Jay-Z's Jim Crow Segregation?

I recently posted Jay-Z's interview at Interview. My oldest boy likes his music, and Jay-Z seems like a savvy businessman. But he's not coming up rosy this week. See The Blog Prof's report, "Real racism: Rapper Jay-Z Bans White People From Nightclub Bash":

As you read this, imagine the outrage from the left if the exact opposite had been done - a white superstar denying entry of black people to his bash. It would have been tar and feather time in the MSM. As it is, not so much. From Jam Canoe: Jay-Z bash ignites race controversy

Rapper Jay-Z has been caught up in a race scandal following allegations security at his BRIT Awards afterparty on Tuesday banned white people from entering the VIP area.

The 99 Problems superstar threw a lavish bash at Merah nightclub in London following his Best International Male Solo win at the ceremony.

But the night descended into chaos after fights broke out amid people scrambling to get close to the star.

And the atmosphere turned even nastier after security personnel working on the doors of the VIP room allegedly refused to allow any white people into the area, while letting black partygoers straight through, according to Britain's Daily Star newspaper.

Hmm. There's more:

In London this week for the British Music Awards, Jay Z won the Brit for Best International Male, then hosted a lavish after party attended by every big name you can think of. As long as you can’t think of any white ones. One guest told the Daily Star…

"Jay-Zis a megastar and yet it was clear white people were not welcome in his VIP area.

While the red rope was lifted for black guests to breeze through, let’s just say it stayed down if your face didn’t fit.

And that included me, despite clearly being a guest of the double-BRIT winners JLS.

I have never felt so intimidated. It left me feeling like a mauled dog."

This part, however, is extremely important…

Jay-Z was completely unaware of the situation after having a custom-built table laid on for him in a private corner.

But a friend told the Daily Star: “He would not have been happy by the actions of those on the night.”

We shouldn’t rush to judgment until we know the motivations of the bouncers. Maybe they were trying to help. Maybe they were going to show a movie during the party, and everyone there would be talking over it and yelling stuff at the screen. My people don’t like that one bit. “Tsk, tsk,” we say.

See also, AllHipHop, "British Paper Accuses Jay-Z of Racism for Afterparty Snub."

Folks aren't denying that white guests were excluded. It's just a matter of pinning down the real Mr. Charley here?

And yeah, where are those leftists?

RELATED: "Libel Blogger David Hillman (Swash Zone) Workplace Harassment Fail."

Max Blumenthal's Alinsky Tactics

At Big Journalism, "How the World Works: Max Blumenthal and His Vicious Alinsky Tactics":

The video below summarizes Blumenthal’s Alinsky tactics and highlights clips from the most recent CPAC where he continues his viciousness. As Andrew Breitbart wondered, what does Blumenthal really stand for, if it isn’t for destroying people’s lives?

Destroy people's lives? Who woulda thunk it!

RELATED: "Libel Blogger David Hillman (Swash Zone) Workplace Harassment Fail."

Libel Blogger David Hillman (Swash Zone) Workplace Harassment Fail

I met with my vice president for human resources today regarding the claims of "racism" and "harassment" alleged by David Hillman (a.k.a (O)CT(O)PUS) of The Swash Zone.

I can't go into detail as to what went down at the meeting, but it's essential that I post updates of non-proprietary information to the formal record here. The campus inquiry is ongoing and I'll be accompanied by union representatives in case of any forthcoming actions. Recall that David Hillman's allegations are just the latest in his completely deranged (but longstanding) jihad against American Power. Hillman's charges are as preposterous as they are unhinged. A classical neo-communist, (O)CT(O)PUS is so utterly incompetent at anything other than puerile schoolyard bullying that it's not surprising that he'd go all in with a vicious campaign of personal destruction. Indeed, he's updated his post with a new comment to reiterate his desperate end-all motivation to literally annihilate me and the moral clarity I represent:

This will NOT be my last and final comment on the subject of Internet predation, but I hope this will be my last encounter with the Professor of Political Science at Long Beach City College who has stalked the Swash Zone for years.

This weekend, the professor posted a series of ripostes here, here, and here.

As expected, he is still wrapping himself inside his First Amendment rights while refusing to take responsibility for his actions. He plays the victim card but has not yet explained this ...

This is totally piss-poor unsubstantiated drivel. Readers can go to the link above to see the libelous claims being thrown around. But interestingly, Hillman is so literally consumed by hatred he's driven to psychotic fantasies of alleged mayhem and stalking. Behold these freakishly phantasmagorical projections with reference to the real-life cyber-stalking and death threats to tech-guru Kathy Sierra:

Let there be no doubt. The pleas of Kathy Sierra have failed to reach across the Internet. There are trolls and serial predators everywhere, and few have been more persistent and toxic than the professor of political science at Long Beach City College.

If he were merely an annoying troll, it would be easy to ignore him. It is less easy, however, to ignore hate messages in my email box that originate from his weblog … fulminations against “stinking-boot” liberals … messages warning of dire consequences and a final reckoning. When one reads this crap, it is easy to understand how Kathy Sierra felt.

I'm sensing a persecution complex!

Jeez, I guess American Power really has the power!

I kid, but this is actually quite serious. The Swash Zone community is actually struggling to devise even more crudely devious methods in their jihad to eviscerate my First Amendment rights to freedom of speech (with emphasis added):

Where bigotry and other morally repugnant acts are concerned, I'm all for sunshine; publicize the nasty things that people say and do as much as possible -- which, by the way, is one of the reasons I'm opposed to moderating such things away. Sometimes it's good to confront and be offended by the things people say and do, and to see that as many other people as possible are offended right along with you. Rather than hide bigoted blog comments, I say highlight them, repeating them as many times as it takes for people to get good and pissed off at the people that post them. (In fact, if the lawyer's don't object, I'd suggest posting all of the threats and other nonsense received via e-mail, as well.) I'm all for blog posts, letters to local media--including the LBCC college newspaper--with full quotes and context, tweets, facebook posts, submissions to "Worst Person in the World" segments, and any other means that uses sunshine and/or moonglow to highlight the bad acts Donald Douglas and those like him engage in.

The only problem, of course, is that there are no "threats and other nonsense" or "racism" or "harassment," or whatever. In fact, IT'S DAVID HILLMAN WHO HAS REPEATEDLY PUBLISHED ALL OF MY WORKPLACE INFORMATION TO FACILITATE ONGOING DIABOLICAL THREATS TO ME, MY FAMILY, AND MY LIVELIHOOD.

The truth is that these people reside outside the boundaries of God-given right, morality, and goodness. This truth is revealed to me inside my heart and in my faith, and readers at American Power (and of spiritual blessing) know that righteousness will prevail and that I'm in eternal graces. It is the eminent case that these most horrible people -- Satan's servants -- can't actually defend themselves against overwhelming argumentation, so they can resort only to the most underworldly campaigns of personal and political destruction imaginable.

I now understand much better why some bloggers choose to remain anonymous, but I wouldn't have it any other way. Truth and goodness always prevail, and so it is here at this blog.

PHOTO CREDIT: That's me leaving for work this morning. Picture by American Power Progeny #2.

ACORN: Closed for Business!

Andrew Breitbart is the man!

From Politico, "ACORN 'Dissolved as a National Structure'." And from Allahpundit, "ACORN Dissolving National Structure Due to 'Damage to the Brand'." (Via Memeorandum.)

And check out some of my previous coverage of the story:

And my piece last summer, one of the very first local reports on this nationwide, "Orange County ACORN Office Shuts Down!":

Mike Huckabee Slams CPAC!

Left Coast Rebel has the story, "Mike Huckabee Blasts CPAC as 'Too Libertarian'."

See also, The Other McCain, "Mike Huckabee, Sore Loser." And at the Kansas City Star, "Ron Paul wins, Mike Huckabee loses in CPAC straw poll."

RELATED: ABC News, "Meghan McCain, Mike Huckabee MIA at CPAC Lounge."

Buzzcocks and The Damned 'Smash it Up' in the O.C.!

The title above is a reference to The Damned's seminal punk classic, "Smash it Up":

The second clip is The Buzzcocks, "Why Can't I Touch It."

And, from the Orange County Register, "Musink Day 2: Ye Olde English Punks Rule":

It’s not so unusual for the thrashy ghouls of the Damned and the hyper-melodic speedsters of Buzzcocks (above) to turn up in Orange County for a gig, although until Saturday night in Costa Mesa neither group had played here for several years. It’s rare indeed, however, to see both pioneering English punk outfits one after the other in the same night.

Add in some ripping retro fun from the Head Cat, a grungy rockabilly side project from Motörhead main man Lemmy Kilmister and Stray Cats drummer Slim Jim Phantom, and the second day of the third annual Musink Tattoo Convention & Music Festival became a special treat: three of the U.K.’s most legendary punk/metal figures all performing back-to-back.

Divvy that up, $10 a band, and the evening’s $30 cover charge didn’t seem so steep for those who didn’t care about the mostly unknown local bands earlier in the day, or who weren’t getting inked in the hall next door. Frankly, considering how resolutely strong each act was, they probably deserved double.

I don’t remember seeing the Damned anywhere nearby since KROQ’s second Inland Invasion in 2002, the one that celebrated a quarter-century of punk rock via groups both old (Sex Pistols, X, Social Distortion) and then relatively new (Blink-182, New Found Glory). How astonishing that eight years later original members Dave Vanian (below right, entering like a Goth Cary Grant in shades and scarf) and guitarist Captain Sensible (nutty as ever in a red beret and beady white sunglasses), along with their current supporting cast, are playing more fiercely than ever. The pace of already fast staples like “Neat Neat Neat” and “New Rose” and “Love Song” was positively blitzing Saturday night, and yet these 50-somethings were unerring -– one moment they’d seem to tear away recklessly, the next they’d stop on a dime.

RTWT.

Lemmy and Stray Cat Slim Jim!

Man, that was some far out gig!

The Kardashians: Turning Virtual Nobodies Into Reality Stars

I meant to post on "Keeping Up With the Kardashians" the other day, but didn't have the chance.

The Los Angeles Times published a really fascinating piece on the Kardashian family, "The Kardashian Phenomenon." I've only watched the show once or twice, but a lot of bloggers love Kim Kardashian, so it's hard to be out of the loop. In fact, I was laughing when I read Robert Stacy McCain's post this afternoon, "TMI Twitter from Kim Kardashian." (Robert couldn't resist illustrating the entry with a Playboy cover shot.)

I've been catching so much flak for the babe-blogging I'll just cut and paste some social commentary from the Times' piece:

When a reality show about the Kardashian sisters of Calabasas debuted in fall 2007, most people had never heard of the family and what was known could scarcely be considered positive.

Their late father, a lawyer, helped O.J. Simpson win acquittal at his murder trial; middle daughter Kim palled around nightclubs with Paris Hilton; and a graphic sex tape featuring the brunet and a former boyfriend ended up in the hands of a porn distributor.

Two and a half years later, the Kardashians are an inescapable cultural and commercial force. Their series, "Keeping Up With the Kardashians," which concludes its fourth season Sunday on E, has shattered viewership records for the cable network and spawned a spin-off show. Kim Kardashian.com is the world's most popular official celebrity website, according to its operator. Checkout-aisle magazines and gossip blogs cover the smallest details of the sisters' lives. And Madison Avenue calls on the family to sell mainstream America everything, from diet pills and orange juice to NASCAR and fast food.

Their popularity comes despite the fact that the sisters lack the talents that traditionally lead to superstardom and, some believe, partly because of it.

"There's an aspirational quality to somebody who has become a celebrity for -- and I don't say this in an offensive way -- but for not doing anything celebrity-worthy," said Matt Delzell, an executive at Davie Brown Entertainment, a company that helps corporations choose celebrity endorsers. The young women to whom the Kardashians appeal, he said, "tend to think that's pretty cool. That's something I might be able to achieve."

Television programming, especially on cable, is increasingly dependent on created rather than established celebrities. Turning nobodies -- or virtual nobodies -- into reality stars is cheaper than hiring actual somebodies. But the Kardashians have transcended that level. While personalities on Bravo's "Real Housewives" franchises and MTV's "Jersey Shore" and "The Hills" seem to exist to promote those shows, the Kardashians have turned their program into a promotional vehicle to expand their own empire.

Kris Jenner, the family matriarch and self-described "momager," said she had little time for those who criticized her brood for being "famous for nothing." She is too busy sorting through business opportunities, working on "SPINdustry" -- a Kardashian documentary special debuting Sunday on E -- and generally protecting what she only slightly self-consciously refers to as "our brand."

Interesting story, FWIW. More at the link.

See also, The Celebrity Cafe, "When Talent is No Longer a Necessity in Hollywood."

And as far as the ladies, check out The Classical Liberal, The Daley Gator, Theo Spark, Washington Rebel, and WyBlog.

Charles Johnson, Ron Paul, Stormfront, and Glenn Greenwald

I've forgotten all about Charles Johnson this last couple of months. He may have peaked with the fawning Los Angeles Times piece a while back, but he was doing some serious damage control on his blog following the surprisingly non-fawning New York Times write up sometime thereafter.

But King Charles is looking for "racists" and "Birchers" as intensely as the likes of Keith Olbermann, and in the case of the latter that interest is mainly a periodic one to keep in good graces with the Daily Kos hate-masters. For Charles Johnson, the search for the ever-elusive key to the alleged GOP/white supremacist connection is all consuming. And because of that, this post (a safe Google link here) is extremely fascinating, "Neo-Nazi Sites Love Ron Paul." Here's the Stromfront quotation from King Charles' post:

Polymath
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,966

Re: Ron Paul Wins CPAC Poll

There is a Jewish Supremacist hate site called “Little Green Footballs” and this kind of thing drives them crazy, because they PRETEND to be conservatives and when a real conservative and all-American man like Dr. Ron Paul wins so many conservative polls, they go crazy with whining.

These LGF Jews are the most unpatriotic Israeli-first traitors the United States sees in the blogosphere. They are vile and disgusting rats. “Charles Johnson” is the shabbat goy that fronts this obvious Zionist hate site, and even if this “Charles Johnson” moron claims to be Christian, he could care less about Christianity in the Holy Land, which is getting wiped out by Zionists, and it fared far better under the Arabs before the Khazar (Ashkenazi) fakes came to the Middle East.

Now reading this, it's extremely perplexing to figure out the lines of ideological affilation or repudiation.

Charles Johnson wants to destroy the tea party movement as an extremist neo-Nazi falange. But this Stormfront guy -- if that's who he really is -- is smearing King Charles with the worst anti-Semitic hatred. Which itself goes to show, frankly, that the tea partiers have absolutely nothing in common with such legitimate hate groups.

It's ridiculous, but that's not all. Glenn Greenwald, the radical leftists who claims to be a constitutional libertarian, has a post up today claiming that the original tea party activists were "Paulbots." See, "The GOP's "Small Government" Tea Party Fraud":

There's a major political fraud underway: the GOP is once again donning their libertarian, limited-government masks in order to re-invent itself and, more important, to co-opt the energy and passion of the Ron-Paul-faction that spawned and sustains the "tea party" movement. The Party that spat contempt at Paul during the Bush years and was diametrically opposed to most of his platform now pretends to share his views. Standard-issue Republicans and Ron Paul libertarians are as incompatible as two factions can be -- recall that the most celebrated right-wing moment of the 2008 presidential campaign was when Rudy Giuliani all but accused Paul of being an America-hating Terrorist-lover for daring to suggest that America's conduct might contribute to Islamic radicalism -- yet the Republicans, aided by the media, are pretending that this is one unified, harmonious, "small government" political movement.

The Right is petrified that this fraud will be exposed and is thus bending over backwards to sustain the myth. Paul was not only invited to be a featured speaker at the Conservative Political Action Conference but also won its presidential straw poll. Sarah Palin endorsed Ron Paul's son in the Kentucky Senate race. National Review is lavishly praising Paul, while Ann Coulter "felt compelled [in her CPAC speech] to give a shout out to Paul-mania, saying she agreed with everything he stands for outside of foreign policy -- a statement met with cheers." Glenn Beck -- who literally cheered for the Wall Street bailout and Bush's endlessly expanding surveillance state -- now parades around as though he shares the libertarians' contempt for them. Red State's Erick Erickson, defending the new so-called conservative "manifesto," touts the need for Congress to be confined to the express powers of Article I, Section 8, all while lauding a GOP Congress that supported countless intrusive laws -- from federalized restrictions on assisted suicide, marriage, gambling, abortion and drugs to intervention in Terri Schiavo's end-of-life state court proceeding -- nowhere to be found in that Constitutional clause. With the GOP out of power, Fox News suddenly started featuring anti-government libertarians such as John Stossel and Reason Magazine commentators, whereas, when Bush was in power, there was no government power too expanded or limitless for Fox propagandists to praise.

A long quote, I know. But the context is needed when reading Greenwald's next passage:

These fault lines began to emerge when Sarah Palin earlier this month delivered the keynote speech to the national tea party conference in Nashville, and stood there spitting out one platitude after the next which Paul-led libertarians despise: from neoconservative war-loving dogma and veneration of Israel to glorification of "War on Terror" domestic powers and the need of the state to enforce Palin's own religious and cultural values. Neocons (who still overwhelmingly dominate the GOP) and Paul-led libertarians are arch enemies, and the social conservatives on whom the GOP depends are barely viewed with greater affection. Sarah Palin and Ron Paul are about as far apart on most issues as one can get; the "tea party movement" can't possibly be about supporting each of their worldviews. Moreover, the GOP leadership is currently promising Wall Street even more loyal subservience than Democrats have given in exchange for support, thus bolstering the government/corporate axis which libertarians find so repugnant. And Coulter's manipulative claim that she "agrees with everything [Paul] stands for outside of foreign policy" is laughable; aside from the fact that "foreign policy" is a rather large issue in our political debates (Iraq, Israel, Afghanistan, Iran, Russia), they were on exactly the opposite sides of the most intense domestic controversies of the Bush era: torture, military commissions, habeas corpus, Guantanamo, CIA secrecy, telecom immunity, and warrantless eavesdropping.

Now you can really see the ideological lines coming back together. Charles Johnson hates the tea parties, and links them to neo-Nazi Ron Paul websites. Glenn Greenwald hates the tea parties BECAUSE he thinks the movement's trying to co-opt Ron Paul. It's amorphous, but I'll tell you: I've been to dozens of tea parties, political rallies, and protests over the last year, and the only place I saw a major Ron Paul (antiwar) contingent was at the communist ANSWER demonstration at the Wilshire Federal Building last October. Indeed, the folks from Antiwar.com were marching, and their organizer, Nick Hankoff, commented at my report.

So folks can now figure out where they'd like to draw up ideological lines: Would you prefer to be associated with the leftist/Ron Paul/Stormfront strange-bedfellows alliance (that in fact includes all of these folks, C.J, Greenwald, and Ron Paul) or with Sarah Palin and the tea parties? For despite Greenwald's long list of indicators suggesting that the tea party movement is going all in for Ron Paul and his protege, it's foreign policy that'll be the dividing line. Ann Coulter said it best, and I noticed this over the weekend: "she agreed with everything he stands for outside of foreign policy." Exactly!

And pay special attention to Greenwald's excoriation of the "neocons." Stormfront folks hate the neocons (for their support of Israel). But Sarah Palin's a neoconservative hero, as I've long noted. And that makes it easy to figure which side of the ideological line you'll find me. Genuine conservatives favor a strong national defense, for without security, all of our freedoms here at home are at risk.

Kathleen McKinley at CPAC!

Kathleen McKinley, my co-blogger at Right Wing News, is back from CPAC and she has a fabulous report, with tons of great pictures:

Glenn Beck best summed up the feelings of the people at CPAC. He blasted the Republican party. He said the Democrats were the party of "Tax and Spend," while the Republicans were just the party of "Spend," and it's got to stop. He said the Republicans better wake up and get it. He was cheered throughout. He brought his blackboard. He explained that "progressivism" is a disease eating away at our country. In both parties. He told the story of how we got the Statue of Liberty. He spoke of how the Statue of Liberty's feet have chains around them, broken, and she is stepping forward into freedom. He read the part we all know.."Give me your huddled masses," but he read much more and it was...beautiful. In the end this is all about love for our country. It is about loving the idea that our founding father's had of a country of freedom and opportunity for all. In the end, we see our country as diminishing into something we don't recognize. I honestly didn't hear Obama's name much at all. He is only part of a much bigger problem. The problem of seeing the government as the answer, instead of understanding that it is the problem. I hope Republican politicians got it. I hope they got the message. Because understanding it means a big win this year. Understanding it means we take our country back ...

RTWT.

One of the best posts out of CPAC this year! Yo go, Kathy!

WTF? Newt Gingrich is 'Model' for Tea Parties?

File this under the "Department of MSM Orwellianism."

The Los Angeles Times has a story out this morning that's truly unreal in its distortions of reality. And I've got a screencap of the article for some additional context. "Conservatives Draw Up a New 'Contract'." I guess by showing up at CPAC and giving his standard "American Solutions" corporate stump speech, Gingrich can get the endorsement of the tea party-bashing MSM via some front-page disinformation hack jobs. From the article:

Although "tea party" activists and other conservatives claim kinship with the founding fathers and the Spirit of '76, their emerging strategy for the November elections has more in common with the Spirit of '94 -- the year Republicans ended 40 years of Democratic dominance on Capitol Hill.

Conservative strategists centered the 1994 Republican campaign on a "Contract with America." This year, GOP leaders in the House have pledged to issue their own, updated version of that agenda, which is widely credited with having helped Republicans focus their message and win a historic victory.

But this time, the declaration of principles that House Minority Leader John A. Boehner of Ohio has promised will have to play in a crowded field.

A version of the tea party-backed "Contract From America" was unveiled last week at the Conservative Political Action Conference, the annual showcase of leaders and activists on the right. The unveiling came a day after another group -- including many of the elders of conservatism -- announced their own manifesto, dubbed the Mount Vernon statement after its signing at a library near George Washington's estate.

Newt Gingrich, chief architect of the 1994 Contract with America, also has weighed in, publishing his version of a new contract in this month's NewsMax magazine.

The plethora of manifestoes reflects a heightened energy among Republicans, and also shows the work the GOP has to do in uniting the party.

Reflecting that lack of unity, former Republican House leader Dick Armey, now a leading voice of the limited-government, anti-tax tea party movement, said the tea party contract wouldn't be necessary "if Republicans had the credibility to do it themselves. They don't."

Armey's Washington-based advocacy group, FreedomWorks, has endorsed the "Contract From America," which bills itself as culled from the collective wisdom of Internet activists. Its organizer, Houston attorney Ryan Hecker, has been soliciting policy ideas through a website for months and has selected 22 that will be narrowed to 10 through an online vote.

Many of the original suggestions on Hecker's site, contractfromamerica.com, might be difficult for mainstream Republicans and moderate voters to swallow: abolishing the Department of Education, dismantling the IRS and establishing an official U.S. language.

The shortened version distributed last week was edited with an eye toward making the goals more palatable. On education, the new contract proposes to "give parents more choices in the education of their children." On reforming Washington, the ideas include making bills public seven days before a vote and "demanding a balanced budget." The often-divisive issue of immigration didn't make the list.

Focusing on positions that would attract broad popular support was central to the original Contract with America's success, Gingrich wrote this month, and the same must be true of any current effort to spell out what conservatives stand for.

"It has to be popular with 70% or more of the American people," he said.

See how clever that is? Dick Armey was House Majority Leader under the Newt Gingrich speakership. Since Armey has indeed been one of the original backers of the tea party movement, the Times can piggyback Gingrich into the story to make this link between the GOP takeover in 1994 and the tea parties today. Problem is, the "Contract with America" was a campaign vehicle rather than a real reform manifesto with teeth. By 2000, according to Edward Crane at Cato, "the combined budgets of the 95 major programs that the Contract with America promised to eliminate have increased by 13%. " And Crane adds something important: "For all of his talent in generating the "revolution," Newt was never the conservative ideologue the media painted him to be."

Yeah. Hello.

Remember last October and Newt's endorsement of Dede Scozzafava over Doug Hoffman in NY-23? See Michelle's piece on that, "An ACORN-Friendly, Big Labor-Backing, Tax-and-Spend Radical in GOP Clothing."

But you don't get that from the Times. What a joke. Recall Eric Erickson's comments at Politico the other day:

“There needs to be a purging of the movement, and I think we’re already starting to see a different of hierarchy of groups,” said Erick Erickson, the Macon, Ga.-based founder of RedState.com ...

Erickson, a favorite of the new activists, said, “Some of these legacy groups have become so entrenched in the Republican establishment in Washington that a lot of these new activists don’t think they can trust them.”

As examples, Erickson singled out CPAC’s primary sponsor, the American Conservative Union, as well as CPAC stalwarts like The Heritage Foundation think tank and the groups headed by Grover Norquist and former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

I attended Gingrich's "American Solutions" event in the O.C. early this month. He's a true patriot on national security. But his calls for bipartisanship made me cringe. He said the same things over the weekend at CPAC. See, "At CPAC, Gingrich Calls for ‘Principled Bipartisanship’."

The Times has a big global warming "cap-and-trade" piece up this morning, "Saving the Amazon May Be the Most Cost-Effective Way to Cut Greenhouse Gas Emissions." Conservatives should ask Newt Gingrich what he thinks about that? Oh, I almost forgot. We don't have to: See Michelle's post, "Lunch-Losing Video: Gingrich and Pelosi Tag-Team for Al Gore."

ADDED: Dr. Melissa Clouthier links, "Newt Might Try To Co-Opt The Tea Party Movement But It Won’t Work."

At Death's Door? Lockerbie Terrorist Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi 'Living in Luxury' Six Months After Medical Release

Boy, that has got to really piss off some of the victims' families. From the London Telegraph, "Lockerbie Bomber Megrahi Living in Luxury Villa Six Months After Being at 'Death's Door'" (via):

The man convicted of the Lockerbie bombing is living with his family in a luxury villa in Libya six months after he was released from jail on compassionate grounds because he had less than three months to live.

Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, who is suffering from terminal prostate cancer, no longer receives hospital treatment after ending the course of chemotherapy that he had been given after returning to his homeland last August.

Professor Karol Sikora, the London-based doctor who examined Megrahi and predicted he would be dead by last October, admitted this weekend that the fact the bomber is still alive might be "difficult" for the families of the 270 victims of the attack.

The latest disclosure will incense many of the relatives of those who died in the bomb blast in December 1988 when Pan Am Flight 103 exploded in mid air over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 243 passengers, 16 crew and 11 people on the ground.

Most did not want Megrahi released and they suspected he would live longer than the predicted three months.

The Sunday Telegraph revealed last September that the Libyan government had paid for the medical evidence which helped Megrahi, 57, to be released. The Libyans had encouraged doctors to say he had only three months to live.

The life expectancy of Megrahi was crucial because, under Scottish rules, prisoners can be freed on compassionate grounds only if they are considered to have this amount of time, or less, to live.

Kenny MacAskill, the Scottish Justice Secretary, ruled last August that Megrahi should be freed. Megrahi's release came after Libyan leaders warned that lucrative oil and trade deals with Britain would be cancelled if the bomber died in jail.

One leading prostate cancer specialist cast serious doubt yesterday on the wisdom of predicting that Megrahi had only three months to live – when a patient still had to undergo chemotherapy. Dr Chris Parker said it was extremely difficult to give an accurate prognosis for individual patients. "Studies show experts are very poor at trying to predict how long an individual patient will live for," he warned.

See Melanie Phillips for an honest evaluation of the circumstances six months ago, "Sending the Lockerbie Bomber Home."

The Cult Rocks the O.C.'s MusInk Festival

I didn't really mention it, but The Cult also played this weekend at the O.C.'s MusInk' Festival. I saw The Cult in 1985. The band was a Gothic mystery for me, and had they toured L.A. more I might have really immersed myself in their sounds. I was hip to "She Sells Sanctuary" (from the band's "Love" album). The video here is from 1987. But check the review at the Orange County Register for Friday's performance, "Musink Day 1: The Cult Roars Once More"

Singer Ian Astbury and guitarist Billy Duffy are the lone holdovers from the original mid-’80s lineup. In the past decade they’ve put out two studio albums (including the criminally ignored Born into This, a 2007 return-to-form) while Astbury also toured with surviving members of the Doors, and Duffy (looking quite like David Beckham these days) spent time with Coloursound and Circus Diablo.

The pair are now augmented by powerhouse drummer John Tempesta (White Zombie, Testament), bassist Chris Wyse and longtime rhythm guitarist Mike Dimkich. They’re currently working on new material with producer Chris Goss (Queens of the Stone Age, Masters of Reality).

Playing to a medium-sized crowd in an exhibition hall at the OC Fair & Event Center, the Cult opened with the rousing AC/DC-esque crunch of “Lil’ Devil” as Astbury vigorously shook a tambourine. An extended “Rain,” awash in shimmering Goth-rock sounds, was simply amazing, Duffy reminding that he’s one of the post-punk era’s best guitarists. He frequently held his Gretsch White Falcon aloft throughout the show, giving old fans and younger Guitar Hero enthusiasts a closeup instructional view ...

Astbury tossed in an interesting ad-lib during the “Fire Woman” breakdown (“I’ve been thinking / Why must MTV air the Jersey Shore / While we’re at war”), then later prefaced the mesmerizing “ Phoenix ” by singing “this is not a love song” — and asking who in the crowd planned on attending the coming Coachella festival to see PiL.

“We’ve never been invited by Goldenvoice and we started this whole thing,” he said, referring to the Astbury-organized Gathering of the Tribes festival of 1990. The pre-song rant continued: “People come and go, but we’re still here. Don’t talk to me about punk rock. This is acid rock. Prepare for liftoff.” Led by Duffy’s eerie effects, it definitely soared.

I'll update tomorrow with some reporting on day two as well. Reminds me the olden days!

LBCC Student Success!

My college runs a new "student success" advertising campaign every spring. The public relations people work with the president's office to identify and promote our most outstanding students. A couple of years ago, Ashlee Redden, a political science major now at UCLA, was featured on the college home page (see, "Political Science at LBCC: Training the Next Generation of Leaders"). And on Friday I noticed that Barbara, pictured below, is featured in the latest campaign on LBCC student success:

Barbara took my course in World Politics last semester. She was a standout, and we've kept in touch since then. In fact I saw her last week and she's already gotten an acceptance letter from one of the UC campuses, but she's waiting to hear back from the "biggies," UC Berkeley and UCLA. I'm pretty sure she'll have the pick of the litter, so to speak. Barbara's a confident young woman, super smart, and a fabulous writer. She's also busier than the dickens with all kinds of internships and what not. The college is also featuring at least three other students in the ad campaign, although I haven't met them: Daniel, Michelle, and Steven. No doubt they all have spectacular stories of academic excellence to share. Working with folks like this is the most rewarding thing about teaching. And the really outstanding successes don't happen as often as I'd like, although I'm thankful for the examples these students set for so many others who are struggling.

More later ...

Message to Self: Don't Skip CPAC Next Year!

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Glenn Beck's Keynote Speech at CPAC!

From Dana Milbank, "At CPAC, Glenn Beck scolds the Republican Party":

For most of the three-day conference, the conservatives took aim at their favorite targets, President Obama, congressional Democrats, the media and Hollywood. By Saturday evening, the hot air and the overflow crowd had warmed the ballroom to an uncomfortable temperature. Coats came off and speakers perspired. Someone brought Beck a white towel midway through his address.

But there was something different about the message of the final session, as the activists sent an unmistakable message to the Republicans that they can't be taken for granted.

The straw poll was one sign. Approval for Obama was, naturally, all of 2 percent -- and those people probably like him because he's been helpful to Republican electoral chances. But 37 percent said they disapprove of congressional Republicans. And Michael Steele, the Republican national chairman, was viewed favorably by only 42 percent.

Milbank's playing up the Ron Paul straw poll win, but there's little practical significance, since Paul's not expected to be a player for the 2012 GOP nomination. That said, Nick Gillespie wants to argue otherwise. See, "Ron Paul: In Your Straw Heart, You Know He's Right."

More video of Beck's speech at the link. And see Memeorandum for updates.

'The Abu Ghraib of the Great Society'

Man, Andrew Breitbart is few steps ahead of his tsunami strike-force notoriety!

The first clip has Andrew coining this killer ACORN descriptor, the "Abu Ghraib of the Great Society." But the second clip's even better, where we see him decimate Salon's Mike Madden:

Andrew's getting some attention from folks on the left. Not used to the push-back, Eric Boehlert of Media Matter's is certifiably obsessed with Breitbart. And Gawker gets a head start on the meme you'll see all week, on the right's allegedly "unhinged" new media king: "Adventures at CPAC: Gangsta Andrew Breitbart Psyched to "Destroy People," Not a Conservative Rapper."

See also, the Washington Independent, "Breitbart: ‘What’s in Your Closet, John Podesta?’"

Shariah-Compliant Societies

Via Blazing Cat Fur, an ominous essay at the Toronto Sun, "Unveiling the Truth Behind Shariah":

Let’s revise the famous opening sentence of Marx and Engel’s Communist Manifesto to state there is a real peril, instead of a spectre, haunting the West — the peril of acquiescing to the Shariah-based demands of the Islamists.

At the top of the Islamist demands is to make defamation of religion a punishable offence. Since Judaism and Christianity are open to criticism, even ridicule in free and secular societies of the West, such a demand is to make an exception for Islam.

The trial of Geert Wilders in Amsterdam for offending Muslims indicates the extent to which Holland, one of the most open European countries, has tilted in the direction of becoming a “Shariah-compliant” society.

Holland is not alone in this effort to appease the Islamists. Across the West, a chill has fallen over the fundamental right to think and speak freely about Islam like any other subject of public interest.

Hey, you can't say that! That's RAAACIST!!

RTWT at the link.

RELATED: Bare Naked Islam, "Pamela Geller of Atlas Shrugs and Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch at CPAC":

This panel featured several American and international resistance fighters working to stop the spread of Islamic supremacism and most importantly, America’s infiltration by Muslim sympathizers. The central focus of the event was the Islamic jihad against the West and how Islamic organizations are working to silence free speech both in Europe and America.

Governor Schwarzenegger Proves, Once Again, Why He's California's Worst Governor in Decades

The story's at ABC News and Memeorandum, but Left Coast Rebel's got the beat down, "Arnold Schwarzenegger, Expert on Fiscal Conservatism Says the Tea Parties 'Not Going Nowhere'":

MORAN: Governor Schwarzenegger, is the Republican Party, your party, the party of no right now?

SCHWARZENEGGER: Well, you know, they have the big opposite position. I mean, because first when it come to the party itself, they have to do everything they can in order to win in November. So they're going to say no to everything, they're going to say it is not good but Obama is --

MORAN: So they are the party of no.

SCHWARZENEGGER: They're the party of no, and at the same time, I think that there are a lot of people that are disenchanted and dissatisfied and they're angry and this is why you have the Tea Party and all of those things. The Tea Party is not going to go anywhere. I think the Tea Party is all about just an expression of anger and dissatisfaction and I see it in California when people come up to me and says, you know I'm angry that you guys don't get along in Sacramento. I'm angry that they're not getting along in Washington. I'm angry that nothing gets done. I'm angry that I'm unemployed. I'm angry that people are losing homes. I'm angry that businesses are losing their businesses and all of those kind of things. And the economy is down.

But that's only the case in California. That's not only the case in America. That's the case all over the world. If you read six newspapers from different parts of the world, you will see the headlines are pretty much the same. They're all angry at their leaders because the economy is down and the world basically has one-third less wealth right now. And so that makes people angry.

Understanding the Surge

Via Great Satan's Girlfriend, from The Institute for the Study of War, "Understanding the Surge." Grab a cup of coffee or some popcorn. This documentary is a little over a half-hour long. Quite moving, my favorite part is at about 20 minutes, when American forces went door-to-door, winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people. This was on top of the military strategy of clearing insurgent strongholds one by one, with the most intensive human resource investments imaginable in wartime. Leftists told the American public that the U.S. military bribed the insurgents to lay down their arms and walk away from battle, but the most crucial successes in the surge strategy came even before the renowned Anbar Awakening. It's quite a film:

RELATED: David Belavia, "Our Mission is Finally Accomplished… Anyone Care?" (via Sistah Toldjah at Right Wing News).

James B. Webb: Intolerant Sexist Pig

I discussed earlier "The Narrative" in American politics. The Narrative is the ideological construct that claims an ineluctable progress toward full equality in the U.S., and to challenge that project is to be subjected to the most vile attacks of "racism," "sexism," and "homophobia." Of course, leftists refuse to hold themselve up to the same standards they hold conservatives, which is a reminder that it's not equality these folks are about, but totalitarianism.

Anwyay, I mention this after noticing that James B. Webb, one of the great purveyors of The Narrative, has once again exempted himself from it. In a post from a few weeks ago ("Ayla Brown Is Available, And I'm Interested"), JBW disrespects my beautiful friend Suzanna as "Sweetits." Pleading and pumping about how ready he is for Scott Brown's daughter, we're treated to this burst of sexist objectification and anti-feminine infantilization:

Yes, I was spurned by Sweetits but I have a good feeling about this one. Ayla, I'm a relatively poor man, I have no real power or influence over anyone, I drink way more wine than any healthy human being should and I prefer not to cook or clean. Come and get it, girl! She'll be in good hands, Senator-elect Brown. Good, busy hands.

Contrary to JBW's claims at his post, I've never insinuated he's gay. But no one needs to insinuate anything about his blatant sexism and progressive hypocrisy. It's just right out there for everyone to see.

So typical of the left, I might add.

RELATED: "Leftists Are Liars, and I'll Show You..."

Questioning 'The Narrative'

A super big thanks goes out to my good friend Grizzly Mama.

After reading last night's piece, "Leftists Are Liars, and I'll Show You...," she suggested that I head over to her "beloved" Weekly Standard to read Jeffrey Bergner's, "Can Republicans Govern? Not unless they change The Narrative." And wow! This is a phenomenal piece. The Narrative is the ideological construction of an ineluctable progress towards full equality in the U.S., and to challenge that project is to open oneself up to the most vicious attacks of "racism," "sexism," and "homophobia." Bergner argues that The Narrative is a bipartisan project, and Republicans in fact need to think outside of that box if they're going have any hope of not only governing, but in providing a sustainable governing vision for the future.

It's a beefy article, but worth your time. With that in mind, enjoy these passages as an appetizer:

From time to time individuals break out of The Narrative. Leading radio talk show hosts do this, rhetorically, and are subjected to vicious personal attacks for their trouble. This is because The Narrative denies any legitimacy to a genuinely different point of view; any such view has been predefined as backward, regressive, self-interested, and evil. There can be no reasonable debate with opponents of The Narrative. When opponents, or even mere skeptics, question not just one or another policy notion but the story itself, the political left goes into overdrive. The entire machine is activated—political progressives, left-wing bloggers, the mainstream media, academics, late night TV hosts, and the arts community all descend with fury to attack the intelligence, the background, and the character of anyone who questions The Narrative. To question The Narrative is to question the self-ascribed virtue of the left ....

Judging by its rhetoric, the left seems singularly threatened by Sarah Palin, but they can’t explain why. Because she’s attractive? So are most politicians, including the current president. Because she’s from Alaska? So are Ted Stevens and Lisa Murkowski. Because she lacks “experience”? So do lots of politicians, including the current president. Does anyone imagine that a few more years of “experience” will cause Sarah Palin’s critics to warm up to her? The left simply cannot supply a convincing rationale for its own mania. That a wife and mother is successful in public life and is also a conservative, populist reformer should not be possible. A political reformer opposed to the expansion of the federal government should be a contradiction in terms. Sarah Palin can undo by her simple existence every stereotype of the left’s Narrative. This creates a visceral threat. It cannot be permitted, or even laughed off—she must be destroyed. The threat to The Narrative is what provokes the name-calling and bizarrely substance-free personal attacks that have flowed relentlessly from Palin’s critics.

*********

What if Republicans took back the House in 2010? Or, to enlarge the fantasy, what if Republicans enjoyed the numerical advantage of today’s Democrats in the House and Senate? Would they actually do anything to reverse the growth of government? Republican majorities would surely strive to slow the rush to national financial ruin and rein in unsustainable deficits, and that’s all to the good. Government-imposed equality might advance more slowly. But what are the chances it would be halted or reversed? For that matter, what did Republicans do as recently as five years ago, when they controlled the House, the Senate, and the White House?

So long as Republicans are enthralled by The Narrative, they will be stuck in rearguard actions. There will be no coherent set of policies toward which Republicans aim steadily over time, such as characterizes the progressive left. There will be only the (almost endearing) Republican embarrassment about governing at all.

So Republicans must ask themselves: Are they really ready to reverse the trend of more and more Americans becoming dependent upon government? Do they really deny the working assumption that most Americans don’t know what’s best for them, and that public policy must set them straight? Are they willing to act so that initiative does not meet bureaucratic obstacles at every turn, and regulations don’t hamper every creative venture? Do they actually disdain an ideal of justice that conjures up an image of well-fed and well-tended sheep?

What if Republicans aimed at a different story altogether? What if the story of America were one in which government imposed ever less control over citizens? What if they considered every policy initiative through this lens: Does it help Americans become less, rather than more, dependent on the government? Their goal would then be to create—as best they can, and over time—a nation of self-reliant citizens, not merely “consumers” and “providers” and “practitioners” and “beneficiaries” and “recipients” and all the other less-than-fully-human descriptors of the left.

What if our national history were recast and understood in this new light? What if we reminded ourselves that it was the Republican party of Abraham Lincoln and Frederick Douglass that ended slavery and the Democratic party that dragged its feet? That it was the Republican party that pushed through women’s suffrage? That Republicans like Senator Everett Dirksen were leaders in the civil rights legislation of the 1960s? The overthrow of slavery, the enfranchisement of women, the end of segregation all empowered people vis à vis their government. And these advances in citizen empowerment were then wrongly put to the service of (seemingly well-intentioned) egalitarian programs that result not in the improvement of America’s citizenry but in their perpetual dependence?

RTWT at the link. And thanks to Grizzly Mama!

'Black Hawk Down' is RAAACIST!!

You know, while this is serious business, rebutting the left's endless allegations of racism, I've been mostly mocking so far in my series on "racist movies." But it's beyond bothersome that "Black Hawk Down" is included and ranked at #27. And here's the caption:

Ridley Scott's account of the 1993 "Battle of Mogadishu" drew heavy fire for casting African-Americans, who neither look nor sound like Somalis, to portray them as an ignorant, extra dark and scary, bloodthirsty mob of villains with no legitimate cause to attack U.S. Army Rangers. Well, they've got their cause now.

I guess indigenous affirmative action quotas are de rigueur among leftists nowdays. But as anyone who's read anything on the Clinton administration's policy in Somalia knows, the firefight there actually did have "bloodthirsty villains" attacking U.S. forces. And of course Americans were in the country to provide massive humanitarian relief to non-combatant Somalis, who were facing catastrophic circumstances amid the country's civil war. According to the Wikipedia entry, U.S. forces delivered "48,000 tons of food and medical supplies in six months to international humanitarian organizations trying to help the over three million starving people in the country." So to be clear here, when you see all these leftist "racist" attacks on everything from the tea partiers to movies like "The Hurt Locker" and "Falling Down," these constitute, in their totality, powerful evidence for the vicious hatred of America -- in all of its manifestations -- that is the core of Democratic/leftist ideology (here, for example):

Reflections on the Peculiar Institution

From my 2006 essay, "Reflections on the Peculiar Institution":

I'm currently reading "Jubilee," by Margaret Walker. It's a novel of slavery. I'm really fascinated by it so far, and I've only read 50-plus pages ....

I was really moved by a passage I read, whereby one of the main characters, Vyry, along with her Aunt Sally, went to attend a Baptist Church meeting while on leave from the plantation. The meeting turned out to be no ordinary Sunday prayer session, as a number of abolitionists were there. They were agitating for a black uprising against slavery across the South. It was an envigorating speech! But Uncle Joe, one of the older black slaves from Vyry's plantation, was scared, and denounced talk of abolition as foolhardy:

That's foolish talk you talking boy, foolish and dangerous, too. Here you is ain't dry behind your ears and here you come talking bout how us gwine be free. Does you know how many hundreds and hundreds of years we's been slaves? Does you know how long since the white man brung us here from Afficky to this here America? You know how come? Well, you know what God told Ham, don't you? You know what we is, don't you. Just hewers of wood and drawers of water, that's what we is. That's our punishment for being black. Yall can swell up, swell on up if you want to, like a dead dog, until you bust. I knows what you think I is, but I'm telling you now bout getting free. You might be willing to die cause you ain't gotta die, and you might be willing to get whipped, but I ain't fixing to say die, and I ain't fixing to get whipped. Sho, us is uprising, niggers uprising all the time and look what happening. Ain't none of them uprising yet went free. Tell me one time they come free, I'm asking you? Just tell me one time. You know when us gwine free? I can tell you cause I knows. Us gwine free when the Good Lord say so and not before, when He come riding in His chariot bringing a Moses with Him. If He means for me to go free, I'm gwine go free one of these days...Lord knows I'd like to be ables to go wheresomever I wants to go, do what I wants to do, have my own farm, raise my own taters and cotton and corn, and be my own marster, man, and boss like you is, but I knows the Lord's will gwine be, and I'm waiting on the Lord...."

This was an extremely moving passage for me. My dad grew up in Jim Crow-era Missouri. Stories he told me, and stories told to me by his close friends, ring close to Uncle Joe's lament in "Jubilee." Blacks in the antibellum South grew strength from their faith in deliverance to the promised land -- the "old negro spiritual" that Martin Luther King spoke of in his "I Have a Dream Speech." I'll write some follow-ups to this post as I move through the book. It's quite good thus far.

Andrew Breitbart is RAAACIST!!

Allegations of racism. It's all they've got, and boy the left's cobags deploy them with extreme regularity:

As noted at IOWNTHEWORLD, "Breitbart is the new Bush. The Left-Wing Media HATES him like olive loaf. Why? Because he’s better than them."

See also the Washington Independent, "Andrew Breitbart Meets Daryle Jenkins of the One People’s Project" (via Memeorandum).

RELATED: "Leftists Are Liars, and I'll Show You..."

Obama Las Vegas Fail

At Politico, "In Sin City, Obama Clarifies Remarks."

Plus, "Vegas Mayor Refuses To Meet Obama: Goodman Demands Apology For Comments," and "Goodman Pleased About Obama’s Las Vegas Comments: Las Vegas Mayor Says He doesn’t Regret Not Attending Presidential Functions."

RELATED: "Obama Unveils Mortgage Plan to Help California, 4 Other States."

IMAGE CREDIT: No Sheeples Here!

VIDEO CREDIT: Theo Spark.

Freedom Defense Initiative

From Atlas Shrugs, "More Coverage of the FDI Event: Jihad: The Political Third Rail, 'Single Most Important Event of This Three-Day Conference'":

Clearly citizen journalists and other bloggers came away from the first Freedom Defense Initiative event with a more informed and intelligent take then the incompetent media. There has been thoughtful, informed analysis here and here. Alternative media has, in fact, become the only reliable, competent media.

When things calm down, I will post my observations. Pamela Hall will have video up of the whole event this weekend, and a DVD with outtake interviews will be available next week.

Here's an excerpt of Mark J. Koenig's trenchant analysis of the day's seminal event over at David Horowitz's NewsReal Blog -- do read it all ...

Also, check out the Freedom Defense blog. And at American Thinker, "Jihad: The Political Third Rail -- At CPAC."