Democrats Push to Brand Partisan Opponents as 'Hate Groups'

From the Washington Examiner, "Political Opposition Is Not a Hate Crime":

What's wrong with this picture? The federal government spends billions on homeland security, but apparently can't stop foreigners from illegally crossing the border or overstaying their visas. The Obama administration wants to bring violent terrorists captured overseas to the mainland and close the military detention center at Guantanamo Bay. Yet in the latest bizarre twist, legislation quietly making its way through Congress would give the White House power to categorize political opponents as hate groups and even send Americans to detention centers on abandoned military bases.

Rep. Alcee Hastings - the impeached Florida judge Nancy Pelosi tried to install as chairman of the House Intelligence Committee until her own party members rebelled - introduced an amendment to the defense authorization bill that gives Attorney General Eric Holder sole discretion to label groups that oppose government policy on guns, abortion, immigration, states' rights, or a host of other issues. In a June 25 speech on the House floor, Rep. Trent Franks, R-AZ, blasted the idea: "This sounds an alarm for many of us because of the recent shocking and offensive report released by the Department of Homeland Security which labeled, arguably, a majority of Americans as 'extremists.'"

Whoa. I guess the discredited DHS “right-wing extremism” report wasn't enough for the Obamaniacs.

More from the Examiner: It turns out that Representative Hastings is also sponsoring additional legislation that proposes to "legally declare someone a 'domestic terrorist' and send them to a government-run camp." You know what? That buzz on the "FEMA concentration camps" doesn't quite sound so "baseless."

Hat Tip: Glenn Reynolds.

Added: Ed Morrissey, "The Lock-Up-Your-Opponents Bills of 2009?" Also, Cold Fury, "Farewell, America; It Was Nice While It Lasted" (via Memeorandum).

Man Gored to Death in Pamplona's Running of the Bulls (VIDEO)

It's the fist time since 1995. See CNN, "Man Killed in Pamplona's Running of the Bulls."

Video Hat Tip: The New York Times, "Man Killed by Bull in Pamplona."

See also, Bloomberg, "Pamplona Bull Runner Gored to Death, 11 More Injured":

A 27-year-old Spanish man died after a fighting bull gored him in the neck at the Pamplona bull- running festival that was made famous by Ernest Hemingway and attracts thousands of foreigners each year.

The victim, Daniel Jimeno Romero from Alcala de Henares, a town near Madrid, was wounded in the neck and chest, the regional government of Navarra said in a statement on its Web site. Five of 11 people injured were released from the hospital. The others include a 61-year-old American man in intensive care, a 63-year-old American with less serious injuries, a 20-year-old Londoner with a thigh wound and a 24-year-old Argentine.

Obama's Stimulus Failure: 'There's Nothing We Would Have Done Differently...'

Here's an update to my previous post, "Obama's Stimulus Failure":

Hat Tip: All-American Blogger.

See also, Edward Lazear, "Do We Need a Second Stimulus? A More Troubling Question Is Why So Little Is Being Spent Fom the First."

If Sarah Palin Were President...

From William Jacobson, "If Palin Were President Now":

Sarah Palin's announcement that she will resign as Governor of Alaska has kicked off a new round of attacks on Palin's intelligence and integrity from pundits on both sides of the political spectrum. For most of the commentators, the resignation signals an end to Palin's chances at becoming President.

Few of the critics supported Palin before the resignation, so the resignation is not so much a revelation to them, as an opportunity to say "I told you so" and to take more cheap shots at Palin and her family. Among the non-political classes who form the base of Palin's support, I'm not sure the resignation makes much difference.

Despite the criticism of Palin and assertions that she is unfit for the presidency, it is hard to imagine that Palin could do any worse as President than Barack Obama is doing right now. For all Obama's smarts and syntax, he is driving this country off a cliff, with the pedal down to the floor while he reads the drivers' manual on how the brakes work.

If Palin were President, we would not have ...

Read the rest of the analysis here.

See also, Riehl World View, "Sarah Palin's Record of Accomplishment In Office."

And Villainous Company, "The Best and the Brightest: Obama, Palin, and the American Dream."

Plus, more award-winning journalism on Palin. At Anchorage Daily News, "Johnston Says Palin Had Eye On the Money":

Levi Johnston, the former fiance of Gov. Sarah Palin's daughter Bristol, on Thursday joined the crowd offering up potential reasons for Palin's decision to step down.

And, The Politico, "Levi Johnston: Sarah Palin Did It For the Money."

Somebody's doing it for the money, that's for sure.

Also, Mark Morford at the San Francisco Chronicle, "Don't Go, Sarah Palin! A Nation Turns its Lonely Eyes To Your Ditzy Insufferable Ramblings."

More at Memeorandum.

Obama's Stimulus Failure

Carol at No Sheeples Here! offers an analysis of the Obama administration's economic stimulus, "America Ensnared by the “Stimulus Trap”."

Carol hammers Paul Krugman's recent piece, "The Stimulus Trap," and adds this:

So far, on this president’s watch, we have witnessed the doubling of the national debt, the nationalization of the U.S. auto industry and a bailout in the billions to insurance giant AIG without any pre-conditions, a hell-bent fixation to nationalize the health care industry and the proposal of a cap and trade bill that would be the largest tax in the history of our nation. Dare I say the world?

More at the link.

Also, check out Rich Lowry, "The Stimulus — The Anatomy of a Failure."

And from the Wall Street Journal, "Few Economists Favor More Stimulus":

Most economists believe the U.S. doesn't need another round of stimulus now despite expectations of continued severe job losses.

Just eight of 51 economists in The Wall Street Journal's latest forecasting survey said more stimulus is necessary, suggesting an average of about $600 billion in additional spending. On average, the economists forecast an unemployment rate of at least 10% through next June, with a decline to 9.5% by December 2010.

See also, Michelle Malkin, "Spawn of the Spendulus."

More commentary at Memeorandum.

On Iran Protests, Leftist Academics Get Back to Business as Usual

From Cinnamon Stillwell, "Ahmadinejad's Academics":

What a difference a popular uprising makes.

It seems like just yesterday that the Middle East studies establishment was busy defending Iran’s theocratic regime and its president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad from the alleged predations of U.S. and Israeli foreign policy. Yet in the wake of the unrest in response to the stolen election, suddenly American academics have succumbed to intellectual honesty and moral clarity. Despite the best efforts of the Iranian regime to drum up conspiracy theories blaming the West for the uprising, the Iranians themselves have taken center stage.

Read the whole thing, here. The professors are already returning to the default anti-American mode ...

Unmanned Fighter Aircraft (And the Left)

Robert Farley and Matthew Yglesias are thrilled with the idea of eliminating manned warplanes from the next generation of technological warfare.

The shift away from manned-fighter technology is serious business. In an essay today, Lawrence Korb and Krisila Benson argue that should the Pentagon eventually terminate the F-22 Raptor, the loss of production will not degrade the U.S. strategic-industrial base, since "the Obama administration's fiscal 2010 budget includes 28 F-35 Joint Strike Fighters - planes better suited for air-to-ground combat."

And, regarding doctrinal shifts in technology and warfighting, Eliot Cohen argued some time back in his now classic article on the RMA:

The platform has become less important, while the quality of what it carries - sensors, munitions, and electronics of all kinds - has become critical ....

Furthermore, the nature of preemption itself may change. To the extent that information warfare, including the sabotage of computer systems, emerges as a new type of combat, the first blow may be covert, a precursor to more open and conventional hostilities. Such attacks--to which an information-dependent society like the United States is particularly vulnerable--could have many purposes: blinding, intimidating, diverting, or simply confusing an opponent. They could carry as well the threat of bringing war to a country's homeland and people, and thus even up the balance for countries that do not possess the conventional tools of long-range attack, such as missiles and bombers.

Given this kind of discussion of the military, technological, and political realities in the shift away from manned fighter aircraft you'd think that Robert Farley - who is an Assistant Professor at the University of Kentucky's Patterson School of Diplomacy and International Commerce - would have something highly significant to say on the emergent nature of threat assessment and advanced airfighting capabilities. Instead we get this:

I don't think there's a next "next generation" of fighter aircraft. And in any case, it appears that the A-10 will remain the platform of choice for fighting the giant robots that undoubtedly will afflict us in the future...

If you click the link there, Farley directs us to the Toys-R-Us page for "Terminator Salvation Vehicle with Action Figure - A-10 Warthog." Here's the photo:

It's not like professional manufacturer images of the Warthog aren't availble. Check the A-10's product page at the Global Aircraft Organization, for example.

No, with Farley there's just no seriousness to diplomacy and military affairs (nor scholarship, for that matter; recall my earlier piece, "The Moral Abomination of Robert Farley").

Given that, it's no surprise that Matthew Yglesias runs with the Farley piece, approvingly, at his own blog. Just today Yglesias published a mind-boggling essay at the American Prospect, "Small Steps Toward a Nuke-Free World."

Mind you, this is not a joke.

Despite the widely understood interpretation of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty as designed practically exclusively to limit the spread of nuclear weapons, Yglesias argues that President Obama's preliminary U.S.-Russian nuclear agreement advances the cause of nuclear abolition:

... according to the "joint understanding" released Monday, the U.S. and Russia will commit to reducing nuclear arsenals from the current ceiling of 2,200 warheads to a range of 1,500 to 1,675 ....

The agreement serves Russia's interests well because, simply put, maintaining a large nuclear arsenal is expensive. For the United States, with our $13 trillion gross domestic product, the current nuclear posture is wasteful ....

At the same time, Obama gets to make real headway on his earlier promise to recommit the United States to the long-term goal of total nuclear disarmament. The objective, if met, would strongly advance America's interests ...

A policy of American nuclear disarmament will advance nothing of the kind. I argued against President Obama's disastrous nuclear diplomacy in two recent posts (here and here). The president's nuclear weapons policies are idealistic, if not unserious, and hold horrendous implications for American national security. In that respect, they have much in common with the policy analysis of Robert Farley and Matthew Yglesias.

The GOP and the 2010 Midterms

Track-a-'Crat gets the video hat tip, but check out Frank Donatelli, "2010 Will Be a GOP Year":

Since the beginning of the 20th century, the party not in control of the White House has gained seats in every off-year election after a president's first election except for two times (1934 and 2002). Off-year dynamics are different and by the time they roll around many of the themes dominant in the presidential election have faded. Most importantly, new presidents and their administrations almost always overreach. And Barack Obama and his Democratic Party are overreaching in a big way.

A great essay, at the link.

Related: Chris Cillizza, "The Most Important Number in Politics Today." ("45 - That's the percentage of voters who believe that President Obama lacks a 'clear plan for solving this country's problems' in a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll.")

Charles Johnson Becomes a Terrorist Tool

Some developments tonight in the jihad against the anti-jihad bloggers ...

From Robert Spencer, "Hamas-linked CAIR defames me again, tries to block my ALA appearance, takes material from libelblogger Charles Johnson of Little Green Footballs":

I wrote the other day about how some alleged believers in free speech among American academia are trying to block my speaking at the American Library Association convention this Sunday. Now the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), true to form, has gotten into the act, sending the ALA a fresh steaming pile of defamation, lies, and distortions (drawing once again on material from its favorite useful idiot, the discredited, thoroughly dishonest Charles Johnson of that cesspool of lies and hate, Little Green Footballs), asking that I be dropped from the ALA panel.

Whatever the ALA does, I am not going to let CAIR's libels go unanswered.

Read the whole thing, here.

See also, Pamela Geller, "Robert Spencer Answers CAIR's Libel, Defamation and Lies," and Yid With Lid, "Little Green Footballs Becomes a Terrorist Tool."

Patriots Counterprotest MoveOn and ACORN

Via Michelle Malkin and This Ain't Hell (and Memeorandum), check out Gathering of Eagles - NY, "AAR – MoveOn and Acorn Meet Patriots":

Patriots from the Conservative Society for Action, Gathering of Eagles, Active and the 912 Group rallied in front of the offices of Senator Charles Schumer to counter the staged pro-nationalized healthcare rally planned by MoveOn.org and ACORN.

The first moonbats arrived and almost immediately called the police because they hate free speech and any opposition to their agenda. One of their old biddies called me a racist for opposing health care for illegal immigrants. Unfortunately for them the first amendment is still enforced in this country and the police would not interfere with our counter protest.

Things went downhill for the Soros stooges from there ....

Michelle notes of the growing conservative protest movement:

You won’t see these on the front page of the New York Times. But it’s happening more often than you think — and it’s all the more remarkable and newsworthy given that most Tea Party folks, unlike the Soros-funded astroturf protest mobsters, have full-time jobs and families ...

Check Gathering of Eagles for more pictures.

WaPo's Sally Quinn Blames Sarah Palin For Sexist Letterman Attacks

I just found this story at Gateway Pundit, "WaPo Writer Blames Sarah Palin For Letterman's Attacks On Her Children."

While searching for video I found this classic screen-cap at Free Republic. The full piece is from last September, by Jeffrey Lord, "Who Is Sally Quinn?" The highlighted part is killer:

The Sally Quinns of the world were given cachet because liberals like Ben Bradlee got to do whatever the hell they pleased with their power in the media and there wasn't a damn thing the rest of the country could do as one conservative after another from Barry Goldwater to Ronald Reagan to Robert Bork to Clarence Thomas, Dan Quayle, Miguel Estrada, and on and on right up to today's Sarah Palin were trashed. And I do mean trashed. They were painted as idiots, warmongers, bigots, boobs, religious fanatics, wild-eyed zealots, racists, sexual harassers, and God only knows what else. This kind of garbage was bannered and blared unchallenged from every one of the three major networks, the New York Times, the Washington Post, Time, Newsweek and the rest of the liberal acolyte media organs. For decades. Until the advent of everything from conservative magazines such as the one you are reading to talk radio to the Internet to Fox collectively shattered the media monopoly.

An old but great essay!

The whole thing is here!

Recall that Sally Quinn stirred controversy over Sarah Palin during last year's campaign, "On CNN, WaPo's Quinn Questions Palin's Ability to 'Put Country First'."

She tried to walk it back later. See, "Sally Quinn Apologizes For Sarah Palin Remarks … Sort of Maybe Not-So-Much."

Controversy Over Pro-Life T-Shirt at McSwain Elementary School

I just caught word of this story on O'Reilly Factor. Megyn Kelly argued that the school had previously allowed the student to wear pro-life clothing. But the pictures of the growing fetus were probably too much, considering that small children would be attending the school. What do you think? It was "National Pro-Life T-Shirt Day." Jill Stanek "can't believe Fox called these images graphic'."

The background is here, "Seventh Grader Sues School Over Right to Wear Pro-Life T-Shirt":

A California mom says her public school administrators violated her daughter's First Amendment rights when they ordered the seventh-grader to take off her pro-life T-shirt.

Anna Amador has gone to court on behalf of her daughter, who she says was ordered by her principal to change her shirt on "National Pro-Life T-Shirt Day." The shirt the girl was wearing displays two graphic pictures of a fetus growing in the womb.

The incident occurred in April 2008 at McSwain Elementary School, a K-8 school in Merced, Calif. Amador alleges in her legal complaint that school Principal Terrie Rohrer, Assistant Principal C.W. Smith and office clerk Martha Hernandez mistreated her daughter and denied the girl her First Amendment rights when they ordered her to leave the cafeteria and change her shirt.

"Before Plaintiff could eat [breakfast] she was ordered by a school staff member to throw her food out and report immediately to Defendant Smith's office, located in the main office of McSwain Elementary School," the complaint reads.

"Upon arriving at the main office, Defendant Hernandez, intentionally and without Plaintiff's consent, grabbed Plaintiff's arm and forcibly escorted her toward Smith's office, at all times maintaining a vice-like grip on Plaintiff's arm. Hernandez only released Plaintiff's arm after physically locating her in front of Smith and Defendant Rohrer ...

"Smith and Rohrer ordered Plaintiff to remove her pro-life T-shirt and instructed Plaintiff to never wear her pro-life T-shirt at McSwain Elementary School ever again ...

Here's this commentary from the Gadsden Times:

The case of free speech in schools goes back to the Vietnam War era, when students wore black armbands, at that time in violation of many schools’ policies. Later, the Supreme Court ruled students could engage in protest as long as it "did not materially and substantially disrupt the work and discipline of the school."

The same seems to be true in the case of the girl’s T-shirt. Each day, there are worse, and more distracting, items of clothing worn to school by boys and girls. Sometimes, the distraction comes from a lack of clothing.

But a girl exhibiting her right to free speech, by supporting a cause she believes in — that a large portion of the entire country backs and believes in — should not lead to the girl being forced to change her shirt.

Breaking Update: July 9th Protesters Gassed and Beaten; Khamenei Seizes Revo Guard, Sarkozy at G8 Rejects Israeli Strike on Iran!

Pamela Geller has a full report, "Iran Revolution Day 26: Thousands Return To The Streets In Iran, Shootings Reported."

And from Mere Rhetoric, "Khamenei Seizes Control Of Iranian Republican Guard Militias, Installs Son As Head Thug." (Related Reference: "Mojtaba Khamenei, Revolutionary Guard, Key to Power in Iran.")

Plus, from ABC's Lara Setrakian in Iran:

tear gas & beatings, people chant "don't be afraid, we're in this together" & "ya Hussein, Mir Hussein." Cars honk in support. #iranelection

Here's video from Tehran, "Intersection of Taleghani and Valiasr. Anti riot forces attacking with teargas (6:23PM July 9th)":

Protesters are overcome by tear gas:

Second from bottom, via Rotten Gods, "we are children of war (They mean Iran-Iraq war), if you fight we'll fight back!" At bottom, people running, shouting, "death to dictator!"

Also, CNN, "Protesters in Iran Met With Tear Gas, Batons," and "In Iran, New Demonstrations Bring New Violence."

Gateway Pundit, "CRACKDOWN IN IRAN- Police Clash With Protesters On 18th of Tir Anniversary (Video)."

Plus, Reuters, "Sarkozy Urges Israel Not to Attack Iran," and Jerusalem Post, "Sarkozy: Unilateral Israeli Attack on Iran Would Be 'Catastrophe'."

See my earlier entry, "Iran Warns of 'Crushing Response' to July 9 Protests." And Michael Ledeen has more, "Today Is a Crucial Day For Iran."

Stay tuned ... rolling updates through the evening ...

Democrats' Partisan Porkulus - And, Americans Rejecting Obamanomics!

From USA Today, "Billions in Aid Go to Areas That Backed Obama in '08":

Billions of dollars in federal aid delivered directly to the local level to help revive the economy have gone overwhelmingly to places that supported President Obama in last year's presidential election.

That aid — about $17 billion — is the first piece of the administration's massive stimulus package that can be tracked locally. Much of it has followed a well-worn path to places that regularly collect a bigger share of federal grants and contracts, guided by formulas that have been in place for decades and leave little room for manipulation.

The story is at pains to indicate that no "political considerations could be at work." But that hardly matters. If race, rights, and spending are seen as driving Democratic policy (as is always the case), then we'll see a backlash. (For more, see Gateway Pundit, "Shocker!... BILLIONS In Stimulus Aid Went to Obama Supporting Counties")

Check out Ben Smith, "Independents Begin to Edge Away From President Obama":

In a potentially alarming trend for the White House, independent voters are deserting President Barack Obama nationally and especially in key swing states, recent polls suggest.

Obama’s job approval rating hit a — still healthy — low of 56 percent in the Gallup Poll on Wednesday. And pollsters are debating whether Obama’s expansive and expensive policy proposals or the ground-level realities of a still-faltering economy are driving the falling numbers.

But a source of the shift appears to be independent voters, who seem to be responding to Republican complaints of excessive spending and government control.

“This is a huge sea change that is playing itself out in American politics,” said Democratic pollster Doug Schoen. “Independents who had become effectively operational Democrats in 2006 and 2008 are now up for grabs and are trending Republican.

“They’re saying, ‘Costing too much, no results, see the downside, not sure of the upside,’” he said.

The White House denies there’s been any real shift.

And remember from earlier this week, "New Gallup Poll Indicates that Americans are becoming more Conservative."

And the week before that, "More Americans See Democratic Party as “Too Liberal”." And related, from Pew Research, "Independents Take Center Stage in the Obama Era."

Plus, see Ed Morrissey, "Confidence in Obama, Economy Still Dropping," and Foon Rhee, "Obama's Poll Numbers Drop" (via Memeorandum).

The icing on the cake: Michael Barone, "Getting Cold Feet Over Big Government."

Related: Michelle Malkin, "Culture of Corruption Watch: “Put Nothing in Writing ... Ever”."

More at Memeorandum.

Allegations of Racism in Philadelphia Swim Club Controversy

Well, at least James Joyner's consistent. He's got a post up on the controversy in Philiadelphia over allegations of racism, "Swim Club Racism in Philly?" Joyner's introduction is worth quoting at length:

A rather thinly sourced piece in the Philadelphia News alleging racism at a private swim club is getting quite a bit of attention.

More than 60 campers from Northeast Philadelphia were turned away from a private swim club and left to wonder if their race was the reason.

“I heard this lady, she was like, ‘Uh, what are all these black kids doing here?’ She’s like, ‘I’m scared they might do something to my child,’” said camper Dymire Baylor.

So, a kid claims “some lady” was wondering about the presence of black kids at a private club that, one gathers, tended to not normally have large numbers of black kids?

“When the minority children got in the pool all of the Caucasian children immediately exited the pool,” Horace Gibson, parent of a day camp child, wrote in an email. “The pool attendants came and told the black children that they did not allow minorities in the club and needed the children to leave immediately.”

So, the white kids reflexively exited the pool en masse? Because they’ve never seen black kids before? In Philly?

And pool attendants — in 2009 Philadelphia — not only carried out a policy of excluding blacks from the club but had the incredibly poor judgment to tell the blacks that that’s what they were doing?!

Well . . . maybe:

“There was concern that a lot of kids would change the complexion … and the atmosphere of the club,” John Duesler, President of The Valley Swim Club said in a statement.

Now, frankly, if I’m paying for membership in a private club so that I can take my kids swimming in peace, I don’t want said club to sell season passes to large groups of non-members. Not only does that make the pool more crowded but it rather diminishes the “club” aspect of the experience. Typically, members are vetted and recommended by other members; having a busload of kids coming in from outside the community makes it, in essence, a public pool.

Yet Joyner's views are consistent, as noted. In June, he hammered critics of Sonia Sotomayor, who had attacked the judge for her membership in an all-women's social club, "Sotomayor Quits Women’s Club." (See also, the Wall Street Journal, "Court Nominee Sotomayor Quits Women-Only Group").

The question for Joyner is how identity politics creates its own vicious loop of discrimination and recrimination. There should be no place for any of this in a colorblind society.

Interestingly, today's lead editorial at the Los Angeles Times' attacks conservatives for their alleged indifference to the "continuing realities" of discrimination in the country today. "In the Struggle Against Racism, We Haven't Overcome Yet":

As many conservatives see it, we're living in a chastened, post-racial America in which discrimination has been largely dismantled, Jim Crow is dead and gaps are being narrowed. With a growing black and Latino middle class -- not to mention a "beiging" of America thanks to intermarriage -- it's time to end our obsession with righting the wrongs of the past. More specifically, we should do away with morally troublesome policies such as affirmative action, minority set-asides and "pre-clearance" that aid minority groups at the expense of the majority, and revert, instead, to the sounder principle of colorblind justice for all.

Well, yes ... absolutely. Unfortunately, the Times' board goes on to decry (phantom) "de facto" segregation and then concludes with lame arguments for race conscious equal protection, saying "it's not so clear that the battle is over."

So what to say about the Philly case? Sorry to Mr. Joyner, but this is inexcusable bigotry. Folks can't be quoted on the record with worries about "changing the complexion" of the neighborhood pool. Public, private ... it doesn't matter. This smacks of racial insensitivity, at least, and I'm not one to tag along on the racial victimology bandwagon. The question for me is why did the club sell access to the pool for non-member families? The offer of summer swimming to outside groups must have been made with the consent of the club's membership. They can't come along later and say, "Hey, these kids are all black. We can't have them here. We have an image to keep, you know? ... 'complexion' matters."

As Nice Deb puts its, "Wrong! Wrong! Wrong!":

What the heck?! This story reads like something out of Birmingham Alabama circa 1958:

More than 60 campers from Northeast Philadelphia were turned away from a private swim club and left to wonder if their race was the reason.

I heard this lady, she was like, ‘Uh, what are all these black kids doing here?’ She’s like, ‘I’m scared they might do something to my child,’” said camper Dymire Baylor.

Well, if that kid’s telling the truth, I’d say, yeah, duh! Race was the reason.

Nice Deb is one of the most stalwart conservatives I know. I have to agree. This is wrong, wrong, wrong. There are times for discerning motives and nuance, but this isn't one of them.

What's a bummer, of course, is how an isolated case of racial insensitivity like this gives ammunition to the racial grievance masters who see Jim Crow hiding behing every corner (see, for example, pandagon.net, Jack & Jill Politics, Gawker, Unreported and Alas, a blog).

The administration and members of the Valley Swim Club need to get on the same page, and they need to get in step with the rest of the country. This is pure idiocy. This should NOT be taken for a larger statement on the contemporary (phantom) endurance of some long-ago repudiated pattern of entrenched racial hierarchy.

Conservatives are right to condemn both the swim club's stupidity, as well as the racial grievance lobby's opportunistic reaction to it.

The full video is at the link, "Pool Boots Kids Who Might 'Change the Complexion'." More at Memeorandum.

**********

UPDATE: Skye from Midnight Blue e-mails:

I read this report yesterday, Donald.

Something does not feel right with this story. Too many statements from the alleged victims seemed to be boilerplate racial statements. My intitial gut feeling on this is that there is more to this story than what has been reported. Let me be clear - I will be the first to condem this action if it is indeed true - but I need more evidence that what has been reported.

And to reiterate Nice Deb, "Well, if that kid’s telling the truth ..."

**********

UPDATE II: John Duesler, the president of the Valley Swim Club, is a Barack Obama supporter!

See Moe Lane, "Yes, the President of the Valley Swim Club is a John G Duesler, Jr."

See also, Sweetness and Light, "Philly Pool Kids Booter Is Obama Fan."

Remember, racism's always cool and hip on the Democratic side!

As they say at Alas, a Blog, "A whole lot of folks in “post-racial” America are still spouting the same old bigotry."

Well, those "whole lot of folks" would be Democrats!

See, "Mainstream Bigotry and Racism on the Democratic-Left."

Added: Dan Riehl, "Uh Oh! Duesler Founder Of The Chocolate Squad?"

Iran Warns of 'Crushing Response' to July 9 Protests

From the New York Times, "Iran Warns Foes of ‘Crushing Response’ to Protests."

Also, at Pajamas Media, "Iran Launches Preemptive War Against July 9 Protests."

Plus, Michael Ledeen, "Today Is a Crucial Day For Iran":

Maybe it’ll be a turning point. Maybe not. It’s the anniversary of the massacre of students in Iran ten years ago, when they defied their tyrants and called for freedom. There are certainly a lot of people around the world who will turn out to show their contempt for the Tehran regime. I can’t keep track of them all, but there should be significant turnouts in the Hague, Vienna, Rome, Paris, Washington, New York, Irvine and Santa Monica, Seattle and Hamburg…and more and more. In Iran itself, the regime’s opponents have called for “the biggest turnout yet,” totally silent, no posters or banners, just silence.

The silence of the demonstrations would be a counterpoint to the nightly chants from the rooftops and prisons of the nation. Chants of “Allah is great,” along with “Death to the Dictator.” If you believe the folks on Twitter, those chants have been louder with each passing night, despite the violence of the Basij and Revolutionary Guards, which ranges from snipers shooting from one rooftop to another, armed thugs breaking into homes to seize computers, cell phones and other communications devices, and arrest one or more family members. Meanwhile, horribly maimed bodies have been showing up all over the country. Some of the gouging of the bodies seems to have been done to remove all evidence of bullet holes, but whatever the “explanation,” the bloody savagery is well documented.

If you want some detail about the horrors inside Iranian hospitals, have a look at Le Figaro’s account.

Over the objections of medical staff, bodies from the demonstrations were quickly moved elsewhere. “We believe they were transferred to the Baqiatollah military hospital or some other undisclosed location”, notes the doctor. Then, under the pretext of “organ donation”, all traces of bullets were removed from the bodies. “The parents were force to accept this if they wanted to retrieve the body for burial”.

And yet, the protest goes on. For the past three days, a general strike has been in effect, with significant results. Indeed, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei preemptively admitted defeat when government offices and factories were shut down in the name of a religious observance. But the strikers only expanded the range of their actions, notably by shutting down electrical grids in several cities, including parts of Tehran. Great swathes of the nation were plunged into darkness. This sort of thing is likely to continue, whatever happens on the 9th.

Most of the protesters fear the worst, warning of snipers preparing to shoot into the crowds, and a massive buildup of security forces in Tehran. There are rumors about possible countermeasures from the demonstrators, but, like the stories about massive repression, these remain to be confirmed.

More at the link.

Also, Gateway Pundit, "CRACKDOWN IN IRAN- Police Clash With Protesters On 18th of Tir Anniversary."

ADDED: Atlas Shrugs, "Iran Revolution Day 26: Thousands Return To The Streets In Iran, Shootings Reported."

Let's Not Overstate What Obama Accomplished in Moscow...

From Christian Brose at Shadow Government, "What Did Obama Accomplish in Moscow?":

Patrick Barry and my colleague Josh Keating think I’m understating the importance of what President Obama accomplished in Moscow. So let me be clear: The arms reduction agreement and the Russian air corridor into Afghanistan aren’t small peanuts. Indeed, the latter is quite important because it will help to advance a key national interest -- success in Afghanistan. Still, we’d better not put too many of our eggs in that basket, because what Moscow giveth, Moscow can easily taketh away. And considering how many conflicts of interest we still have with Russia, even after our reset buttoning, U.S. military planners are probably not taking that air corridor as a given indefinitely.

As for negotiating an update to START, which expires this year -- of course we should do it, and it’s not unimportant. But would anyone drawing up a list of U.S. national interests put the negotiation of a bridge agreement for the START treaty at the top, or anywhere near the top? That’s all I’m saying. It’s a worthwhile step, but let’s put it in perspective.

Now, nonproliferation more broadly IS a national interest that I'd put at or very near the top of my list, and U.S.-Russian arms reductions are a piece of that. Furthermore, Josh is right that if your goal is "a nuclear-free world", then you have to start somewhere. Well, yes, as far as that goes. Still, no matter how clearly we meet our obligations under the NPT, and no matter how much legitimacy that adds to our argument that others should follow suit, I just don’t think that will markedly advance those goals in the real world. So by all means, let’s restart START, let's wrap our policies in whatever added legitimacy that gives us, but let’s not overstate the importance of doing so.

Read the whole thing, here.

Marc Andreessen Has Silicon Valley Buzzing Again

From Fortune Magazine, "Marc Andreessen puts his money where his mouth is: The original web whiz kid today advises Twitter, Facebook, and others. Now he has a new venture fund. Will he bankroll the next Netscape?":

Over the past two years Andreessen has emerged as the most connected, prescient, right-place-right-time force in Silicon Valley. In addition to his Twitter stake, he sits on Facebook's board and advises the CEOs at both companies. He is co-founder and chairman of Ning, a service that lets people create their own niche social networks, like 50 Cent's ThisIs50.com. Ning, co-founded with CEO Gina Bianchini, adds 2.5 million members a month. Andreessen owns stakes in Digg, LinkedIn, and Will Ferrell's Funny or Die comedy site. He recently joined the board of eBay (EBAY, Fortune 500) to help that company turn around, and he is the author of a hugely influential blog that went on hiatus in August 2008. By the time this story appears, he promises, the blog will be back with a new design.

Entrepreneurs and investors seek him out for his blunt advice and because he's experienced the ups and especially the downs of life in the Valley. Netscape got trounced by Microsoft (MSFT, Fortune 500). Loudcloud, a too-early stab at so-called cloud computing services, had to retrench and lay off five-sixths of its employees before stabilizing under a new name, Opsware. Just five years ago Andreessen's image was more that of a smart, amiable billionaire playboy who dabbled ineffectually at technology's fringes. He seemed more Paul Allen than Bill Gates. "Marc is like a rock star who had his first album hit big, and then the next ones were not quite the same," says Steve Case, who ran AOL when it bought Netscape in 1999 and made Andreessen AOL's chief technology officer. "There's a lot of respect for the fact that he persevered. He evolved a couple of times and ultimately succeeded."

Could Andreessen end up becoming the next great tech investor? He certainly is taking a great leap: There's a huge difference between dabbling in startups with your own pocket change and investing big slugs of institutional money. Expectations for Andreessen's venture may be especially high. Venture capitalists are always on the lookout for the "next Netscape," a game-changing company that can produce off-the-charts financial returns for its initial investors; now imagine the pressure the co-founder of the original Netscape faces. Sure, Andreessen has been on a roll of late, but can he maintain his startup-picking hot streak? And so, at the ripe old age (by Silicon Valley standards) of 38, Andreessen is once again having to prove that he still has not only tech chops, but financial and management savvy too.

More at the link.

Also, the New York Times, "Venture Capitalists Look for a Return to the ABC's."

Obama Betrays Freedom in Iran

From FrontPage Magazine, "Freedom Betrayed":

How much damage did Barack Obama do to the incipient Iranian revolution—and by extension, to peace in the Middle East and to the U.S. national interest—when he failed to support the Iranian protesters, and instead poured cold water on Moussavi as an alternative to Ahmadinejad? ....

In a situation like this, Barack Obama was not powerless to affect the outcome, as his defenders suggest. As spokesman for the most powerful nation on earth, he was in a position to make a real difference to the all-important psychology on both sides—and that is exactly what he did. But instead of building up the confidence of the protesters (and simultaneously undermining that of the security apparatus) with encouragement and a ringing endorsement of what they were doing, what he actually did was to give comfort to the forces of repression and undermine the confidence of the Iranian people.

See also, Atlas Shrugs, "For the first time in US history, we have a president who hates his own country. A president who is on the side of America's enemies, not on the side of America."

**********

UPDATE: Cold Fury links Thanks! Plus, I forget to link a credit to William Warren.

Senate Democrats Still Seeking GOP Support

From the Washington Post, "Senate Democrats Still Seeking GOP Support: Balance of Power Not Changed Much By Supermajority":

Senate Democrats spent their first full day holding 60 votes just as they have spent the previous 2 1/2 years without such a supermajority: scrambling to find Republican support for their key initiatives in order to choke off potential filibusters.

In short, Tuesday's seating of Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) did little to change the balance of power in the chamber.

Democrats still have a large enough majority to pass bills without any GOP support, but they are grappling with internal divisions on key issues such as health care, climate change and union organizing. In addition, caucus leaders and President Obama would like at least some Republican backing on key measures so they can say they are enacting a bipartisan agenda, which then-Sen. Obama made a cornerstone of his 2008 campaign.

Some conservative Democrats who live in GOP-leaning states believe that getting Republican votes on controversial bills provides them with a line of defense against political attacks back home.

Moreover, two members of the Democratic caucus, Sens. Edward M. Kennedy (Mass.) and Robert C. Byrd (W.Va.), have not cast a vote in months. It is not clear whether the health of either elder statesman -- Kennedy, 77, has brain cancer and Byrd, 91, is battling the effects of a staph infection incurred during a hospitalization in May -- will allow him to participate in any key matter before the Senate.

In greeting Franken to Capitol Hill this week, Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) sounded a conciliatory note.

"Democrats aren't looking at Senator Franken's election as an opportunity to ram legislation through the Senate," he said Monday. "In turn, Senate Republicans must understand that Senator-elect Franken's election does not abdicate them from the responsibility of governing. That is why we have and will continue to offer Senate Republicans a seat at the table. It is up to them to decide whether they will sit down and work for the common good or continue to be the 'Party of No.' "

But the arrival of a 60th Democratic vote has been accompanied by increasing pressure from liberal groups nationwide that have helped bankroll the party's electoral successes the past few years. They are now demanding Democrats follow through on their campaign promises, with or without Republican votes.

"When it comes to health care, energy and the economy, Democrats have no excuses not to deliver on the changes that voters wanted last November," said Justin Ruben, executive director of the liberal group MoveOn.org. "On health care and on energy . . . you have conservative Democrats saying we have to compromise. That dynamic has just changed. Really they don't" have to compromise.

More at the link.

See also, Megan McArdle, "A Public Plan and the Law of Unintended Consequences":

Hilzoy is mad at conservatives talking about rationing in the public plan. She says that no one's really rationing care with a public plan; anyone can buy what they want. It's just that the public plan will ration for those in its care in order to make coverage affordable.

Megan wins that debate hands down, but read both posts (via Memeorandum).

Cartoon Credit: William Warren.