophic election result.” It was Schmidt, a veteran Republican strategist, who first advised Senator McCain to select Palin as his running mate in 2008. And it was Schmidt who first criticized Governor Palin within the McCain camp as “going rogue.” Asked how Palin’s book might describe their relationship during the election, Schmidt suggested that perhaps he was the “anti-rogue in the running of the campaign.”

Schmidt’s comments provide a nice backdrop to a recent report at Politico (”McCain’s Mission: A GOP Makeover.”) It turns out that the Arizona senator has been positioning himself as a major power broker within the Republican Party hierarchy. He is identified in the article as the party’s titular head; and the erstwhile presidential nominee has been raising money for moderate GOP candidates and hitting the campaign trail for pragmatic allies. As noted in the article:

“I think he’s endorsed people with center-right politics because he has an understanding that the party is in trouble with certain demographics and wants to have a tone that would allow us to grow,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, the South Carolina Republican who is McCain’s closest friend and ally in the Senate.

“At a time when our party is struggling and has a lot of shrill voices and aggressive voices, he’s one that can expand our party,” said John Weaver, a longtime McCain friend and strategist.

This meme of McCain’s reemergence as the GOP’s elder statesman and centrist savior is not likely to go down well among grassroots conservatives.

Read the whole thing at the link.

Medea Benjamin on 'Rethinking' Afghanistan: 'Taliban Are Just Poor Villagers'

Scott Horton interviewed Medea Benjamin following reports that Code Pink was "rethinking" its call for a U.S. troop withrawal from Afghanistan:

Horton: ... I wanted to bring you on the show today was to talk about all the antiwar protests going on around the country, and I guess I just assumed you guys would be involved with that. And yet I’m reading in the Christian Science Monitor that you’re rethinking your call for a pullout from Afghanistan, and that you’ve had your mind changed about the Afghanistan war due to a recent trip that you took there. Can you elaborate on that?

Benjamin: I don’t think that piece really reflects our thinking. We took a delegation there and just got back yesterday. And we certainly did hear some people say that they felt if the U.S. pulled out right now there would be a collapse and the Taliban might take over, there might be a civil war. But we also heard a lot of people say they didn’t want more troops to be sent in and they wanted the U.S. to have a responsible exit strategy that included the training of Afghan troops, included being part of promoting a real reconciliation process and included economic development; that the United States shouldn’t be allowed to just walk away from the problem. So that’s really our position. Not the one that was implied in the Christian Science Monitor.

Horton: Well, and you know I actually considered setting up the first question that way. This is probably sloppy reporting. I can’t imagine that you guys just flip-flop. But again, you sort of seem to be saying, well this is what the people in Afghanistan told you and now that’s your position. Is that it?

Benjamin: Well actually, there were many different opinions in Afghanistan and unfortunately because of the security situation we were very limited in who we talked to. We didn’t get out to the countryside, we didn’t talk to people who had been the targets of U.S. bombing, we didn’t talk to people who lived under Taliban control. We, in a week, got to talk to an amazing variety of people, but they were all working inside Kabul, many of them coming from outside Kabul. We are putting up on our Web site interviews with some of the women who did tell us that they thought more U.S. troops would mean more civilian casualties and more recruits for the Taliban. And they said it very clearly. One of the women is a member of parliament. She comes from Wardak province, she’s a medical doctor, and she says that this is the best way to recruit the Taliban is to send more troops, that it’s time for another approach.

Horton: Hmm… Well, I appreciate that about you’re going ahead and stating that you were basically stuck in Kabul, you weren’t allowed to go around and see what it’s like on the other side. You know, it’s interesting the way you kind of gave it… especially in your first answer… "Well, we talked to people who said this and we talked to people who said that." And the way the Christian Science Monitor article is written is that these are all the reasons why you were convinced to change your mind to what they’re saying, when really it sort of sounds like you’re basically just reporting what you were told and then you have your own thing that you want to say that’s not necessarily – you know, [that is] separate from that in its own way. Right?

Benjamin: Well as in all discussions with people, it really depends on how you phrase the question. If you say to people, "Do you want 40,000 more troops, or would you like that money to go to economic development, healthcare, education?" They almost always said the latter. So people told us that war was not the answer. That after eight years of U.S. presence and billions of dollars being thrown into this conflict that the lives of people, especially those living outside of Kabul have virtually stayed the same, and that even women who know that the Taliban has had a very retrograde position in terms of women’s rights, even they told us that, look, the majority of Taliban are just poor villagers who don’t have another way to earn a living. We’ve got to reintegrate them into society, we’ve got to have peace talks and we’ve got to find ways other than through guns and bombs that we solve this conflict [emphasis added].

That's an interesting way to frame things. Kind of like President Barack Obama. See Gateway Pundit, "Unreal. Obama Says Taliban Killers Should Be Part of Afghan Government."

Code Pink's Jodie Evans: No 'Rethink' on Afghanistan - 'U.S. Troop Withdrawal Now' ... ANSWER Coalition Decries 'Criminal Occupation'

Here's the promised follow up and confirmation to my previous report, "Calling Bull on Code Pink 'Rethink Afghan' Meme: Antiwar Group Says End 'Occupation' Now!" ... Contrary to the big buzz online Wednesday, Code Pink has not revised its position on a "near-term" U.S. troop withdrawal from Afghanistan.

I spoke with Code Pink co-founder Jodie Evans Wednesday night in Los Angeles. I snapped the first photo above just as I walked up to the Code Pink contingent on the West side of Wilshire, across the street from the Federal Building. She was busy speaking with activists, and a television crew was setting up for an interview; but as she finished I asked her about Wednesday's report in the Christian Science Monitor, " 'Code Pink' Rethinks Its Call for Afghanistan Pullout." Ms. Evans emphatically rejected the thesis of the article. Medea Benjamin was "misquoted," she told me. Code Pink wants to bring the troops home, now! -- there's been no "rethinking" of the group's demand for withdrawal of U.S. forces. I asked her, then, what should be the U.S. goals for Afghanistan? She said the U.S. should focus on a humantiarian mission - education, healthcare and human rights, especially the rights of women. (Notice the propaganda posters focusing on women and children below.) She said Kabul was the model: "It's the only safe place in the country ... people can get healthcare and education ... we need to expand the success of Kabul to the rest of the country." I told her I was surprised to see the Monitor's report indicating that Code Pink was no longer calling for a troop pull out. She said she'd "been on the phone all day" clarifying Code Pink's position on the war. A troop withdrawal remains the objective, but the U.S. should stay to focus on improving quality of life. (See also, Code Pink's "Afghanistan Talking Points.")

The incompatibility between a total troop withdrawal and the security necessary to promote "unconditional humanitarian aid" didn't seem to occur to Ms. Evans. But I thanked her for her time, and returned across the street to the main protest. (For more on Jodie Evans, see Sweetness and Light, "Code Pink’s “Sugar Mommy” – Jodie Evans.")

Okay, this was earlier ... I arrived in Westwood a little before 5:00pm. International ANSWER's protest announcement is here: "U.S./NATO Out of Afghanistan! Bring All the Troops Home Now! Health care, Housing, Jobs, Education for All–Not War! End Colonial Occupation—Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine ..."

This woman, from the Party for Socialism and Liberation, was setting up her table:

She had a full rack of Marxist-Leninist revolutionary tracts as well:

The ANSWER cadres were setting up their signs and banners too. The ANSWER group was leading the crowd with chants, "OCCUPATION IS A CRIME ... IRAQ, AFGHANISTAN, PALESTINE ... Also, "MONEY FOR JOBS AND EDUCATION ... NOT FOR WAR AND OCCUPATION..."

There was a big turnout for the 9/11 'Truthers':

These people seriously make me sick. I had some technical problems and didn't take additional photos. The "Truthers" hoisted a twenty-foot banner that read something like, "What we know about 9/11 is killing people ..." and "9/11 = Controlled Demolition." Photographs of similar signs are at the 9/11 Truth Now Action Network. See also, "ACTION ALERT: Anti-War Protest in Los Angeles - Get Out of Afghanistan! "

Check as well the 11:00pm video report from KABC-TV Los Angeles, here.

There were some "libertarian" representatives from Antiwar.com (one of their guys was sporting a '60s-style "mod" haircut ... weird).

Also in attendance were folks running the gamut of the hardline communist-left ... the Anti-Racist Action Network; the Freedom Socialist Party (socialist feminism); the International Committee of the Fourth International; the International Socialist Organization; Iraq Veterans Against the War; the National Assembly to End the Iraq War and Occupation; the Party for Socialism and Liberation (with pictures above); and World Can't Wait (see, "Demonstrations Mark 8th Anniversary of Afghan War - Demand Immediate U.S./NATO Withdrawal"),

A special note: I said hello to Ron Kovic before I left (I thanked him for his service to country, and he thanked me back, sincerely). And, as I headed back to the car, an activist asked me if I'd like to sign a petition for Representative Barbara Lee -- I said "no thanks," and the dude just about had a heart attack!

Calling Bull on Code Pink 'Rethink Afghan' Meme: Antiwar Group Says End 'Occupation' Now!

It's stupidly transparent, but leftist media outlets have launched a campaign to rehabilitate Code Pink, the hardline neo-communist protest group. The Christian Science Monitor quotes group co-founder Medea Benjamin as saying:

We would leave with the same parameters of an exit strategy but we might perhaps be more flexible about a timeline ... That's where we have opened ourselves, being here, to some other possibilities. We have been feeling a sense of fear of the people of the return of the Taliban. So many people are saying that, 'If the US troops left the country, would collapse. We'd go into civil war.' A palpable sense of fear that is making us start to reconsider that.

That sounds about right. The country will collapse without a continued robust presence of American forces. The only problem is that actions speak louder than words. Jonn Lilyea reported on the Code Pink antiwar rally Monday from the White House. And as the photos above attest, the group's still demanding a complete withdrawal from Afghanistan, as well as Iraq and Guantanamo Bay.

And here's the statement at Code Pink's homepage:

October 2009, Eight Years in Afghanistan—How Many More?

At the current rate of American deaths in Afghanistan, over 1,000 additional American soldiers will be killed in the next two years of “hard fighting” predicted by the Pentagon as the next phase of a ten year occupation. Another $130 billion for Afghanistan and Iraq now is being rushed through a sleeping Congress. An escalation of even more troops is pending. We have been given the rationale that the war is to protect the rights of women, but what we hear from the women of Afghanistan is that the ongoing combat in their country causes incalculable suffering.

A majority of Americans – including 70 percent from the majority party – now consider Afghanistan a mistake. Now is the time for an exit strategy to end these wars.

And here's this from the ANSWER Coalition's protest announcement for today's event at the Wilshire Federal Building in Los Angeles:

Here's the list of allied group's at the homepage:

Oct. 7 LA protest initiated by the ANSWER Coalition. Endorsed by March Forward!; Ron Kovic, Vietnam veteran, author, "Born on the 4th of July"; Blase & Theresa Bonpane, Office of the Americas, Veterans for Peace, Military Families Speak Out-Orange County, National Council of Arab Americans; Al-Awda, the Palestine Right to Return Coalition; South Asian Network, Afghan Women's Mission, Muslim American Society Freedom, Council on American Islamic Relations-Southern California, Coalition for World Peace, Free Palestine Alliance, Alliance for Just and Lasting Peace in the Philippines, GABRIELA Network, Palestinian American Women's Association, Out Against War, LA LGBT Greens, Peace and Freedom Party, Islamic Shura Council of Southern California, Addicted to War, Party for Socialism and Liberation, Montrose Peace Vigil, Students Fight Back, National Committee to Free the Cuban Five, Anti-Racist Action LA/People Against Racist Terror, Justice for Filipino American Veterans, KmB Pro-People Youth, Latino Movement USA, National Lawyers Guild, Comite Pro-Democracia en Mexico, Frente Unido de los Pueblos Americanos, Comites de Base FMLN, Los Angeles, Coalition for Peace and Democracy in Honduras, Hermandad Mexicana Nacional, Union of Guatemalan Immigrants, International Socialist Organization, American Friends Service Committee, Resistance Front Against the Coup in Honduras, LA Coalition in Solidarity with Cuba, Iraq Moratorium, MSA-CSULB, Minjok.com, Cafe Intifada, LA Palestine Labor Solidarity, San Fernando Valley Chapter of Alliance for Democracy, CODEPINK, Long Beach Area Peace Network, Coffee House Teach-Ins, Cuauhtemoc Aztec Dance and others.

Notice Code Pink mentioned toward the end of the list.

Medea Benjamin and other Code Pink leaders may indeed by "rethinking" their longtanding calls for immediate troop withdrawals. But the group's original positions remain unchanged at protest demonstrations, the homepage, and at the ANSWER coalition's contact page. No matter, in addition to the Christian Science Monitor, the Los Angeles Times and the leftist rag Raw Story are also spreading the propaganda.

Of course, this meme that Code Pink's "rethinking" Afghanistan is bull. Weasel Zippers frames it perfectly, "Height of Hypocrisy: Code Pink Rethinking Their Opposition to Afghan War...." See also, Red State, "The Sham Anti-War Movement":

If there was ever any doubt that the anti-war movement was nothing more or less than an adjunct of the Democrat party, that doubt has been swept away. One would think that with the war in Afghanistan at a critical stage and the administration drunkenly reeling from strategy to strategy apparently in search of a magic elixir or silver bullet that will make the war just go away that the anti-war movement would have been in fine form. If there was ever a time when their presence might have actually made a policy difference this was it.

However, now that Obama is in the White House the anti-war movement is curiously silent. The noxious Code Pink organization which was more than willing to consign 25 million Iraqis to rule by al Qaeda has decided that the war in Afghanistan, also against al Qaeda, doesn’t require an immediate withdrawal (h/t, Gateway Pundit) ....

The anti-war movement we were afflicted with over the past eight years was essentially a rent-a-mob that never had any larger objective than damaging President Bush. The outrage about the war in Iraq was driven not by any opposition to war, itself, but by the hatred President Bush attracted by refusing to let Al Gore steal the 2000 election. The internal contradiction so glaringly apparent in the movement, that of supposedly being against war while supporting a genocidal madman as the ruler of Iraq, is easily explicable when you view that movement as nothing more than street theater designed to weaken the president.

P.S. I'm leaving my office in a few minutes to drive to Los Angeles to cover the ANSWER protest. I'll have a report late tonight or tomorrow afternoon ... stay tuned!

Code Pink -- And Congressional Black Communist Barbara Lee -- Speaks Out on 8th Anniversary of Afghan War

From Code Pink's Jodie Evans, "8 Years of War: Speak Out Against the Occupation of Afghanistan ":

Eight years ago today, George Bush signed the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF) on Afghanistan. There had been only one dissenting vote, Congresswoman Barbara Lee from California (link to her speech). She was surprised to find she was the only vote, because many in the halls before had suggested they were against it, but she was the only one with the courage to go against the fear-mongering of the moment. She knew that rushing into an invasion of Afghanistan would not bring those who died on 9/11 back, nor would it help the situation.

When I heard that one No vote, I was given hope that at least one person agreed with me and understood that military force was the worst way to deal with the situation; more violence was not the response to violence. We didn't need to learn that lesson again, but it seems we are slow learners. Almost a trillion dollars and too many lives later, a majority of the American people now oppose our military presence in Afghanistan.

Still, Admiral Mullen testified in Congress this week about the need for more troops. When do we learn that throwing more troops and money at something that needed to be responded to as a crime is not going to solve an already too-complex-to-understand situation? Our presence has destabilized the region, killed innocent people, expanded the power of the Taliban and created the third most corrupt government in the world. We messed up Iraq and Afghanistan and have no idea what we are doing, either militarily or with regards to nation building. When do we admit we made a mistake and start untangling ourselves instead of digging a deeper mess?

Also, from Democracy Now!, "As Afghan War Enters 9th Year, Rep. Barbara Lee—Lone Lawmaker to Vote Against 2001 Authorization—Seeks to Block New Troop Surge."

Bill Ayers, Unrepentant Terrorist, Wrote 'Dreams from My Father' (?)

Anne Leary has the scoop, "Bill Ayers No Dream." (Via Memeorandum.)

William Jacobson identifies Anne Leary as a "straight shooter." See, "Will Obama Deny Bill Ayers' Accusation?" Plus, the Astute Bloggers, "THE AMERICAN PEOPLE DESERVE TO KNOW THE TRUTH."

Related: Jack Cashill, "Breakthrough on the Authorship of Obama's 'Dreams'," "Evidence Mounts: Ayers Co-Wrote Obama's 'Dreams'," and "Who Wrote Dreams From My Father?"

Plus, David Weigel, "The ‘Ayers Wrote Obama’s Book’ Theorist Gets a Sympathizer."

Image Credit: Serr8d's Cutting Edge.

Obama's Disastrous Middle Ground on Afghanistan

Barack -- Worst. President. Ever. -- Obama has ruled out an Afghan troop increase for now, phrased differently at the New York Times, "Obama Rules Out Large Reduction in Afghan Force."

But I love this headline from the Los Angeles Times, " Obama Mulls Middle Ground in Afghanistan War Strategy" (via Memeorandum):

At a White House meeting aimed at tempering increasingly politicized debate over the war in Afghanistan, President Obama told congressional leaders Tuesday that he does not plan to dramatically reduce the American troop level or switch to a strictly counter-terrorism mission.

Asking for patience until he completes an assessment of the situation over the next few weeks, the president urged lawmakers to keep their minds open to a nuanced range of options.

Obama did not indicate to the bipartisan group whether he is leaning toward or against a significant troop escalation. Instead, he suggested he is looking at the middle range of the spectrum, somewhere between a major increase in forces and a large drawdown.

"The president reiterated that we need this debate to be honest and dispense with the straw man argument that this is about either doubling down or leaving Afghanistan," one senior administration official said after the meeting ended.

You know, Obama's certainly building his creds as the master of presidential disaster. Americans elect presidents to lead the country. Barack Obama in turn give them the back of his hand . In refusing to make tough decisions on the war, Obama is hoping to carve out squiggle room for 2012. He's betting that no matter what happens to the deployment -- and we well may lose in the absence of decisive leadership -- he'll be able to come down on one side or the other in the electoral debates on Afghanistan during the campaign.

Meanwhile, American troops are dying in a series of recent attacks that are being called some of the worst losses in the war. Disgraceful.

Pelosi on Shinseki in 2005: President Bush Should 'Listen to His Commanders in the Field'

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's on the hot seat this morning for her disparaging comments on General Stanley McChrystal. The Republcan National Campaign Committee reports, "General Pelosi Knows Better, Slams McChrystal":

After making pleas for action in Afghanistan, one would think Pelosi would be General McChrystal’s strongest ally:

“President Bush's failed Iraq policies have handed the terrorists a useful recruiting tool and limited our ability to respond to security challenges elsewhere in the region and the world.”

"Fighting the wrong war in Iraq has not ended the threat posed by al-Qaeda and its Taliban allies in Afghanistan, nor has it brought Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri to justice.” (Pelosi Statement, 9/05/2006)

Now, Pelosi is backpedaling on Afghanistan amidst increasing criticism from the radical left:

"I've also made it clear it's a very difficult vote to get from the members," she added. "Their constituents don't like an escalated war in Afghanistan. They'd like to see a different approach. But let's see what the president has to say." (Glenn Thrush, “Pelosi skeptical about Afghan surge, McChrystal,” Politico, 10/05/2009)

“General Pelosi has no problem sacrificing her own credibility as the Obama administration and liberals in Congress attempt to walk back a strategy they strongly advocated just months ago,” said NRCC Communications Director Ken Spain. “Nancy Pelosi continues to make party politics a higher priority than our national security. Rather than listening to a four-star general’s assessments on Afghanistan, General Pelosi somehow believes she is better suited to craft our country’s military policy.”

Also, here's Nancy Pelosi's 2005 statement on how President's Bush should defer to General Eric Shinseki:

I remind you the president – when General Shinseki said that you need 300,000 troops in order to get the job done and come home safely and soon, he was fired. So this president saying that he listens to the commanders in the field, I don’t know about that.

And here's Nancy Pelosi on Charlie Rose last night, from Ruby Slippers, "Pelosi Opines on Afghanistan and McChrystal on Charlie Rose":

See also, Weasel Zippers, "RNC Urges Gen. McCrystal to Put Pelosi "in her Place"...Dems Respond by Saying The GOP is "80% Male, 100% White"... Wait, What Was Their Response? ...." Also, Greg Sargent, "Pelosi Rips McChrystal For Publicly Airing His Views On Afghanistan."

Clue to Debbie Wasserman Schultz: Nancy Pelosi's Second in Line to the Presidency

Glenn Thrush has this quote from Democratic Congresswoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz blasting Repubicans for their sexism:

Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.), who is close to Pelosi, could barely contain her anger.

"I think the place for a woman is at the top of the House of Representatives," said Wasserman Schultz.

"It's evidence they long for the days when a woman's place was in the kitchen. Now a woman is third in line for the presidency... But it's not surprising, coming from a party that's 80 percent male and 100 percent white," she added, referring to the composition of the House GOP conference.

Can someone get Wasserman Schultz a lifeline?

Article II, Section 1, Clause 6 makes the vice president first in line to the presidency should something happen to the president. Thus, the Speaker of the House is second in line to the president's office.

For more on the outrage, see Also, Gun Toting Liberal, "Speaker Of The House Paraphrased: “Bunch Of Cracker-Assed Testosterone-Filled Crackers Make Up The Red Side Of The Aisle In The House”." Also, Memeorandum.

Great News! Organizing for America Backs Anarcho-Communist G-20 Cadres

Well, it turns out that my post on Elliot Madison -- the suspected New York anarcho-communist recently arrested for tweeting police formations at Pittsburgh's G-20 protests -- stirred up a little backlash among the radical left-libertarians.

The notorious nihilist Dr. Hugo Hussein Ahmadinejad Biobrain has written a response. Dr. Biobrain sets out immediately -- like any good radical postmodernist -- to challenge my main source, the New York Post -- obviously objectionable for its capitalist-hegemonic owner Rupert Murdoch:

Donald goes as far as to title his post "Queens 'Tin Can' Anarchist Held One Pound of Liquid Mercury," based entirely on a claim written in the NY Post that mercury was found in his apartment ... I guess this is proof of the NY Times liberal-bias, as they failed to mention this important fact completely.

Okay, fine. Folks can just check with Madison's attorney, Martin Stolar, and his U.S. District Court motion for the return of items seized. The motion claims that the items have "no connection to any pending or continuing investigation ..." At page 22 it notes that police found "one (1) glass container of unknown gray substance wrapped in brown paper napkins with a rubber band." The New York Post accurately reported that item as one pound of liquid mercury. See Stolar's full motion here.

Madison and Stolar are interviewed at communist Amy Goodman's Democracy Now! network, "Twitter Crackdown: NYC Activist Arrested for Using Social Networking Site during G-20 Protest in Pittsburgh." And the Obamunists at Organizing for America are turning Elliot Madison into the movement's latest anarcho-communist cause célèbre, "Free Elliot Madison":

But there's more pushback at my post, for example from "Mike" at Rational Reasons (who's apparently a big Lew Rockwell fan):

You are dishonestly trying to call him a commie because your puny neo-con mind can't wrap itself around the thought that believers in the free market might choose to fight against the state with other [sic] who hold that same goal, even if they don't see eye to eye.

"Believers in the free market." Yeah. Right. A look over at "Mike's" blog shows a link to a Lew Rockwell post decrying "red state facism," and he adds:

This is just to clarify that while libertarians don't like Obama's policies (and neither do I), they also don't support the idiocy of the 9-12ers or the Tea Party movement.

Great. That puts "Mike" right in alliance with Cindy Sheehan, who mounted a neo-communist "March of the Dead" protest in front of the White House yesterday. And recall Lew Rockwell and Cindy Sheehan formed a kinky left-libertarian sex-romp alliance during 2005's "Camp Casey" protests against the Bush administration. See, "Mother Sheehan's Married Lover":

Sources have identified the boyfriend as former right-winger Lew Rockwell of the Ludwig Von Mises think tank located in Alabama, who is himself married.

"Mike" also argued at my post:

I suppose the Centre for Liberty, Mises, Naomi Wolfe, Lew Rockwell and Raason [sic] are all commies too for supporting the G20 protesters and speaking out against the egregious police state tactics taken by the cops in Pittsburgh?

Boy, what a bunch! But dude, you forgot Ron Paul, Andrew Sullivan, and Will Wilkinson! But hey, Reason's cool. While Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch gave the anti-American Ron Paul a big thumbs up in 2007, at least Welsh later denounced talk of a "liberal-libertarian" alliance.

But let's get something straight: It's long been known that the bulk of so-called libertarians have made common cause with the radical left. There's little practical distinction to be made between the paleo-libertarianism of folks like Justin Raimondo and the anti-American hatred of neo-communists of Code Pink and International ANSWER. Indeed, Raimondo, a frequent contributor to Lew Rockwell's blog, was a keynote speaker at the radical left's 2005 gathering in Berkelely, "Iraq: 5 Years Too Many." (Related: See, "Paul Craig Roberts and the Certifiable Right.") Add on top of that the so-called "capitalist anarchists," who -- oddly -- were out in force during Pittsburgh's anti-capitalist G-20 protests, and it's clear that the not only is the anarcho-leftist alliance fully ramping up for the destruction of America, they've even got some of the Obama administration's own Organizing for America goons on board.

Related: The Libertarian Communist Home Page:

Libertarian communists are also called anarchists. Anarchists are opposed to capitalism and the state, and they believe the working class must organize to overthrow capitalism and replace it with an egalitarian, libertarian system where each person's autonomy and individuality is fully realized and allowed to flourish, and human community and solidarity is fully realized.

Actually, that doesn't sound all that different from the manifesto at Tin Can Comms Collective, the anarchist outfit allied with Elliot Madison. But of course, while "anarcho-capitalist" Mike Gogulski is said to favor "free markets," the assertion flies in the face of his expressed hatred of America and American institutions:

I renounced my American citizenship in protest of what has become an American Empire, a nation that I see riding an express train to police state dictatorship with flags flying, anthems blaring and deluded, complicit masses cheering it along the track.

Okay. Right. No wonder the dude was out tweeting police mobilization directives for the anarcho-communists to avoid detection and arrest. What a great guy!

Tensions Rise Over Afghan War Strategy

From the Los Angeles Times, "Tensions Rise Over Afghanistan War Strategy" (via Memeorandum):

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said Monday that President Obama's advisors should keep their guidance private, in effect admonishing the top commander in Afghanistan for publicly advocating an approach requiring more troops even as the White House reassesses its strategy.

The comment by Gates came a day after Obama's national security advisor, James L. Jones, said that military commanders should convey their advice through the chain of command -- a reaction to Army Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal's public statements in support of his troop-intensive strategy for stabilizing Afghanistan.

The exchanges suggested some disarray in the Obama administration's attempts to forge a new policy on Afghanistan and underscored wide differences among top officials over the correct approach.

In May, Obama tapped McChrystal, a special forces commander, to take charge of the Afghanistan effort and institute a sweeping counterinsurgency strategy. Obama and McChrystal spoke Friday aboard Air Force One on an airport tarmac in Copenhagen, and White House officials did not detail what the two talked about.

Still, Pentagon officials dismissed suggestions Monday that the 55-year-old commander was in any professional jeopardy. Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said it would be "absurd" to think McChrystal had lost favor or standing with the administration.

Gates' comments, in an address before an Assn. of the U.S. Army meeting, came in the midst of what the Pentagon chief called a "hyper-partisan" debate over Afghanistan policy. Many Republicans and even some leading Democrats demand the president comply with commanders' troop requests.

The deaths of eight U.S. service members in an insurgent attack in a remote area over the weekend fueled the political fight. At least one prominent Republican, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, argued that the failure to send more troops would lead to additional deaths.

With public opinion turning against the war, Obama and Vice President Joe Biden will meet today with congressional leaders. The president is scheduled to chair a strategy session Wednesday with top advisors.

Gates, demanding room for the administration's deliberations, said the resulting decisions would be among the most important of Obama's presidency.

I'll say.

The left is seeking to distort General McCrystal's comments into a constitutional crisis of civil/military relations. But see Michael O'Hanlon, "A General Within Bounds." Also, Jules Crittenden, "Consulter In Chief."

Plus, don't miss Michael Yon, "Two Firefights: One Video."

Antiwar Groups Launch 'March of the Dead' Protests: Cindy Sheehan Arrested; Bush Derangement Lives!

We'll be having antiwar protests all week. I'll be in Los Angeles on Wednesday to cover the ANSWER coalition's protest, "U.S./NATO Out of Afghanistan!"

We had a preview of events in August, from the New York Times, "American Antiwar Movement Plans an Autumn Campaign Against Policies on Afghanistan."

But here's today's report from This Ain't Hell ... , "Code Pink/VFP/WCW at the White House":

Not feeling the hope and change, a coalition of anti war groups marched on the White House ... I guess you could take this sign a hundred ways, but anyway you parse it, it’s a slap against the troops; It’s not a protest against Bush anymore ...

The Washington Post features a sympathetic report, naturally: "Antiwar Protesters Turn Their Sights on Obama":

Commemorating the upcoming eighth anniversary of the invasion of Afghanistan, a coalition of antiwar protest groups converged on the White House on Monday to urge a withdrawal from the fighting there and in Iraq.

Sixty-one people were arrested, according to protest organizers. Several hundred attended a rally at McPherson Square, which was followed by a procession to the White House.

Organized under the umbrella of the National Campaign for Nonviolent Resistance, it was the coalition's first protest of the war in Afghanistan. Antiwar organizers hope it will mark the start of a month -- and a season -- of fresh agitation, after years of seeking an end to the fighting in Iraq.

More at the link. Also, from United for Peace and Justice, "US Troops Out of Afghanistan! Change = Peace!" Also, from the National Campaign for Non-Violent Resistance, "Join us at the White House to act against the Afghanistan War!" And at Common Dreams, "Hundreds Demand End to Afghan and Iraq Wars, Close Guantanamo and Bagram, Surge Spending on Housing and Jobs, 61* Arrested at the White House."

As the “March of the Dead” wound through the crowd wearing white masks and carrying the names of dead U.S. service people and Iraqi and Afghan war victims, more than 20 people dressed at Guantanamo prisoners assembled near the White House fence. Members of “Witness Against Torture,” a group committed to the shuttering of Guantanamo and the quickly enlarging Bagram air base in Afghanistan, many chained themselves to the fence. On their backs, they wore the names of Guantanamo detainees cleared for release who remain detained under the Obama administration despite the White House’s heralded decision to shutter the prison.

The group read the names of those killed in war and newspaper accounts of U.S. bombings and their devastating consequences in Afghanistan and Iraq. Code Pink, World Can’t Wait and many others also participated in the day of action. Veterans for Peace carried large American and peace flags and processed with three coffins representing those killed in war. Each coffin was draped with a flag—America, Iraq and Afghanistan all represented. Members of the War Resisters League held a large banner than said “End the War in Afghanistan” and wore white shrouds emblazoned with the pictures of Afghan civilians.

Also, David Swanson, "We Were Arrested for Speaking."

And here's the thing: No matter how hard leftists spin these events, these aren't so much "antiwar" events as "pro-revolution" events, sponsored by neo-Stalinists and anarcho-communists. See John Tierney, "The Politics of Peace: What’s Behind the Anti-War Movement?":

The irony of the modern “peace” movement is that it has very little to do with peace—either as a moral concept or as a political ideal. Peace is a tactical ideal for movement organizers: it serves as political leverage against U.S. policymakers, and it is an ideological response to the perceived failures of American society.The leaders of anti-war groups are modern-day Leninists. As Lenin used Russian war-weariness in 1917 to overthrow the Czar, so American street revolutionaries use reactions to the war on Al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein as a way to foment radical political change at home.

The current peace movement is “neo-Communist,” says David Horowitz, the onetime radical-turned-conservative. This is a revealing and accurate label. In fact, the movement is heir to the Communist Party of the United States of America(CPUSA), even though the party’s global base—the Soviet Union—no longer exists. A variety of CPUSA splinter groups claim the mantle of the Left even as they spin-off a dizzying series of front groups and issue-oriented action “committees.”

ANSWER is only the largest of these groups, which also include United for Peace and Justice, Code Pink, Not In Our Name, the Green Party and the Institute for Policy Studies. The Bush Administration’s war on terror, which includes the Iraq war, has prompted all of them to form coalitions and seek allies. Their aim is a “struggle” against “oppression” and “imperialism,” code words in the lexicon of revolutionary socialism. Not In Our Name (NION), a satellite of the Revolutionary Communist Party, decries the War on Terror as a Bush Administration ploy: “We will not stop until all of us are free from your bloodthirsty domination.”

And for the most part, these remain anti-Bush protests. It's almost like President Obama's not even in office. I'll take these nihilists more seriously when they start burning Obama in effigy.

See also, Snooper Report, "Protests Against Military Recruiters at Schools Nationwide Tomorrow."

Babe Blogging: Jessica Simpson's Operation Smile

It turns out that Jessica Simpson's gearing up for a new VH1 reality show, The Price of Beauty. And Ms. Simpson's also in the news following her appearance Friday at the charity ball for Operation Smile in Beverly Hills. I guess the "weight issue" is a big deal nowadays for her career, but she looks great to me:

In any case, I'm just following up my babelicious post from last weekend, "Babe Blogging: Britney Spears Bikini Pics." I actually did retire from full metal blogging (remember R.S. McCain?), but "babe blogging" is a great way to send some links back to folks who've recently linked to me.

And to remind folks, if you're surfing for the hotness, Theo Spark's should be your first stop. And check out Camp of the Saints, "TCOTS Rule 5 Compliance Committee: Sophia Loren." Plus, for the mellow linkages, check Pat in Shreveport's, "Full Metal Jacket Saturday - The Octoberfest Edition."

Blazing Cat Fur's been linking me quite a bit, by the way, and I've actually been repaying the favor. Good practice, you now. Check out Paco Enterprises as well, "Obama Says We Will Not Walk Away From Afghanistan." And Pirate's Cove, "President Narcissist Angry At General McChrystal. Now With Surrender"!

Also, updates on the Rachel Maddow / R.S. McCain libel scandal: See, The Classical Liberal, "Rachel Maddow’s Lying Cheap Shot!" And HotMES, Maddow, Upset With Slow Progress of Sex Change, Lashes Out at Stacy McCain."

In related race-card news, see Saber Point, "Taking Out the Trash with JANEANE GAROFALO." Plus, Another Black Conservative, "Raaaaacism Industrial Complex Member Janeane Garofalo is at it Again." And Grandpa John's, "Garofalo is at it Again."

More good stuff at Nice Deb, "MSNBC: Evil Wingnuts Cheering Obama’s Failure “Even If It Means Half The Country Dies”." And related, from Cold Fury, "The Agony of Defeat."

More hotties -- and hot links -- later!

Robert Stacy McCain: 'SPECIAL REPORT: Death in Clay County'

From Robert Stacy McCain, "Death in Clay County: The Green Room Goes Gonzo, or Fear and Loathing in Lower Glennbeckistan."

**********

So here I was alone, looking at the locked gate across Hoskins Cemetery Road. I wrote down the time in my notebook, got out of the car and took a few photos of the bridge and gate with my small Kodak digital camera. It was actually a lovely scene. The large hardwood trees lining the banks of the stream were still summer green in late September. The afternoon was cool and breezy, the sky was overcast with heavy clouds, and the only sounds were the wind in the trees and the quiet burbling of the little brook flowing east, parallel to Arnetts Fork Road.

Just then, I heard the sound of a car approaching from the direction of Big Double Creek Road. Standing by the roadside, I flagged down the blue sedan and approached the driver’s side window. The driver looked to be in her early 30s, and there was a child’s car seat in the back, but no child.

“Excuse me, ma’am,” I said to the lady, trying to smile as friendly as I could. “I’m a reporter, covering the murder y’all had up here.”

She nodded in recognition – obviously, the locals knew all about the case – and I continued.

“I’m up here to see the place where they found that fellow’s body and get a few pictures and, frankly, it’s kind of scary, y’know?”

She nodded again and said, “Yeah, I know.”

“So what I was wondering,” I said, “was whether you wouldn’t mind just waiting here for a few minutes, while I walk up to the cemetery – just wait here, to make sure I get back.”

She shook her head. “Well, I don’t think so, but I’ll tell you what. My husband’s up at the house” – she gestured westward up the hill – “and I can send him back down here, if you want.”

“Could you?” I asked. “About how long would it take him to get here?”

“About five minutes.”

Thus it was agreed, and I felt much better about my situation. No doubt her husband was a stout, hearty soul who would accompany me to the graveyard and assure my safety. Unless, that is, the lady’s husband was some hillbilly meth-cooker, a dangerously violent ex-con with deep hostility toward nosy outsiders and, for all I knew, the same guy who’d killed Sparkman.

Crazy fears like that crop up in a man’s mind when he’s short on sleep, hyped on coffee, far from home, and standing at the scene of a notorious crime in the Appalachian backwoods. But I’d wait for the lady’s husband to come back. He was probably a mild-mannered, clean-cut Baptist church deacon, and I was just being paranoid.

On the other hand, these woods were reportedly crawling with marijuana growers who plant their crops in isolated forest clearings, and late September is harvest time for these outlaw agriculturalists. Maybe there was some weeder, dressed in camouflage, rifle at the ready, guarding his crop planted nearby. Maybe, even at that very moment, I was a target in the crosshairs of a scope on a high-powered rifle held by a mountaineer marksman. One squeeze on the trigger and – boom! – that would be it for me.

Honestly, you think about things like that at such a moment, in such a place.

“Be careful,” my wife had told me before I left on this trip, which I’d undertaken against her advice. I reminded her I’d survived my 10-day excursion to Africa in February 2008. “If they didn’t kill me in Kampala, I think I’ll be all right in Clay County, Kentucky.”

There's going to be lots more where that came from.

Full post is at Hot Air.

Are You America's Next Great Pundit?

Seriously, from the Washington Post, "America's Next Great Pundit Contest":

Think you have what it takes to be a great pundit? Put your opinions to the test -- and win the opportunity to write a weekly column and a launching pad for your opinionating career.

We’re looking for a fresh voice that we can set on a path to become the next byline in demand. And we'll be enlisting readers to help make the pick.

More details and entry form here.

***********

Beginning on or about Oct. 30, ten prospective pundits will get to compete for the title of America’s Next Great Pundit, facing off in challenges that test the skills a modern pundit must possess. They’ll have to write on deadline, hold their own on video and field questions from Post readers. (Contestants won’t have to quit their day jobs, but they should be prepared to put in about eight hours a week for three weeks.) After each round, a panel of Post personalities will offer kudos and catcalls, and reader votes will help to determine who gets another chance at a byline and who has to shut down their laptop.

Kathy at Hummers & Cigarettes sent me the link. I don't, however, think I'm worthy. Actually -- and I'm serious -- Robert Stacy McCain should throw his hat in the ring. Say what you will about the guy him (except that he's a "racist," of course), the guy can write like writing went out of style!

Additional nominations, in no particular order:

Noah at Noah Johns.

Pat at So It Goes in Shreveport.

Jimmy at Sundries Shack.

Paco at Pace Enterprises.

Lynn at SWAC Girl.

Richard at Three Bears Later.

Mike at Cold Fury.

Kathleen at Right Wing Sparkle.

Nikki at Nikki's Blog.

William at Legal Insurrection

Pamela at Atlas Shrugs.

Scott as Scott Kingsmore.

Stogie at Saber Point.

I'd also nominate Jules Crittenden, but he's already at the Boston Herald!

P.S. More links for blog buddies later! No selection criteria here whatsover!