IDF Women

At Double Tapper:

Obama's Employment Policy: Paying People Not to Work

At WSJ, "Stimulating Unemployment":

Presidents typically invite Americans to appear at Rose Garden press conferences to trumpet their policy successes, but yesterday we saw what may have been a first. President Obama introduced three Americans—an auto worker, a fitness center employee and a woman in real estate—who've been out of work so long they underscore the failure of his economic program. Where are his spinmeisters when he really needs them?

Sure, Mr. Obama's ostensible purpose was to lobby Congress for the eighth extension of jobless benefits since the recession began, to a record 99 weeks, or nearly two years. And he whacked Senate Republicans for blocking the extension, though Republicans are merely asking that the extension be offset by cuts in other federal spending.

But Mr. Obama was nonetheless obliged to concede that, 18 months after his $862 billion stimulus, there are still five job seekers for every job opening and that 2.5 million Americans will soon run out of unemployment benefits. What happens when the 99 weeks of benefits run out? Will the President demand that they be extended to three years, or four? ...

In the immediate policy case, Democrats are going so far as to subsidize more unemployment. If you subsidize something, you get more of it. So if you pay people not to work, they often decide . . . not to work. Or at least to delay looking or decline a less than perfect job offer, holding out for something else that may or may not materialize.

The economic consensus—which includes Obama Administration economists in their previous lives—couldn't be clearer on this. In a 1990 study for the National Bureau of Economic Research, labor economist Lawrence Katz found that "The results indicate that a one week increase in potential benefit duration increases the average duration of the unemployment spells of UI recipients by 0.16 to 0.20 weeks."

A March 2010 economic report by Michael Feroli of J.P. Morgan Chase examined several studies and concluded that "lengthened availability of jobless benefits has raised the unemployment rate by 1.5% points."

A 2006 NBER study by Raj Chetty of UC Berkeley on a related subject begins, "It is well known that unemployment benefits raise unemployment durations."

The current recession is bearing this out, as a record 6.7 million Americans have now been out of work for at least six months. That's 45.5% of the total jobless, close to the highest share ever recorded. The number was 23.4% in February 2009. Americans tend to support jobless benefits on compassion grounds, but at some point such a policy becomes the false compassion of welfare by keeping people out of the job market and thus not learning new skills.

Hat Tip: Memeorandum. See also, RWN, "WSJ: Obama Presser Highlights Failure Of His Own Policies."

'You're Too White, Go Back To Europe'

They call 'em the "Tan Klan."

Check the links (via Memeorandum):

* "Racist Latino Group Harasses Tea Party: “You’re Too White. Go Back to Europe.” (Video)."

* "Latino KKK Member To Tea Partier: "You’re Too White, Go Back To Europe."

* "Racist Mexican Group the "Brown Berets" Chant to Tea Party: "Your White, Go Back To Europe, Your Too White to Be American."

RELATED: "The Media's Ideological Death Spiral."

The Media's Ideological Death Spiral

A couple of related stories, via Memeorandum:

At Big Government, "JournoList: …Yes, But the Reporters at Pravda Weren’t Such Insufferable Assholes."

And Daily Caller, "'CALL THEM RACISTS' — Documents show media plotting to kill stories about Rev. Jeremiah Wright."

Cartoon via Theo Spark.

Political Incorrectness --- UPDATED!!!

Theories of ideology are off the mark when they indicate that leftists are libertarian on social issues. Well, perhaps classical liberals are (recall my problem with the bastardization of the word "liberal"), but progressive leftists are totalitarian, and for our purposes here, I refer to all the recent controversy over AmPow's hotness blogging. Comrade Repsac3 has issues with it, surprise!

I agree with SEK's earlier post that it's a bad idea for a professor to even give the appearance of being a letch, and that regardless of legalities and first amendment freedoms, having posts/posters of hot chicks who're about the same age as your students doesn't present a professional appearance, and may make some of his female students uncomfortable. Legal or not, the phrase "a girl half his age..." seldom puts forth the appearance of decency and high moral values that many professions call for... ...even if it's just pictures on your blog.)

SEK is Scott Eric Kaufman, who has recently engaged in a big round of libel blogging (the legal ramifications of which are unresolved). But as an excellent primer on Repsac3's totalitarianism, see Classical Values, "Your lifestyle stems from a Communist plot to destroy America!":

Political correctness sucks bigtime. My biggest objection to it is that the focus on the proper language and rectifying "power imbalances" and shit like that gets in the way of reasonable communication, especially if you're white, because anything you say can be interpreted as having a white privilege male power racist sexist subtext. And subtexts suck, even though I have a lot of fun with them.

Yet reasonable people and people of good faith try to be polite, and they have always tried to be polite. Politeness existed long before political correctness was invented, and of course that supplies the foot in the door for petty tyrants who inject their leftist poison into dialogue.

It's powerful poison, too.

Poison? Sounds about right.

RTWT.

It goes off a bit from a hotness blogging perspective, but it's right on the control factor of cultural Marxist totalitarianism.

*******

UPDATE: RepmasterHateMasterSponsor has responded to this post by calling me stupid and lazy. So, to note, (1) I mainly like CV's idea of "poison," which perfectly refers to the obsessive hatred that eminates from American Nihilist. And (2) I think there's more need to unpack the requisites of cultural Marxism than we find at CV. For example:

Americans who like pot, porn, or unapproved sex are all victim of the sinister manipulations of Gramsci, Adorno, Marcuse, and Alinsky. Plus the evil, Darwin-inspired Alfred Kinsey, the sinister John Dewey (whose ideas about education have been responsible for every incompetent teacher since) and of course the ultimate precursor to Cultural Marxism -- the Satanic Charles Darwin himself!

The linchpin of Cultural Marxism is cultural determinism, the parent of identity politics and group solidarity. In its turn, cultural determinism was birthed by the Darwinian idea that man is but a soulless animal and therefore his identity is determined by for example, his skin color or his sexual and/or erotic preferences. This proposition rejects the concepts of the human spirit, individuality, free will, and morally informed conscience (paired with personal accountability and responsibility) because it emphatically denies the existence of the God of the Bible.

Everything that has followed these evil men is their creation, and we are all their victims. Never mind that homosexuality has been practiced since at least the Greeks, and pornography pre-dates Alfred Kinsey.

And never mind that sex, drugs, rock and roll are as American as apple pie and helped bring down the Soviet Union. The fact is that by introducing the meme of "Democracy! Sexy! Whiskey!" our American GIs were actually sinister dupes of the Frankfurt School plot -- which they foisted off onto innocent and naive Iraqis.

Fine, overall.

But obviously, if I'm being attacked as a juvenile offending "lech" for blogging Sports Illustrated models I hardly expect to criticize radical leftists for their libertarian proclivities on enjoying a bit of sexy hottness. And that's the thing. The end stage of Marxist thought is total control, as all history has shown, so this idea of a social libertarianism leading to a "cultural" Marxist program is not the whole story. Gays may not be necessarily Marxist, but as we saw in 2008 the most active groups leading the NoOnH8 agenda were overwhelming radical left-wing extremists. More recently, Toronto's Queers Against Israeli Apartheid is allied with the most implacable Jew-bashing leftist totalitarian commies, and it's not hard to notice that the same Middle Eastern regimes they work to prop up turn around and excute gays and lesbians with increasing frequency and abandon. That's totalitarian. So RepMasterHateCommissar is shooting blanks, and I've left a few comments at the post illustrating his freak-nozzle idiocy.

Shirley Sherrod Resigns

See the reports at Big Government and The Other McCain.

And check commenter Jan's remarks at my earlier post:

This is just about one of the most disgusting things I've ever heard! Racism is racism. Period.

The old "we are victims" mentality is getting a little old, and I, for one, am sick of it.

I'm white, and I was born, and brought up, in the South. My stepfather was a sharecropper, working for what amounted to a few commodities, and about enough money for shoes for us kids when school started.

We all worked in the fields, planting, hoeing, and then picking cotton, along with all the other work that goes into surviving another day.

We didn't have any handouts, nor did we ask for any. And guess what? When my stepfather found a regular job, and we moved away, nobody gave us forty acres and a mule. None of us kids got a free education, paid for by taxpayers, and none of us ever got a job handed to us on a silver platter, because of the color of our skin, or because of anything that happened to our relatives a hundred years ago.

It's about time that we all were treated equally, and fairly, no matter what our skin color happens to be, nor how badly any of our ancestors may have been treated in the past ...

Comment continues at the link.

Added: At Instapundit, "RACIST, FIRED: USDA Official In Breitbart Video Goes Under The Bus. Meanwhile, Breitbart promises more to come."

Sarah Palin Tweets Fuel Ground Zero Mosque Controversy

Okay, time for joking around is over.

The main background is here: "Sarah Palin Won’t ‘Refudiate’ Mosque Comments." (Plus more at Memeorandum.)

But the larger issue is the mosque itself. My long-time blogging pal Wordsmith left a comment this morning at an earlier entry:

Sorry Donald, but I am NOT ok with the National Republican Trust ad. It is nothing short of religious bigotry and a win-win for the global jihad movement.

Wish I had time to go into more details on how I've arrived at this position, but right now, I don't have the patience. Just a lot of anger at the conservative blogosphere.

That got me thinking, naturally, and I posted on the issue this morning. And that entry garnered some excellent comments, from Stogie, for example:

I've thought about this quite a bit, and I don't think the 1st Amendment should protect Islam. It is not just harmless worship, but a totalitarian ideology that seeks to violently overthrow our Constitution and democracy and replace them with Sharia law. The extensive cultural disruption and non-assimilable nature of Islam in Europe has already been clearly noted. Do we want the same problems over here? I think not.

The Constitution, as someone has said, is not a suicide pact. In the 1950s, when we were being undermined by communists "boring from within," would we have allowed communist training centers throughout America? And if they had called themselves "a religion," would that have made it all okay?

Also, from Grizzly Mama:

As an American, raised with American values and beliefs in freedom of religion, I am uncomfortable with even having this debate. BUT...after what we have witnessed of islam in the last ten years, I don't want it anywhere near me or mine. I've become very intolerant of islam - I despise islam's influence in the world and in America. It's a hateful, nasty, intolerant political system. In no way should the Cordoba mosque be allowed anywhere near ground zero. As for Temecula - not sure what to say except that a vast majority of Americans will not be dhimmified and the fight appears to be on. Bring it on. I would hate to see what happened to large swaths of Philly happen to Temecula. Parts of Philly are nasty with radical islam. It's disgusting, and it won't take much for the fuse on this culture war to be lit.

Dana at CSPT commented as well (mostly snark however).

I'm not personally thrilled about Ground Zero, and I join those in protesting it. Seems a slap in the face to those who died and to the living who are still mourning and recovering the dead. I won't personally go so far as banning Islam in America, however, which is what both Stogie and Grizzly are supporting, basically. I'm not sure how we're going to do it, but we've got to find a way to separate jihadi Muslims from those of the faith who reject the Islam's fundamentalist literalism in favor of liberalized version of the religion. (And I'm skeptical that's possible, given my knowledge of Islam as a religion of victory and conquest.)

Laugh Riot of the Day — Crooks and Liars: 'Insurers and Employers, Not Government, Limiting Choice of Doctors'

I'm having a hard time even believing that Crooks and Liars would publish something this stupid.

Seriously.

"Insurers and Employers, Not Government, Limiting Choice of Doctors."

RTWT.

Particularly hilarious is the assumption that "government" has absolutely no influence on whether "insurers and employers" limit "choice of doctors." Or another way to put it: The government's here to help.

Right.

Crooks and Liars is upset with William Jacobson's post, "Moral of the Obamacare Story: Taxes In, Doctors Out." Quoting the New York Times:

As the Obama administration begins to enact the new national health care law, the country’s biggest insurers are promoting affordable plans with reduced premiums that require participants to use a narrower selection of doctors or hospitals.

The plans, being tested in places like San Diego, New York and Chicago, are likely to appeal especially to small businesses that already provide insurance to their employees, but are concerned about the ever-spiraling cost of coverage.
But large employers, as well, are starting to show some interest, and insurers and consultants expect that, over time, businesses of all sizes will gravitate toward these plans in an effort to cut costs.

The tradeoff, they say, is that more Americans will be asked to pay higher prices for the privilege of choosing or keeping their own doctors if they are outside the new networks.

That could come as a surprise to many who remember the repeated assurances from President Obama and other officials that consumers would retain a variety of health-care choices.

And while it's true that of course insurers and employers "limit" coverage, it's the government's "mandate" that's making them do so --- at an increasingly accelerated rate since the ObamaCare monstrosity passed.

It's bad law. Crooks and Liars is reduced to near-senility in trying to defend it.

OTHER SOURCES: "Side Effects: Like Your HSA? Enjoy it While You Can." Also, "Side Effects: Obamacare Shifts Costs to the Privately Insured."

RELATED: At Astute Bloggers, "ROMNEYCARE/OBAMACARE: DRIVING BUSINESSES OUT OF THE HEALTH INSURANCE ARENA AND FOSTERING SOCIALISM." And Robert Samuelson, "An Ugly Preview of ObamaCare."

Update on Sarah Palin's 2012 Ground Game!

Last night's post is here: "Sarah Palin's 2012 Ground Game."

I need to augment my main suggestion (avoid "The Hillary Complex") with the additional notation on the use of dictionaries and spellcheck as needed:

RELATED: "Palin invents word 'refudiate,' compares herself to Shakespeare" (via Memeorandum).

Gulf Spill Day 90

Some updates on the the disaster.

At NYT (FWIW), "Seep in Gulf Likely Not Tied to Well, Officials Say." And, "Some oil spill events from Monday, July 19, 2010."

But more importantly, at Right Wing News, "The Video President Obama Doesn’t Want You To See." And Serr8d's Cutting Edge, "Oil Spill Timeline."

Also, at Fox News, "Obama's War On Fossil Fuels."

NAACP Racism

The clip is pretty astounding, listening to this woman, Shirley Sherrod, USDA Georgia Director of Rural Development, confess she would be less likely to help a man --- a white man who needed help for his farm --- on account of his race. In fact, this makes me sick to my stomach. I'll let readers make what they want out of the rest of the entry, from Andrew Breitbart, "Video Proof: The NAACP Awards Racism–2010." (Via Memeorandum.) I'll simply note that this is a devastating indictment of what appears to be a professional woman in what appears to be a professional context (NAACP Freedom Fund dinner). Are we not a country whereby now we define people by the content of their character and not the color of their skin? What did a 21st century white farmer do to deserve this kind of disparate treatment? I could not live with myself if I said to myself "I can't help this student. She's a migrant daughter, and her parents are undocumented. I refuse to help her. I hate her for who she is." But that's exactly what Shirley Sherrod is doing. Blacks were sharecroppers, sure. Maybe this white man's parents and grandparents were contract farmers as well. The South is historically the poorest region in the country. I can't imagine some post-bellum landed gentry-man going to some USDA office looking for farm support, but for too many blacks in the country today, this guy needing help is a "cracker," so screw him. We be lookin' out for our own, ya'll!

To Build or Not to Build? Mosque Protests Go Nationwide

This was in Sunday's Los Angeles Times, "Planned Temecula Valley mosque draws opposition."

Muslims throughout Temecula and Murrieta have saved up for years to build a mosque to replace the plain white industrial building, tucked between a pipeline company and packaging warehouse, where they now gather to pray.

But as the Islamic Center of Temecula Valley moves ahead with plans to build on a four-acre plot of vacant land near Temecula's gentle hills and invading housing developments, plans for the new mosque have stirred hostility in this mostly conservative community in southwest Riverside County.

Along with increased traffic and noise, opponents fear the mosque would clash with Temecula's rural atmosphere and, they say, possibly turn the community of 105,000 into a haven for Islamic extremists.

Okay.

But what about 1st Amendment protections for freedom of worship? Are folks in Temecula a bit intolerant? Or are we now going to prohibit the construction of mosques whenever there's local opposition?

This Temecula case doesn't seem to be anything like the opposition to the Ground Zero Mosque, which is clearly an example of Islamic Jihad's imperial conquest. New York Muslims will literally be praying on a battle zone where bodies are still being recovered.

And some even bigger names are speaking out on this now ... Sarah Palin, for example, on Twitter. And at ABC News: "Sarah Palin Joins Chorus Slamming Ground Zero Mosque: Palin Calls on 'Peace-Loving Muslims' to Oppose Mosque Near 9/11 Site."

Who's Pushing Whom? California Nurses Association Sends Thugs to Rough Up the Opposition at Meg Whitman Protests

The California Nurses Association says they won't be pushed around: "Nurses mount 'pushy' campaign against Whitman":

One of the state's most powerful labor unions, saying it "won't be pushed around" by Meg Whitman, unveiled a scathing ad campaign Friday seizing on an altercation between the former eBay CEO and one of her employees.

The California Nurses Association said the incident shows how disconnected the GOP gubernatorial nominee is from working people.

At a news conference outside its Oakland headquarters that was attended by 150 nurses in red scrubs, the union unveiled a new ad campaign - "Nurses Won't Be Pushed Around" - and released posters showing a heavily jeweled hand adorned with rings that was meant to represent the billionaire candidate.

Well, who's pushing whom?

Seriously!

At Scared Monkeys, "Tea Party, Oops Union Goon Assaulting Videographer at CNA Rally in California." (Via Memeorandum.)

And at Power Line, "It's funny how the political class is always wringing its hands about the potential for violence at Tea Party rallies, while 100% of the actual violence and intimidation that take place at political events is committed by union goons."

These thugs are the real deal. Turns out CNA has a "community organizing" affiliate, the National Nurses Organizing Committee.

More on that here: "Figures!... looks like the thug who shoved GOP volunteers isn't a nurse -- he is a community organizer."

Plus, they protested earlier outside Whitman's home — yeah, her home! "Nurses protest outside Whitman's home."

Sarah Palin's 2012 Ground Game

Just barely a year ago I published "Can Palin Win the 2012 GOP Nomination?" I laid out what I considered the necessary prerequisites for Sarah Palin's emergence as viable, top-tier candidate for the nomination in 2012. The very first comment at the post was offered by the radical progressive LeMonton, who dissed Palin's chances: "dream on dude, dream on."

Actually, no need to dream. A year out from Palin's resignation as Alaska Governor, the former GOP running-mate is looking good for a presidential run of her own next time around. As for my analysis, I'm still leaning on development of the experience thing, especially on foreign policy. Palin still sounds "light" on some issues. But she's unquestionably the finest potential candidate on the issues of greatest concern to the conservative base, and absent some serious gaffes or blunders, she'll be the one in every competitor's cross hairs. I'd add a new recommendation, however: Palin must avoid the Hillary Clinton complex, whereby Ambassador Clinton campaigned as the inevitable nominee throughout 2007 right up to the Iowa caucuses. I can't see who'd be the insurgent to knock Palin out before she captures the crown next time around, but to assume the primaries are basically a formality before coronation could be fatal politically.

It's all looking good, that's for sure. See WSJ, "Palin's Ground Game Spurs Campaign Buzz":

Through Facebook, Twitter and YouTube, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin has burst back into the political spotlight this month, while her family life has once again become part of the broader American conversation.

But it is Ms. Palin's groundwork on behalf of candidates across the country, along with her continued fund-raising abilities, that has Republican leaders and political strategists wondering whether she is gearing up for a presidential bid in 2012.

Ms. Palin's intentions remain unclear, and unstated. She declined to comment through her political-action committee.

But her influence is undeniable: On Sunday, SarahPAC disclosed contributions of at least $87,500 to Republican candidates she has endorsed, and a tantalizing $210,000 she has spent on consultants of her own.

Ms. Palin also appears to have honed her pitch. Last week, SarahPAC posted a "Mama Grizzlies" video online aimed at reaching out to women voters. In the clip, women carried signs such as "I am not the 'Angry Mob.' I am an angry tax-bled 'Hockey Mom.' " Political experts said the video—with its high production values and campaign-like blue hues—was impressive.

She has also been judicious with her political endorsements, for instance backing Nikki Haley for governor in South Carolina despite rumors of scandal surrounding the candidate, and Carly Fiorina for U.S. Senate in California over tea-party favorite Chuck DeVore.

Ms. Palin's backing was seen as important to both candidates' victories—particularly in Ms. Haley's case—bolstering Ms. Palin's political clout and boosting her among women.

"A sign of Palin's political maturity and calculation is that her endorsements have become more strategic than ideological. She's not just picking people who are compatible, she's picking candidates who can win and, therefore, increase her power base," said Mark McKinnon, a former media adviser to President George W. Bush.

Such moves, if not announced as such, appear to be the maneuvers of someone mapping a political future, not a retired governor angling for a media career. Mr. McKinnon, in fact, declared on the Daily Beast website Friday that she is running.

Obama and Latin America

From Abraham Lowenthal, at Foreign Affairs, "Obama and the Americas: Promise, Disappointment, Opportunity":

Recent U.S. administrations assumed that the paths of Latin American and Caribbean countries were converging: with Chile showing the way, all (except Cuba) were thought to be moving toward free markets, democratic governance, sound macroeconomic policies, and regional integration. The Obama administration, however, recognized from the outset that the countries of the region are actually going in very different directions. This is the result of important structural differences among them, including the level of their demographic and economic interdependence with the United States; the degree and nature of their openness to international economic competition; the strength of key aspects of their governance, such as checks and balances, accountability, and the rule of law; the relative capacity of the state and of their domestic civil and political institutions beyond the state, such as political parties, the media, religious organizations, and trade unions; and their ability to integrate traditionally excluded populations, including the more than 30 million indigenous people, Afro-Latin Americans, and migrant workers in the region. Washington's policies would have to take account of these differences; clearly, one size would not fit all.

In reframing U.S. policy toward the diverse mix of Latin American and Caribbean countries, the new administration proceeded in line with its broader resetting of U.S. foreign policy: it would be more open to engagement, even with adversaries; more disposed to multilateral cooperation; and more respectful of international law and international opinion. Once these changes became clear, the Obama team posited, the international economic crisis might make inter-American cooperation attractive again.

In devising this approach, the incoming administration drew in part on policy changes that had been introduced during the second term of the Bush administration by Thomas Shannon, a career diplomat who became assistant secretary of state for Western Hemisphere affairs in 2005. In contrast to his predecessors, political appointees who had pursued Cuba-centric policies redolent of the Cold War, Shannon fashioned a carefully nuanced, case-by-case approach to the various populist and potentially populist regimes of Bolivia, Ecuador, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua, Paraguay, and Venezuela. Shannon emphasized that social and economic inequities were the root cause of many of the problems in Latin America and the Caribbean.

This was in line with the prevailing view among many nongovernmental experts on the region. A series of think tank reports before and soon after the 2008 election had recommended more emphasis on poverty, inequality, citizen security, and energy; new approaches to narcotics and gun trafficking and immigration; increased cooperation with Brazil and Mexico; restrained, nonconfrontational, rope-a-dope responses to Chávez; and initiatives to move beyond the Cold War impasse with Cuba and to assist Haiti's development -- all ideas that contributed to the new administration's thinking.

Instead of reverting to grand rhetoric, the Obama administration began working on a few concrete matters: bolstering financial institutions, restoring credit and investment flows, and meeting the challenges of energy security, the environment, and citizens' safety. Rather than unfurl broad Pan-American initiatives, the new administration sought to bring together different clusters of states with comparable concerns to deal with specific issues.

Blah, blah ...

Sounds like mushy-tortilla diplomacy.

Meanwhile, "Hezbollah-style Car Bomb Kills Four Near Texas Border."

But hey, non-confrontational!

That oughta work...

Calling New York Times: Congressman John Lewis was NOT 'Showered With Hateful Epithets Outside the Capitol' Last March

Having previously posted one big essay on alleged tea party racism, I saw another New York Times report at Memeorandum --- on the generational divide over racial issues in America --- and I thought I'd check it out with an open mind. The essay is by Matt Bai, one of the Times' most prominent political writers: "Beneath Divides Seemingly About Race Are Generational Fault Lines." The piece starts out with a breezy little introduction about Newt Gingrich's idea for town halls featuring both the tea parties and the NAACP, and then I get to this passage, which is jaw-dropping:

The question of racism in the amorphous Tea Party movement is, of course, a serious one, since so much of the Republican Party seems to be in the thrall of its activists. There have been scattered reports around the country of racially charged rhetoric within the movement, most notably just before the vote on the new health care law last March, when Representative John Lewis, Democrat of Georgia, the legendary civil rights leader, was showered with hateful epithets outside the Capitol.

Say what?

"Showered with hateful epithets outside the Capitol"?

Not.

See, "Case of Two Liars: MO Dem Rep. Cleaver’s & GA Dem Rep. Lewis’s Racism Lies Exposed — Videos Prove Deception of Democrat Party."

This bogus racism episode is immediately recognized by rank-and-file conservative activists, but it's apparent that the Beltway media cocoon is impenetrable to evidence disproving the corrupt leftist media memes.

This gets tiring after a while. Although it's sick to realize that potentially 10s and 10s of thousands of non-insiders reading this story will be propagandized with these bogus images of regressive "hateful" tea party mobs surrounding one of the great icons of the civil rights movement, it's just one more example of why I can't trust the press on hardly anything political nowadays.

At the YouTube description:

Since this video was first posted. John Lewis and the Congressional Black Caucus have claimed they were called racial slurs by Tea Party members opposed to Obamacare.

As you can see in this video, there is no evidence of the so-called "N-word" or any other slur being used, despite the claims of the CBC and their lapdogs at CNN, NBC, MSNBC, See BS.

Also, check Marooned in Marin for full coverage of the D.C. events, "Rally Against Obamacare In DC - March 20, 2010 (VIDEO & PHOTOS)."

**********

ADDED: Linked at Andrew Bolt and Instapundit!

Mark Williams and the Endless Allegations of Tea Party Racism

I'm a little late to this story, mainly because I really don't care anymore, given the scale of the left's investment in "racism" (and what I have to say won't make that much of a difference in the long run). The background is here: "Tea Party Express Leader’s ‘Colored People’ Letter to Lincoln Draws Fire." But CNN is now reporting that Tea Party Express leader Mark Williams has been removed from the umbrella organization. See, "Tea Party Express Leader Gets the Boot." And there's more at CBS, "Tea Party Leader: NAACP Is Playing the Race Card."

There's a thread building on Memeorandum, with all the usual suspect denouncing the "racist" teabaggers. But I'm struck by how lucid Williams is on the issues at this MSNBC news clip below. He clearly meant this "letter to Lincoln" as a satirical (if forceful) poke at the internal inconsistencies of the NAACP. (And I don't know the woman at the tape, but she refused to even discuss the possibility that the name itself --- the "National Association of Colored People" --- is in fact a unproductive relic of the Jim Crow era, and thus didn't really allow Williams to delve as hard on the point as he might have.) And while some have pointed out that NAACP was repudiating "elements" of the tea party, that's simply too vague a notion and it's come across throughout the 'sphere as a blanket condemnation. Ta-Nehisi Coates, the Atlantic's house expert on race relations, after a cursory review of allegedly "racist" tea party leaders, came out strong in his condemnation of both Williams and the tea party, "The NAACP Is Right":

I'm left with the notion that many of us that like to consider ourselves sober-minded and fair, have forgotten the history of this country we love. No matter. I cannot speak for others, but I was immediately jogged back to reality by the Tea Party's response:

You're dealing with people who are professional race-baiters, who make a very good living off this kind of thing. They make more money off of race than any slave trader ever. It's time groups like the NAACP went to the trash heap of history where they belong with all the other vile racist groups that emerged in our history...

This is not some deluded crazy, who has infiltrated the Tea Party with an offensive sign. This is the national spokesman for the Tea Party Express claiming that one of the authors of the 20th century American revolution is actually a "vile racist" organization. This is who they are--America's far right-wing, speaking with all the emboldened ignorance that is fast becoming their stock in trade. I have had, and continue to have, my criticism of the NAACP. But the notion that they are somehow being unfair to the Tea Party, that President Obama should denounce the NAACP, says a lot about our desire to forget and their insistence that we do no such thing.

I'm sure Ta-Nehisi Coates is a nice guy. And he means well. But when you make your entire career around finding examples of continuing racism in America it's pretty hard to see the big picture. The tea party is just today's convenient racist BOO-BOO-BOGEYMAN for a Democratic-leftist establishment that's completely out of steam. You'll find racists in any organization, but since Obama's come to office I've yet to meet a tea partier who didn't denounce explicit Jim Crow-style racist sympathies. And I never actually seen such sympathies at an event (or when I have it's been among Democrats like the LaRouchies). The tea party is simply not an organization built on racial hostility, despite never-ending attempts and infiltration programs designed to delegitimize the movement.

And at what cost? One of the most interested pieces of data in the recent Pew survey on voters' ideology is that fully 48 percent of the respondents hadn't heard of the tea parties. These kinds of people are either relatively apolitical or simply uninformed about politics on a close day-to-day basis. A lot of people like this will have a heightened attention-span a month or two before the election, and they may be moved by the left's attacks on the tea parties as racist. Mostly though, voters are looking at big issues like the economy and jobs, so all the investment in red-flagging these so-called racist elements everywhere on the right works in fact to further highlight the Democratic Party's policy and political impotence.

That said, I think the proposal out today for a tea party convention on race relations is a good one. Those most in the know on this stuff are activists and insiders, and they can have a impact on media memes and campaign agendas. I'd like to see how it would be organized and who would participate as representatives of all sides, but if folks really did dig down deep on the issues (the culture of poverty, failing inner-city education, decline of the black family, etc.), then we could actually make some progress.

See WSJ, "Tea Party Leader Backs Proposed Summit on Racism."

Lindsay Lohan in German GQ

I'm taking Robert Stacy McCain to task for his delayed posting on that hot high school Rachel Maddow pic. He says he's just playing around with the MSNBC host, but he's usually on top of the Lindsay Lohan Google Bombs, so not sure if he's got the latest from Germany's GQ, "Lindsay Lohan Topless In German GQ." (And click here if you don't read German.)

RELATED: "Lindsay Lohan checks into rehab before 90-day jail term begins," and "PREACH IT! Lindsay Lohan rehabs her legal team -- for now."

Reader Mail: 'Thank You For Your Defense of Freedom'

My good friend Norman Gersman sent two e-mails recently:

Donald ...

I can't thank you enough for your defense of freedom and democracy in Israel.

Norm Gersman

*****

Donald ...

I enjoyed the pictures of Laguna Beach. Someday you'll have to try a bottle of Ithaca Pale Ale ... some great stuff from upstate NY. We had an amazing thing happen here in Great Neck about two weeks ago. A small thunderstorm approached the north shore of LI and when it hit Great Neck it turned into a "microburst" or a tornado. A wind shear knocked hundreds of trees over damaging homes and cars. No one got hurt. We lost electricity for days. Line crews had to come from upstate. Amazingly, just 3/4 of a mile away there is not one leaf out of place. Anyway, here is a couple of shots: one of my street just after the storm, and one of my buddy Jay in my backyard. By the way, the storm lasted a big five minutes and my backyard does not usually look like that ... you should see what was behind me.

Have a great day,

Norm

Recall that Norm is a former guest-blogger at American Power: "Obama Must Recognize Evil."

*****

And a hearty thanks to all of my readers. Traffic has been great and the feedback fabulous!

Sports Illustrated Marisa Miller Body Painting (Probably NSFW)

Previously at AmPower: "'Best Hitting Supermodel' Marisa Miller at All Star Celebrity Softball Game at Angels Stadium."

Here's a nice follow up to that for some Sunday Rule 5:

And Linkmaster Smith's weekend roundup is live.

Plus, at MAinfo, "Brooke Shields - Beauty Through the Years."