The People's Cube Goes to Washington!

Don't miss this, from The People's Cube, "9-12 Tea Party Pictures: Red Cube Goes to Washington."

Robert Gates: 'We Don't Take Any Options Off the Table'

From John King's interview with Robert Gates this morning. Gates is highly skeptical of military efficacy vis-à-vis Iran, but given the long cat-and-mouse Tehran's played with the West, there's some reassurance that we might at least consider decisive forceful action:

Gates also stated at the interview that "'I very much enjoy working for' Obama" (via Memeorandum). That's more testimony to how good a man Robert Gates is than how good a man is the president.

Was President Obama Kissing Another Woman?

Now that's some suave diplomacy! But hey, Michelle Obama might not be too forgiving of the takeaway shots! Good thing "The One" can point to exculpatory video:

And here's this from Freedom's Lighthouse:

Ever vigilant to help out President Obama, here is CNN video that explains a "U.N. Kiss" photo of Obama and woman there. It does show that still photos can be deceiving.

So true.

Barack Obama and the National Interest

One of my students e-mailed me to express his fascination at how President Obama's recent speeches conform to the "liberal international" model in international relations - my student noted that Obama "seems to negate that a realist political theory can even apply to our modern 21st century international relations." That's a sharp observation. Obama's talk of mutual collaboration and shared interests in the world diverge from the power-politics paradigm of world politics. Yet, watching this video below, and then thinking about Jennifer Rubin's comments at her post, "Wanted: Defender of American Interests," it's clear that Obama rejects the notion of states as key actors in international politics, and hence the assumption that national interests drive state decision-making. Here's Rubin:

Obama plainly embodies that mindset of liberal elites. America is flawed. America has no distinct message or values, and its interests are entitled to no more weight than Belgium’s or Cuba’s. It’s wrongheaded to assert our national interests. We should be seeking consensus and righting the great wrongs that America has done to other nations—both its stinginess in redistributing wealth and its failure to cater to other nations’ geopolitical and psychological concerns. Russia needs reassuring. The Arabs need validation. And it’s the president’s job to lower America’s profile so as to not incur the wrath of hostile powers.

Average Americans don’t buy into any of this. They have the notion—ridiculed by Obama and his supporters—that America is unique, both in its attributes and in its role in the world. They might grow weary of the burdens and prefer shorter and less costly wars (what democratic people do not?), but the notion that we should simply go along with the crowd, avoid hurting Russian sensibilities, or contradict false historical narratives of Arab nations in contravention to our own interests and those of our allies are alien and off-putting to them. If Iran is a threat to the world, ordinary Americans expect their president to do something about it, not merely call another meeting to talk with thugs spouting genocidal nonsense.

I think that's extremely perceptive, and interestingly, I think the observation about average Americans may become increasingly germane to the debates heading into the 2010 and 2012 elections. While leftists continue to excoriate grassroots activists as "teabaggers" and 'racists," the fact is that more and more political independents are turning against this administration. And if lots of folks who aren't particularly partisan realize this administration's making Neville Chamberlain look like Genghis Kahn, well, "The One" may well soon become shorthand for "The One-Term" Obama presidency.

Hat Tip: Gateway Pundit, "Obama On Nuclear Conflict With Iran: "I'm Not Interested In Victory" (Video), and HotAir Pundit, "Obama At The G-20 On Iran: “I'm Not Interested In Victory”." More at Memeorandum.

Iran Tests Short-Range Missiles

The BBC has video, "Iran Missile Tests Stoke tensions." And the New York Times has the story, "Iran State Media Report Short-Range Missile Test." (Via Memeorandum.)

And this is what Astute Bloggers reported yesterday, "BREAKING NEWS: IRAN SAYS IT WILL ALLOW IAEA INSPECTIONS":

THE IAEA HAS PROVEN OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN IT'S USELESS. IRAN, INDIA, PAKISTAN, LIBYA, AQ KHAN, SYRIA - ALL FOOLED THE IAEA.

WE MUSTN'T LET IRAN DELAY US. IT ONLY MAKES THEM STRONGER.

Now it's really time to quarantine Iran.

The USA should say: "Effective Monday, no goods or services or money or gasoline comes or goes into Iran until Iran dismantles their nuclear assets.

If Iran doesn't start dismantling them within 3 weeks, then we will bomb and destroy their nuclear assets, and all their military assets.

Unless there is a successful popular pro-West uprising.

See also, Jennifer Rubin on the Obama administratin's appeasement, "Wanted: Defender of American Interests."

Digby's Hullabaloo Rejects Afghanistan as Just War: Joins Neo-Stalinists in Protest Against U.S. Neo-Colonial Project

Okay, here's a follow up to AOSHQ, "Liberal Blogger Admits: We Claimed to Support 'The Good War' in Afghanistan as Political Strategy to Prove Our "Macho" Credentials; We Never Meant It," and Jim Geraghty's, "Democrats Never Meant What They Said About Afghanistan."

After Geraghty sent the NRO comment trolls over to swarm Digby's page, she closed comments and posted an update. Check this part especially:

I have always believed that The Good War was a myth and that the Democrats used it as a political weapon. I've written about it plenty in the past. But why these bloodthirsty wingnuts should take issue with that and conclude that I'm therefore responsible for the deaths of American soldiers is beyond me.

After all, the Democrats were all for the war --- just like they were. The only problem the right had with it was that the Democrats criticized George W. Bush for not being enough of a warmonger on Afghanistan. They weren't pacifists. They were just liars and political opportunists. And now the Republicans and the Democrats are all potentially on the same team, pulling for a bigger and better and longer war in Afghanistan. Huzzah! Post partisan comity is at hand.

Notice something here: Diby's essentially saying that (1) don't freaking link me in with the Democratic war party, because (2) I'm way out further on the left than almost everyone in Congress. That is to say, obviously, by rejecting the "Good War," Digby aligns with the one-and-only Representative Barbara Lee, who in 2001, was the sole Member of Congress to vote against the the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Terrorists (AUMF) --- i.e., the Afghan deployment. It may be recalled that Representative Lee chairs the Hip Hop Caucus Advisory Board, which is the White House-linked group behind plans to desecrate the historical memory of September 11. It all fits together like a puzzle.

Interestingly, Digby's basically in solidarity with the International ANSWER forces who are staging their 8th anniversay Afghanistan protests on October 7th in Los Angeles:

U.S./NATO Out of Afghanistan!
End Colonial Occupation: Iraq, Afghanistan, Palestine...
Money for People's Needs, Not War!

Notice the classic Marxist-Leninist agitprop, "End the Colonial Occupation."

And so, yes, Digby's right --- she did oppose the war all along, just like the hardline neo-Stalinists looking to topple global capitalism. Digby's a major player in the "progressive" netroots, but as I've long pointed out, "progressive" is the political-correct contemporary term for "neo-commmunist." Where Digby's not correct is by suggesting today's Democratic Party is simply politically expedient, a shadow war party. The fact is, from the top leadership in Congress, to President Barack Obama, the current U.S. goverment is infiltrated with neo-communists and fifth-column terror enablers. The only reason they support anything resemble mainstream foreign policy views is constituency pressure and the need to keep up the cloak of secret moderation. (We'll see how that works out November 2010.)

The stakes are clearly high for the forces of good in this country. Great job by Ace and Jim Geraghty in hammering Digby, but it's not just that Democratic-leftists "misreprepresented" themselves. It's all part of the larger plan to turn over the U.S. to the world's forces of moral decay and collectivist destruction.

(P.S.: If all goes well, I'll be infiltrating the October 7th ANSWER protest to photograph and report on the antiwar agitation and revolutionary anti-Americanism. Stay tuned ...)

Breitbart's Rules for Radicals

Kathryn Jean Lopez is a little late to this party, but her essay gives me an excuse to run this Hannah Giles interview with Sean Hannity at the same time. Here's this from K-Lo, "Rules for Counter-Radicals: Andrew Breitbart, Internet Juggernaut":

Something happened as folks on the right sat around waiting for Sarah Palin’s next Facebook post, wondering who the next Ronald Reagan would be. Something happened while folks debated death panels, what Rush Limbaugh said at noon that MSNBC or Rahm Emanuel is up in arms about. Something happened while the president of the United States planned his strategy for getting a Washington his party runs to sign up for his health-care revolution.

The stuff of which media revolutions are made happened.

The Left rules, you could still argue. But that’s in spite of being Left. Barack Obama ran for president downplaying his left-wing ideology and record, instead talking vaguely about “hope” and “change” and even invoking Ronald Reagan.

You’ve seen the tea parties. You saw the march. Now you’ve seen inside the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN).

Andrew Breitbart, born and raised online, has been a longtime collaborator with web wonder Matt Drudge. Always a behind-the-scenes mover, he’s come out of the shadows a bit with his own websites, Breitbart, Big Hollywood, and Big Government— taking the Rules for Radicals and Radical Change and running with them.For as long as I can remember, the Right — most notably the Capital Research Center — has been writing about ACORN. And, for as long as I can remember, ACORN has gotten government funding anyway.

For as long as I can remember, churches naively gave them money anyway. As recently as this summer, we exposed the ties of the Democratic party and its nominee to this community-organizing organization, its radical anti-capitalism and its voter fraud.

But what it really took was a cartoonish pimp-and-prostitute sting operation. A guy and a gal with a hidden camera and a website willing to publish. By now you know the story. When asked how to skirt the law and establish a brothel, representatives of ACORN offered them advice — a gift to the Right that for so long has wanted to take them down. Want to know how to get on welfare? James O’Keefe III, portraying a pimp who sought to traffic in foreign children, got advice, with Hannah Giles, portraying a prostitute, by his side. Want to cheat the tax system? ACORN provided this advice, too. Public housing? ACORN helped! And always make sure to have a tin for hiding the profit, they added.

More at the link (via Memeorandum).

See my earlier reports as well, "American Power: ACORN, NEA, and Andrew Breitbart's PWNING of MSM," and "Two Cheers for Andrew Breitbart."

Related: "ACORN Circles the Wagons: Our Staffers 'Are Victims'."

LGF's 'Frogger-Gate': Best 'Downfall' Parody, Evah!!

I'm still trying to decide which of the many punchlines here is the best. "Kos and DU don't watch Fox ... Should be okay, don't want to lose credibility with them" is my top contender! Right up there is the earlier crescendo to "I'm not changing my post. Glenn Beck is a frog killer!" More good stuff at the clip:

Don't miss the second video for the full background story:

Hat Tip: Atlas Shrugs.

G-20 Communists on Hannity: 'I Support the People-Run Redistribution of Wealth'

Well "Free the Planet," the organization claimed by the two young women speaking with Sean Hannity last night, must be pretty secret. Clicking freetheplanet.org takes us to a Student PIRG action page. Here's the mission statement:

As college students, we are about to face big problems when we graduate - from global warming to endangered species, from the escalating cost and declining quality of health care to the plight of the hungry and homeless.

The PIRGs are originally Ralph Nader-inspired consumer advocacy organzations in the good government/populist strain. Now, obviously, PIRG activists have aligned with the most hardline socialist and neo-Stalinist revolutinary cells on the scene today. Interestingly, Nader himself was interviewed at Amy Goodman's communist media-outlet Democracy Now! earlier this week:

It’s the same old rut ... Amy, what is necessary by way of money, organizers in the field, strategy, smarts, determination to break this massive corporate-state gridlock that’s put our country into a paralysis. Our country is stuck in traffic. It is being prevented from solving many problems or diminishing them—public transit, housing, consumer protection, living wage, universal health insurance, single payer, all these corporate crime crackdowns. All of these are problems that can be addressed and solved, but not when there’s too much power in too few hands, who make the decisions for the many to the many’s disadvantage.

So we have to—we have to ask ourselves the question: What will it take to break through? What will it take to put the people back into their sovereignty? What will it take to make sure that we enforce the Constitution and we don’t get in these foreign military adventures that are unconstitutional, violate statutes and violate international treaties, not just under Bush-Cheney, but there’s an unseemly continuity in this area under the Obama administration.

In any case, watch the video above.

Obviously these two women have no clue as to the economic, political, and social foundations of modern liberal societies. They both look like healthy, clean, well-adjusted young women. I can only imagine the hardcore indoctrination they've received growing up, with teachers and radical agitators expounding the evils of capitalism over and over again until the cows come home. At one point, the woman at left says she wants a "people-run redistribution of wealth," that is, the socialist-state system that expropriates property and redistributes wealth "from each according to ability, to each according to need."

Hey, (dumb) workers of the world, unite!

Leftists Gleefully Exploit College Grad's Swine Flu Death in Ohio: But, Care Was Available - State Boasts Robust Network of Free Clinics

I never cease to be amazed at the despicable political opportunism of radical leftists today. The latest episode involves the death of Kimberly Young in Ohio. The 22 year-old was a recent graduate of Miami Univeristy of Ohio. She died of complications from Swine Flu after a two week struggle. Condolences go to her family for this loss of life.

Naturally, there's little regret over Young's death on the radical left. Hardline bloggers are cynically exploiting this woman's status as uninsured to smear Republicans as greedy and heartless. Here's a look at the headlines:

* Daily Kos, "Kimberly Young RIP - Wall Street Care Snuffs Another Candle." As noted there: "Much like the recent immolation of everything Wall Street touches, human error and Mother Nature have exposed the Status Quo for what it is: Greed triumphing violently over compassion, common sense and decency." In other words, blame the evil capitalists for the death of Kimberly Young.

* HCAN, "22 Year Old Dead From Swine Flu Because of Delayed Care." Here's this from author Jason Rosenbaum, "Health insurance companies have priced people like Young - young, normal, hardworking - out of the market, and because of skyrocketing premiums, fewer and fewer employers offer health care as a benefit ... public health insurance option is needed to increase competition and keep the insurance industry honest so they can't delay care even if they want to." Well, that's an utterly shameless plug for ObamaCare. I'm sure HCAN is on the edge of their seats waiting for more young people to die for lack of insurance.

* Victor Zapanta at Think Progress, "Uninsured 22-Year-Old Boehner Constituent Dies From Swine Flu." According to Zapanta, "Kimberly Young graduated from Miami University in December and continued to live in Oxford, Ohio, within Minority Leader John Boehner’s congressional distrct." Okay, let's put responsibility for this woman's death right at the top of the GOP congressional leadership.

* Steve Benen at the Washington Monthy, "KIMBERLY YOUNG.... What a Very Sad Story." Benen explains: "Her roommate's mother said Young worked several jobs, none of which offered insurance. She eventually went to a public hospital's emergency room after showing signs of kidney failure and dehydration. In critical condition, she was soon after transferred to another facility, where she died." So, Ms. Young made a decision to ride out the illness until she became dehydrated, and of course, that's also the fault of the heartless American system: "In every modern democracy on the planet, those who get sick don't have to put off treatment because they lack coverage. It's time the United States join them."

Well, actually Ms. Young didn't have to "put off treatment." But let's just put aside the notion that Ms. Young actually chose to go without health insurance. Perhaps due to unaffordability she decided to forego a policy. Okay, sure. But then, why wait until at the edge of death's door to seek care at Ohio's public hospitals? That's simply irresponsible. People should seek care for themselves, even if uninsured.

And unfortunately, had Ms. Young - perhaps before her emergency room visit - done a quick search online she would have detemined that Ohioans benefit from a robust netork of free healthcare clinics. For example, checking the homepage for the Ohio Association of Free Clinics indicates that Ohio's free clinics provide "Hope for the hurt. Healing for the suffering. Medications for the sick. Treatment for people who are ill." And also, "OAFC member clinics provided more than 106,000 visits to nearly 55,000 uninsured and underinsured patients in 2008."

Checking around further online we find the Free Medical Clinic of Greater Cleveland. As noted there: "The mission of The Free Medical Clinic of Greater Cleveland ('The Free Clinic') is to provide quality health care and related services free of charge to those who lack appropriate alternatives, and to advocate for policy changes that make health care available to all."

Reading the clinic's homepage, it's clear that Ms. Young would have been extremely unlikely to have been denied services. And even is she had, the state of Ohio has launched "Health Care Coverage Reform Initiative," which is an effort by the state government to get all of the state's citizens insured by 2011. A quick look at the website indicates a huge network of resources, incuding information on providers for the uninsured. The program, in particular, seeks to provide access to those not insured by their employers and for those not eligible for traditional public programs.

So what can we conclude? Well, while tragic, Ms. Young's death may have been avoidable. It's not clear from the available news information, but this woman apparently chose not to take advantage of the ready health services available in her state - and these services were within the longstanding public/private model of health services delivery (the health clinics being tax-exempt service agencies).

I recall, in 2000, before I landed my current teaching position, my family was uninsured. My wife's state-sponsored workplace COBRA plan was too expensive. Yet, my oldest son required substantial treatment. My wife and I paid out of pocket for most of his care. But we also visited local free clinics, which helped us pay for medications. I knew that our need for services would be temporary, and when I was employed full-time by the fall of 2000 I had workplace health insurance coverage again. But had my son come under serious illness, my wife and I would not have delayed seeking care for two-weeks for fear of cost. That's a matter of personal responsiblity, and should anyone come under similar circumstances, I'd be very hesitant to blame my congressperson or the "greedy" capitalists on Wall Street for the crisis.

No one is saying we can't develop a better system of coverage for those without access. But leftists hate the system we have, and in this case they're overlooking the fact that Ms. Young may well have made foolish decisions. Those on the Democratic-left are all too happy to excoriate conservatives as evil, when the facts suggest a sadly regretable tale of failed personal responsiblity.

Added: See also, Right Wing Nut House, "YOUNG, STUPID THINK PROGRESS RESEARCHER LOSES SANITY IN PUBLIC":

Liberals were right when they warned us that Republicans opposed health insurance reforms because they want you to die. That poor young girl should have listened. If she had only had the courage to go against the wishes of her Congressman and buy health insurance, she would be alive today. But Boehner is a sneaky one. He used all of his wiles, all of his GOP MoJo Magic to make that poor girl decide that at age 22, she was indestructible and didn’t need health insurance - a waste of money, that.

UPDATE: From the Middletown Journal, "Report: Miami Grad Did Not Die of Swine Flu." Also, JammieWearingFool links!

Success Matters: Public Opinion and the War in Afghanistan

From Gallup's new poll on public support for the Afghan deployment, "Americans Tilt Against Sending More Troops to Afghanistan":

Americans are more likely to say they would oppose (50%) rather than favor (41%) a possible decision by President Barack Obama to send more U.S. troops to Afghanistan.

The possibility that Obama will need to make a decision on U.S. troop strength in Afghanistan has increased in recent weeks, amid reports that the senior American military commander in Afghanistan -- Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal -- is preparing to deliver a formal request for additional troops in Afghanistan, perhaps by the end of this week.

As noted by Gallup, the military wants more troops, and there's been speculation that the Obama administration is facing a crisis of civil-military relations over appropriate troop levels in Afghanistan. Gen. Stanley McChrystal has asked from more troops and has stated that the U.S. will lose the war without them (and there's speculation that McChrystal will resign if the administration refuses to provide the necessary resources). This morning's papers report on the meeting Friday at Ramstein Air Base in Germany. See, the Wall Street Journal, "Afghan Troop Request Simmers," and the Washington Post, "U.S. Military Leaders Discuss Troop Needs for Afghanistan" (via Memeorandum).

The conflict has been heating up and U.S. forces have taken heavy casualties of late. And, increasing battle deaths are being used by our enemies to help drain public support for the deployment. As the Journal's article notes:

Five U.S. troops were killed in volatile southern Afghanistan Thursday, part of a surge of American and North Atlantic Treaty Organization troop fatalities that is sapping public support for the war in the U.S. and Europe.

Thursday's casualties pushed the U.S. death toll in Afghanistan to 218 this year, including 36 this month, a sharp increase over last year's record toll of 155. Britain, which maintains the second-largest troop contingent, has lost 80 soldiers this year ....

Osama bin Laden, the fugitive head of al Qaeda, apparently sought to seize on the war's unpopularity in Europe by releasing a recording Friday demanding that European nations withdraw troops and threatening attacks against European targets. U.S. officials said they believed the recording to be authentic.

Of course, American leftists are in alliance with our enemies in pushing for a precipitous redeployment from Afghanistan. According to Bob Herbert, citing the latest New York Times survey:

Americans are tired of the war. Some of the young people currently being outfitted for combat were just 10 or 11 years old when Al Qaeda struck the U.S. on Sept. 11, 2001. They are heading off to a conflict that most Americans are no longer interested in. The difference between the public’s take on this war and that of the nation’s top civilian and military leadership is both stunning and ominous.

A clash is coming. President Obama may be reconsidering his idea of substantially increasing the number of American troops, but no one at the higher echelons of government is suggesting that anything other than a long, hard, tragic and expensive campaign lies ahead — with no promise of ultimate victory, or even a serious definition of what would constitute victory.

And citing Herbert, Steve Hynd of Newshoggers, a blog that cheered the use of female Downs syndrome suicide bombers in Iraq, claims:

The nation has already come to the conclusion that continued escalation of the occupation of Afghanistan is not in its interest and the President seems to be teetering on the brink of admitting the same thing, if only to himself.

Plus, Spencer Ackerman, the hardline leftist blogger who called for President Bush's excecution in 2008, during the height of the Petraeus surge in Iraq, published a report last week attacking Kimberly and Frederick Kagan's call for a troop increase, "You’re Never Going to Believe This, But the Kagans Want to Add At Least 40,000 Troops to Afghanistan."

What's missing here are real facts and context. Public opinion has not turned irrevocably against the war, despite leftist claims to the contrary. There's no big push for an immediate of U.S. forces for the mission, and the fate of the deployment is largely in the hands of President Obama, who must exercise leadership. As Kenneth Davenport has noted:

No war effort can be successful without the president -- the Commander in Chief -- reminding the American people daily about the importance of doing the HARD thing. You can't spend 99% of your time selling an unnecessary government takeover of health care and then 1% talking about Afghanistan and expect the people to see it as vitally important.

Exactly. And a strong presidential public relations campaign combined with a renewed military effort will likely guarantee victory in Afghanistan. For example, academic political science research shows, success matters. As Duke University political scientist Christopher Gelpi has noted at Foreign Affairs:

Public support for U.S. military operations ... does not inexorably decrease like sand flowing through an hourglass. Instead, the American public regularly makes judgments about the potential costs and benefits of a military operation. As the likelihood of obtaining any benefits diminishes, the human cost of war becomes less tolerable, and casualties reduce support for the operation. On the other hand, if and when the public is optimistic about a successful outcome, it is far more willing to bear the human cost of war.

And here's Gelpi from a more detailed research report:

Consistent with much of the recent work on public opinion in wartime, we find that members of the public appear to be engaging in simple but clear calculations about the expected value of continuing to engage in armed conflict. That is, individuals make judgments about the potential benefits of the conflict and weigh those potential gains by the probability that their government will be able to achieve them.

More specifically, our findings suggest that believing the war was the “right thing to do” combines with expectations of success to determine an individual’s tolerance for the human costs of war. Once one takes account of the interaction of these two attitudes, other prominent variables in the literature have only a modest direct impact on casualty tolerance. This interaction effect even outweighs the independent impact of partisanship. Rather than implying that those other factors are not important, however, it seems likely that many of the variables identified in the literature – such as the partisan cues, primary policy objective, elite consensus, and multilateral support – may be most important through their impact on respondent’s views about the “rightness” of the war and the prospects for success.

Significantly, events on the ground in Iraq - on the heels of the Bush/Petraeus surge in 2007-2008 - provide moderate support for the Gelpi hypothesis. See Newsbusters, "Poll: 41% Say Iraq War Succeeding, 48% Say Will Get Even Better." Also, Ed Morrissey, " “The Surge Has Worked”."

There's no reason to believe that a renewed political and military focus by the Obama administration would fail to bring about success in Afghanistan. Contrary to radical naysayers, we do have a definition of victory in Afghanistan, as well as a strategy to bring it about. On war aims and military strategy, see my report, "Reconciliation and Resolve in Afghanistan. And on the doctrinal case for increased ground forces, see Kimberly Kagan and Frederick Kagan, "A Comprehensive Strategy for Afghanistan: Afghanistan Force Requirements."

**********

UPDATE! Wow, there's a really fascinating uproar over a Hullabaloo's post frank admission that leftist support for the Afghan war was cynical political posturing. See AOSHQ, "Liberal Blogger Admits: We Claimed to Support 'The Good War' in Afghanistan as Political Strategy to Prove Our "Macho" Credentials; We Never Meant It." Also, Jim Geraghty, "Democrats Never Meant What They Said About Afghanistan." Follow the links at Geraghty's post to Digby's - it's a laugher!

Census Worker Was Naked, Bound: Leftists Blame Bachmann, Beck, Limbaugh, Malkin, and Palin

At the New York Times, "Witness Says Census Worker Was Naked, Bound" (via Memeorandum). Of course, that's confirmation that Bill Sparkman's death couldn't have been suicide. You know, the right-wingers killed him. From airhead Larisa Alexandrovna:

I ... think it is absolutely fair to ask why someone would target a census worker (and sadly, a single father of two)? I have never heard of a Census worker being murdered before. I am sure it happens and has probably happened even in recent times, but I simply have never read or heard another instance of such a crime. So at the very least we can say it is a rare crime.

And I think that it is also fair to question the role Rep. Michelle Bachmann [sic] (the psychotic, drooling, knuckle-dragger, ill-informed conspiracy theorist, birther and hater masquerading as a member of Congress) jihad against the Census Bureau had something to do with it.

Okay. Right.

And since Charles Johnson's also advocating this meme, it's no doubt ironclad! (Memeorandum link only - trying to observe the LGF embargo.)

How about at Democratic Underground, "Handy Guide to how Republicans and Fox News are Responsible For Census Worker Being Hanged":

We need to absolutely expose Glenn Beck, Michele Bachmann, Michelle Malkin, CNN's Lou Dobbs, Michael Steele, Rush Limbaugh and the legion of others parroting right-wing lies for trumping up this nonsense and getting people to now commit murder in a hideous fashion.

Conservatives getting people to commit murder?

Okay. That's a really credible hypothesis coming from folks who post with murderous Che Guevara avatars. It's kinda like, you know, communists don't have to "get" anyone to murder people - they just go out and cut down their opponents without provocation.

And how about that "Fed" graphic above? Oh, that's from The Brad Blog, "Was the 9/12 Murder Related to Inflammatory Rhetoric of Beck, Bachman, and Fox 'News'? Or to Recent Local Events That Have Rocked the Rural, Poor, Republican County? Or All of the Above?" Geez, all that, and the Photoshop's already enough for an indictment!

But wait! Maybe it wasn't the right wing after all. Even the nihilist Firedoglake is skeptical:

Before we assume that this apparent homicide was a response solely to the attacks Michele Bachmann and others have made on the census, it's worth recalling how Clay County made news earlier this year, when a bunch of local officials were indicted for vote fraud.

Whew! I feel better already. All that Fox viewing is turning me into a murderer!

Related: "Sparkman: Casualty of Methland, USA? Or Victim of Anti-Government Bile?" (via Memorandum). Plus Lindsay "Don't Spell My Name Wrong You Nazi Stormtrooper" Beyerstein's on the case, "Meth and Anti-Government Extremism Not Mutually Exclusive."

Dr. Denise King, N.J. School Principal and Long-Time Obama Supporter, Won't Apologize for Student Indoctrination

From Fox News, "N.J. Principal Unapologetic for Videotape of Kids Praising Obama, Parents Say":

The principal of a New Jersey elementary school where young students were videotaped singing the praises of President Obama is making no apologies for the videotape and says she would allow the performance again if she could, according to parents who spoke with her Thursday night.

Three parents told FOXNews.com that Dr. Denise King, principal of B. Bernice Young Elementary School in Burlington, N.J., defended the controversial performance, which was videotaped and posted on YouTube, when they approached her during a "Back to School" event.

Parent Jim Angelillo said King told him the lesson was merely part of Black History month, and not an attempt to indoctrinate students, as critics have charged. He said he believes teachers have the freedom to express their political views, but not in the classroom.

"Freedom of speech, not freedom to teach," Angelillo told FOXNews.com.

King has long been a fan of Obama, hanging pictures of the president in her school's hallways and touting her trip to his inauguration in the school yearbook.

Included in the full-page yearbook spread were Obama campaign slogans ("Yes we can! Yes we did!") and photos King took in Washington on Jan. 20, when she attended the inauguration.

There also were photos taken at the school depicting students doing Obama-themed activities about their "hopes for the future," featuring posters of Obama. According to the yearbook, students watched the inauguration in class.

Parents said Elvira James, the teacher of the class that was videotaped, also seemed to be promoting Obama.

"She praised him, she put pictures on the walls," said Jim Pronchick, whose 8-year-old son, Jimmy, was in James' class last year. "When he won (the election) they really went off."

Leslie Gibson, who has two children at the school, said she was "shocked" at the videotape, adding that political beliefs, like religious views, should be kept at home. She also said King made a "big deal" about her attendance at the inauguration.

"Throughout the school, there were signs posted supporting Barack Obama quite a bit," Gibson told FOXNews.com. "I understand it's a historical event, but on the same token, I like politics to be left at home and I think she should follow that as well."

Attempts to reach King on Friday were unsuccessful. A recording at the school said its mailbox was full and could not accept new messages.

For the "student praise" YouTube, see Snooper Report, "Czars. Big Government. ACORN. Big Labor. Treasury Dept. Schools." Also, Right Wing Fanatic, "Elementary School Students Taught to Sing Praises of President Obama."

Image Credit: Left Coast Rebel, "Principal at Bernice Young Elementary Not Apologizing - Says she Would do it Again."

From the G-20: Police Respond to Anarchy and Violence

Perhaps being nearly mowed down by loaded dumpsters (top) explains why cops aren't tolerating any violence by protesters (bottom):

See also, Kimberly Morin, "Comparing the Tea Parties to the G20 protests - The Violence, Destruction and Hypocrisy of the Left."

'Why I Am No Longer an African American'

From Mary Baker, at American Thinker, "Why I Am No Longer an African American":

The classification of me as an African American says that although I live in America, my loyalty and allegiance are to Africa. My loyalty and my allegiance are first to Jesus Christ who is the Lord and Savior of my life. These same principles were those held by many of our Founding Fathers who held high regard for God's protection and leadership over this nation. These are the principles that are common to the foundation of Conservatism. As I think of my viewpoints politically, everything I believe about this country is wrapped up in my Conservative views. The tenets of the Declaration of Independence were set forth to bring equality and well being to all Americans. And those are the principles that I embrace as an American.

It is my faith that drives everything that I believe and hold as dear. The Founders of this country envisioned a nation that would secure the God-given rights of its citizens. The desire that every citizen born in this country would not suffer the oppression they endured under England's rule, set as the backdrop for guaranteeing freedom for all Americans. The Founders especially desired that our nation would be one ruled and protected by our Creator God. Many beg to differ, but the Founders' insistence that God guide the ways of this nation is apparent in their acknowledgement of His hand in the creation of life, the rights of life, and the prosperity of life.

Don't miss this powerful essay in full (link).

Mary Baker's blog is here. Blogroll her right now.

I've always disliked the term "African-American," although I've never articulated my thoughts on the issue as well as Mary does at her essay.

Hat Tip: Saber Point, "Clifton's Friend Mary Baker Appears on Glenn Beck Show."

Obama at U.N.: Disastrous Agenda

From Ben Johnson at FrontPage Magazine, "Obama’s Dangerous UN Agenda":

Barack Obama’s UN speech advanced a doctrinaire left-wing foreign policy that will hamstring American defense, further sideline the economy, and leave the nation relying on “law enforcement” to chase down terrorists after the fact. His anti-American statements were offensive, but his substantive proposals could do far more damage.

The whole thing is at the link.

See also my response to Obama's speech, "Obama at U.N.: Worst Foreign Policy Ever."

NBC News to Americans for Limited Government: 'Bite Me, Jew Boy'

Just in from Americans for Limited Government, "ALG Statement in Response to NBC “Bite me, Jew Boy” Email":

Americans for Limited Government is appalled that an employee of the NBC news network apparently felt it was appropriate to send an email to an ALG employee, in response to a standard news release, saying, “Bite me, Jew Boy.”

According to ALG records, the email came from the Blackberry and email address of Jane Stone, a producer for NBC’s Dateline. The email was sent to Alex Rosenwald, the ALG Director of Media Outreach. The news release to which Ms Stone apparently responded was one in which ALG called upon Congress to defund ACORN.

Americans for Limited Government does not contend that NBC or its parent company GE, are anti-Semitic. What is highly disturbing, however, is that there clearly is a culture at NBC that has allowed this person who clearly has issues to go unchecked.

Ms Stone claims she did not send the offensive email. If that is not the case, we at ALG call upon her to help ascertain who did send it using her Blackberry and her email address. If Ms Stone did, in fact, send it, we at ALG call upon Ms Stone to apologize to Mr. Rosenwald, and we call upon the NBC hierarchy above Ms Stone to join her in issuing that apology.

Attachments: Anti-Semitic email from NBC to ALG, September 24th, 2009.

See also, Matthew Vadum, "NBC Producer to Anti-ACORN Group: ‘Bite Me, Jew Boy!’":

Apparently NBC “Dateline” producer Jane Stone or someone else who has access to her Blackberry has a problem with groups that oppose ACORN and with an ethnocultural minority.

Naturally, NBC circles the wagons: "NBC News Prez Blasts ALG: 'Reckless' and 'Defamatory'." (Via Memeorandum.)

Harry Reid Rejects Calls for ACORN Hearings

From CQ Politics, "Reid Rejects GOP Call for ACORN Hearings":

Majority Leader Harry Reid rebuffed a Republican request that he call Senate hearings and an investigation into recent allegations against the scandal-tainted community organizing group ACORN.

Reid, D-Nev., said Tuesday that he would not ask the Senate committee chairmen or Congress “to do anything that would distract from efforts to address” health care, climate change, an overhaul of the nation’s financial regulatory system and oversight of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Reid made the comments in letters to 28 Republican senators, who had asked for the investigation into the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.

The liberal-leaning group has faced heavy criticism following the release last week of a video showing ACORN employees apparently advising a couple, posing as a prostitute accompanied by her pimp, about how to conceal their line of work, evade taxes and handle undocumented, under-age sex workers.

Reid called the actions of ACORN employees and contractors captured on the video “shocking” and said he shared the concerns voiced by Republican senators.

But Reid noted that federal and state authorities are investigating ACORN and warned about politicizing such probes. “I am sure you would join me in praising the effectiveness, honest intentions and impartiality of our nation’s law enforcement communities and inspectors general,” he said.

See also the Las Vegas Review Journal, "Reid Blocks ACORN Probe: Tracking Abuse By Political Allies Could Be 'Distracting'." (Via Memeorandum.)

Video Credit: Kenneth G. Davenport.

Losing the Debate? Attack Your Opponents: 'You Must Be Racist'

From Mark Steyn, "Dislike Obama? You Must Be Racist":

We are now eight months into the 44th presidency. The Obamessiah has come down to earth. He’s now just another 50/50 president, his approval ratings having fallen further faster (according to some polls) than any occupant of the Oval Office since Truman. The obvious explanation for this would seem to be his ambitious, expensive, transformative and radical agenda: the governmentalization of health care, cap-and-trade environmental legislation, the federal takeover of the automobile industry, the gazillion-dollar flopperoo of the non-stimulating “stimulus,” more debt, more deficits, more taxes, more regulation, more government, everywhere you turn. This would be a tough sell for even the smoothest pitchman.

But sometimes the obvious explanation is too obvious. Those “tea party” protests? “This is about hating a black man in the White House,” explained the eminent thinker Janeane Garofalo. “The only thing missing is a noose,” huffed L.A. Weekly about a poster showing Obama as the Joker. It turned out to be the work of a left-wing Palestinian from Chicago, but why get hung up on details? If you oppose the massive expansion of government and multi-trillion-dollar expenditures, you’re a racist.

The other day, President Obama gave a speech to Congress on health care, and, in response to a more or less routine bit of dissembling, a Republican representative called Joe Wilson yelled out “You lie!” Because the President’s speech was a dud, the Democrat-media complex decided to divert attention to the no-name congressman’s outrageous ejaculation and give it the old flood-the-zone treatment. Maureen Dowd, the elderly schoolgirl at the New York Times, weighed in:

“Surrounded by middle-aged white guys—a sepia snapshot of the days when such pols ran Washington like their own men’s club—Joe Wilson yelled ‘You lie!’ at a president who didn’t.

“But, fair or not, what I heard was an unspoken word in the air: You lie, boy!”

“Boy”? Why, yes. Like some bull-necked plantation overseer from the even-more-sepia snapshot days, Mistuh Wilson was teaching that uppity Nigra a lesson he wouldn’t forget.

I suppose it’s possible that opposition to the federal government’s annexation of one-sixth of the U.S. economy is being driven by nostalgia for segregated lunch counters. And no doubt, if you write for the New York Times or teach race and gender studies at American colleges for long enough, it seems entirely reasonable, listening to a patient profess satisfaction with her present health insurance arrangements, to respond, “You know, if you re-sewed the back of that hospital gown so your ass wasn’t showing, your Klan sheet would be as good as new.”

Thus, Melissa Harris-Lacewell, professor of African-American studies at Princeton, was invited on to National Public Radio to expound on the use of “racial code words” in “the current opposition to health care reform.” For example, explained professor Harris-Lacewell, “language of personal responsibility is often a code language used against poor and minority communities.”

“Personal responsibility” is racial code language? Phew, thank goodness America is belatedly joining Canada and Europe in all but abolishing the concept.

More at the link.

See also, Michael Willliam, "Opposing the President Doesn't Make You a Racist" (via Prairie Pundit).

Obama's Post-Allied America

From Abe Greenwald, at the Weekly Standard, "Post-Allied America: The U.S. Shrinks Its Influence and Severs Ties With Sympathetic Global Partners":

With last Wednesday's decision to scrap plans for a promised missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic, President Obama put the finishing touches on a new and dangerous entity: post-allied America. With his declaration a week later before the UN General Assembly that "alignments of nations rooted in the cleavages of a long gone Cold War" no longer apply, he justified his creation. As a string of headlines from Central and Eastern European capitals makes plain, the U.S.'s most reliable democratic partners see the administration's decision for what it was: a historic shift in America's priorities. Adversaries' wishes now enjoy equal baseline footing with the needs of friends. Whatever may tip Washington in this or that policy direction, a history of cooperation or shared ideology will not be a factor. The Obama administration believes, ahistorically, that this will turn bad actors good.

The implications are disastrous. Small democracies, like Poland and the Czech Republic, may fall prey to aggressive, expansionist neighbors like Russia. Rogue and autocratic regimes will go unchecked as they ratchet up various proscribed initiatives. The U.S. will lose access to valuable partnerships, thus halting our ability to roll back dangers and maintain global stability. Already fading is American credibility. How can the U.S. hope to shame China out of abetting totalitarian North Korea when President Obama himself has just agreed to snub the pro-Democracy Dalai Lama out of deference to China? One-time allies will be forced into expedient relationships with our ideological antagonists. Democracy may see worldwide retreat.
The missile defense decision was a knock-out blow to our fraying alliances. But the Obama administration's unmistakable capitulation to the Kremlin was preceded by months of escalating post-ally policy. It should be no surprise that some of the potential dangers listed above have been realized. Treating Israel as just another Middle Eastern country with stubborn complications has led Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu into secret security discussions with Moscow. Indifference to maintaining our relationship with Great Britain may be seen as the backdrop before which Scotland freed the murderer of 190 Americans in order to facilitate Libyan oil contracts.

The shift in American policy is more than geostrategic. It is a shift in the realm of ideas. President Obama has not merely sided with anti-democratic states over democratic ones, but supported anti-democratic forces over democratic ones within the same states. Instead of throwing U.S. patronage behind aggrieved Iranian voters, the American president "bore witness" to their deadly struggle before the White House publicly recognized their tormentor as "the elected leader" of Iran. Instead of standing with democratic Hondurans, who refused to see their country go the way of regional banana republics, Obama has decided to refuse them aid and recognition until they accept a would-be self-appointed strongman.

More at the link.

Related: The Washington Post, "Iran Reveals Existence of Second Uranium Enrichment Plant." Plus, Dana Loesch responds, "Obama Knew About Second Iranian Facility?" (via Memeorandum).