Orange County No Longer Nixon Country — It's Tea Party Country!

Hey. Wow.

The New York Times discovers The O.C.!

Yeah, we actually have diversity down here, and there's still a whole lot of patriotism left. But NYT is watching and waiting, hoping for that demographic tide to topple the county's GOP hegemony:

Orange remains a Republican county, at least relatively: an influx of immigrants certainly does not equate to automatic Democratic gains, here or anywhere else across the country. Many Vietnamese immigrants are socially conservative and run for office as Republicans. Until the increased identification of the Republican Party with tough measures on immigration in recent years, Latino voters were also clearly in play for Republicans. Most elected officials in Orange County are Republicans.

But the political texture of this county, which is larger in population than Nevada or Iowa, is changing, and many officials say it is only a matter of time before many Republican officeholders get swept out with the tide.

Well, it ain't happening any time soon, not if local tea party action is any indication:

From Palin Derangement to Acknowledging Left-Wing Sexism — Now That's Progress!

This line from Anna Holmes and Rebecca Traister captures a lot:

We progressives discount her references to the women’s movement — not to mention her validity as a candidate — by looking down on her as a dim, opportunistic, mean-girl prom queen, all spunk and no policy muscle.

That's fine. Funny though is how much these two can't stand the fact that a conservative woman is redefining feminism away from the left's culture of death. Holmes and Traister prattle on about "reproductive rights" and how Sarah Palin's intent is to roll back progress for women. This is such patent mendacity it's almost obscene. I can't take women seriously --- leftist women, or any others for that matter --- who insist that the ability to abort a pregnancy is the sine qua non of women's progress. And as much as I hate abortion, I've never argued for a 100 percent ban on it. There's so much caricature in discussions of conservative positions on the left --- seriously, I keep seeing so much of it of late (Markos Moultisas is getting to me, I guess). But what's good about the article, is the full-blown acknowledgement that Democrats are sexist. Yep, that's really the thesis here, for example:

... the sad truth is that Democrats often prefer their women fulfilling similarly diminutive models for behavior. Consider how Hillary Clinton has been treated, at times, by those in her own party: Democratic leaders never really celebrated Mrs. Clinton’s nation-altering place in history as the first female candidate to get so close to a major party’s presidential nomination. Indeed, she is most appreciated when she plays well with others in the Senate or the State Department; when she behaves like a fierce competitor, she is compared to Glenn Close’s bunny-boiling virago from “Fatal Attraction.”

If folks can remember all the vicious attacks on blogs like HillBuzz and the Pumas, well, it's clear that it's not women's progress that these people want, but lock-step ideological compliance. Kill more babies. Rob more taxpayers. Appease more Islamists. I could go on. It's all so strange sometimes. What drives that kind of hatred? I get it, but not always.

Reason.TV — 'What We Saw at the Glenn Beck Rally in DC'

It's an interesting video. I love the woman at about 2:25 minutes who reacts to the notion of "African-Americans" — "I'm not African. I'm American, black American." My thoughts precisely. She's a registered independent as well. Lots of folks are fed up with two-party politics as usual. In any case, be sure to read Glenn Reynolds' comments on the religious theme of the event. I can comment on that more when I listen to Glenn Beck's speech, but I agree with Glenn that you can't transform the tea party (small-government) movement into a religious one:

Leftists Search Desperately for 'Racists' at Restoring Honor Rally

William Jacobson has been covering this angle, and he notes:

Think Progress tried really, really hard to cover the Restoring Honor rally with photographers and videographers. I don't think it is a stretch to think that Think Progress was hoping beyond hope that it would find a sign or something else that would permit it to portray the rally as racist.

And Robert Stacy McCain has been getting good laughs out of the left's efforts to smear tea partiers as "racist." Turns out Rachel Maddow apparently found evidence of "racism" in one of the event's program guides, which "advised visitors to stick to the touristy parts of town." But it turns out the program guide was written by a Democrat, Bruce Majors, who's been a major contributor to Democratic candidates, including Howard Dean and John Kerry. And checking over at Charles Johnson's Twitter page, these dolts are working overtime to find "racist" posters at the rally and indications of "tea party racism" in Google searches. Google searches? And here's the brilliant analysis: "Here's a scary thought: It's easier to be a racist in America today than it's been in quite some time." Yeah, okay. Desperate much?

And reading AP's major report on the event this morning we find this at the lede:

Conservative commentator Glenn Beck and tea party champion Sarah Palin appealed Saturday to a vast, predominantly white crowd on the National Mall to help restore traditional American values and honor Martin Luther King's message. Civil rights leaders who accused the group of hijacking King's legacy held their own rally and march.

Civil rights leaders? Well, the writers neglected to mention Alveda King, the niece of the slain civil rights leader, until the very last paragraph of the article.

Perhaps the reporters might have spent a bit more time on the ground, talking with actual tea partiers in attendance. It looks like folks are having a little problem with the tiresome "tea party racism" meme. My good friend Skye at Midnight Blue was on the scene, with reports here and here:

The AP article does note that the event signaled a "show of strength" for the movement. And that's exactly what's giving radical leftists fits of apoplexy.

See also, "Martin Luther King would have been Proud of the Restoring Honor rally."

And "Beck, Palin, Faith, Hope, and Charity" (via Memeorandum).

Added: Linked at Instapundit!

President Barack Obama Claims Credit on Iraq War

For all of the socialism and Islamist-appeasement of this administration, the one thing that has bothered me the most about this president (and candidate in 2007-08) is his screechingly perverse antiwar ideology and opportunism. Barack Obama was the most antiwar Senator in Congress throughout 2007 and in 2008 he tried to play both sides of the fence: After opposing the surge he then turned around and hailed its success, while insisting once more that the war was wrong. As noted in his New York Times op-ed in July 14, 2008, "My Plan for Iraq":

In the 18 months since President Bush announced the surge, our troops have performed heroically in bringing down the level of violence. New tactics have protected the Iraqi population, and the Sunni tribes have rejected Al Qaeda — greatly weakening its effectiveness.

But the same factors that led me to oppose the surge still hold true. The strain on our military has grown, the situation in Afghanistan has deteriorated and we’ve spent nearly $200 billion more in Iraq than we had budgeted. Iraq’s leaders have failed to invest tens of billions of dollars in oil revenues in rebuilding their own country, and they have not reached the political accommodation that was the stated purpose of the surge.

I do not hate this president. But he brings deep shame to the role of Commander-in-Chief. And that shame is seen one more time with this weekend's White House announcement on the end of U.S. combat operations in Iraq. IMHO, Obama just lies when he claims to be upholding the "sacred trust" of our fighting men and women. It takes more than winning an election to win that trust -- you have to earn it. That said, folks may have different emotions than I do. But I think we can agree that getting the Democrats out of power in 2010 and 2012 will begin the process of restoring American power in the world. I cringe at the thought of this sick ACORN-sleazeball presidential interloper directing the force and capabilities of the U.S. abroad. But time heals all wounds, and the electorate is rumbling:

UPDATE: Also Blogging ...

* American Glob, "Let Me Be Clear: Obama Deserves ZERO Credit For Iraq."

* Cold Fury, "Obama singlehandedly wins Iraq war, comes home victorious, pats wonderful self on back."

* Ed Morrissey, "Obama: Iraq begins and ends with I, I, I."

* Sister Toldjah, "Obama: “Iraq was all about me”."

Cassadee Pope

Of Hey Monday:

She's a sweetie:

David Beamer, Father of Flight 93 Hero Todd Beamer, Condemns Ground Zero Victory Mosque

Via Weasel Zippers:

Alveda King, Niece of Martin Luther King Jr., Speaks on Anniversary of 'I Have a Dream' Speech

This is going to explode leftist heads like a nuclear detonation.

At Gateway Pundit, "CROWD ROARS at Restoring Honor Rally as MLK’s Niece Alveda King Declares: “I Too Have a Dream!” (Video)."

And at ABC News, "Alveda King Speaks at Glenn Beck's DC Rally":

On the 47th anniversary of her uncle's historic "I Have a Dream" speech on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial, politician and activist Alveda King has joined conservative commentator Glenn Beck at the same spot to bring people together in paying tribute to America's soldiers and "restoring honor" to America.

King, the niece of civil rights activist Martin Luther King, Jr. and daughter of his brother activist A. D. King, is currently the director of African-American outreach at the pro-life group Priests for Life and has recently stepped into the spotlight after several appearances on Beck's radio program.

"I am attending this rally to help reclaim America," she told "Good Morning America's" Ron Claiborne today from Capitol Hill. "I'm joining Glenn to talk about faith, hope, charity, honor. Those are things that America needs to reclaim. Our children need to remember to love each other how to honor each other, their parents, God and their neighbors. I agree with Glenn on all of those principles. So that's why I'm here. For me it's principles over politics."

King, who served as a Democrat in the Georgia House of Representatives from 1979 to 1981, was a keynote speaker at today's non-partisan rally, which also featured speeches from Beck and Sarah Palin.

Throughout her career King has courted controversy as an advocate for the pro-life movement. After having two abortions herself, King began speaking publicly, often at college campuses, about abortion issues. In 1996 she publicly condemned her aunt Coretta Scott King's support of abortion rights.

Earlier this month King grabbed headlines when she equated gay marriage with genocide.

"It is statistically proven that the strongest institution that guarantees procreation and continuity of the generations is marriage between one man and one woman," King said at an Atlanta rally. "We don't want genocide. We don't want to destroy the sacred institution of marriage."

King brushed off criticism that Beck was dishonoring her uncle's legacy by hosting a rally on the anniversary of his most famous speech, stating that the rally is about faith, honor and love, principles that her family has supported.

"My daddy, Rev. A.D. King, my granddaddy, Martin Luther King, Senior -- we are a family of faith, hope and love. And that's why I'm here today," King said. "Glenn says there is one human race, I agree with him. We are not here to divide. I'm about unity. That's why I'm here, and I want to honor my uncle today."

While speaking in front of tens of thousands today in DC, King said that she hopes that white privilege will become human privilege and that America will soon repent of the sin of racism and return itself to honor.

Related: The low-ball crowd estimates are coming in, "Glenn Beck Rally Attracts Estimated 87,000" (via Memeorandum). But see Glenn Reynolds, who reports much larger turnout.

Nation's Capital 'Jammed With Freedom Loving Patriots'

Tweets Amanda Carpenter:

More photos at Instapundit and Weasel Zippers. Michelle will be linking pics throughout the day, and she has this:

We’re hearing a lot about people criticizing the timing of the event, calling it insensitive for having the rally on the anniversary of Dr. King’s speech — but since most of this criticism is coming from people who are calling critics of the ground zero area mosque over-sensitive, let’s move on.

And heads continue to explode at the audacity of Glenn Beck and thousands of patriots marching to rescue liberty and the civil rights legacy. All Steve Benen can do is screech: "hate-filled demagoguery."

Plus, at ABC News, "Sarah Palin at Glenn Beck's Rally: 'Dr. King Would Be So Proud'."

Obama Pisses on Remains of the Fallen: Administration Drops Military Commission in USS Cole Bomber Trial

KICKIN' AND SCREAMIN' has the big picture, "BLOOMBERG AND OBAMA RUB SALT IN AMERICA’S WOUNDS."

But check Andrew McCarthy, former Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, "Obama Administration Halts Commission Trial Against Cole Bomber":

It’s a sleepy Friday in late August, the president is on another vacation, Congress is out of town, no one is paying much attention. What better time for the Obama administration to pull the plug, once again, on military commissions? This time, it has halted the case of top al-Qaeda operative Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri, who was to be prosecuted by a military court for the Cole bombing. The Washington Post report is here, and Jen Rubin has thoughts at Contentions.

None of this is terribly surprising. Prosecuting the Cole case by military commission sticks in the Left’s craw because it shows the incoherence of the Obama/Holder position. They want to treat the war like a crime and endow our enemies with all the rights and advantages of civilian courts; yet, they went military in the Cole case, despite the fact that there is a pending Justice Department civilian indictment addressing that attack. There can be only one explanation for that: they are afraid the case against Nashiri is weak and might not hold up under (slightly) more exacting civilian court due process. That is, the Obama/Holder position is not principled — for all their “rule of law” malarkey, they are willing to go where they have the best chance to win. But there were no military commissions when the Cole was bombed, so what is the basis for trying it militarily? Answer: the 9/11 attacks and the ensuing war . . . except the Left doesn’t accept that it’s a war and the administration wants to prosecute the 9/11 plotters in civilian court. None of it makes any sense.

See also Newsmax, "USS Cole Bomber May Get Civilian Trial." And don't miss AoSHQ, "Obama administration shelves prosecution of alleged USS Cole bomber."

Summer Reading

Here's some of the books I'm savoring (Geller, Thompson); rereading (9/11 Commission); just starting (Emerson, Gwynne); or finishing up (Markos Moulitsas, on whom I'll have more):

Crush the Progressive Spirit

Here's Markos Moulitsas writing on the eve of the presidential election, Oct 12, 2008:

I've been making the case the last couple of weeks that we can't just focus on winning in November, but that we have an imperative to take advantage of a historic opportunity to break the conservative movement's backs and crush their spirits.

How's that working out for ya?

Broken backs? Spirits crushed?

Not so much. See Peter Berkowitz, at WSJ, "The Death of Conservatism Was Greatly Exaggerated" (via Memeorandum):

In late 2008 and early 2009, in the wake of Mr. Obama's meteoric ascent, the idea that conservatism would enjoy any sort of revival in the summer of 2009 would have seemed to demoralized conservatives too much to hope for. To leading lights on the left, it would have appeared absolutely outlandish.

In late October 2008, New Yorker staff writer George Packer reported "the complete collapse of the four-decade project that brought conservatism to power in America." Two weeks later, the day after Mr. Obama's election, Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne proclaimed "the end of a conservative era" that had begun with the rise of Ronald Reagan.

And in February 2009, New York Times Book Review and Week in Review editor Sam Tanenhaus, writing in The New Republic, declared that "movement conservatism is exhausted and quite possibly dead." Mr. Tanenhaus even purported to discern in the new president "the emergence of a president who seems more thoroughly steeped in the principles of Burkean conservatism than any significant thinker or political figure on the right."

Messrs. Packer, Dionne and Tanenhaus underestimated what the conservative tradition rightly emphasizes, which is the high degree of unpredictability in human affairs. They also conflated the flagging fortunes of George W. Bush's Republican Party with conservatism's popular appeal. Most importantly, they failed to grasp the imperatives that flow from conservative principles in America, and the full range of tasks connected to preserving freedom.

Progressives like to believe that conservatism's task is exclusively negative—resisting the centralizing and expansionist tendency of democratic government. And that is a large part of the conservative mission. Progressives see nothing in this but hard-hearted indifference to inequality and misfortune, but that is a misreading.

What conservatism does is ask the question avoided by progressive promises: at what expense? In the aftermath of the global economic crisis of 2008, Western liberal democracies have been increasingly forced to come to grips with their propensity to live beyond their means.

It is always the task for conservatives to insist that money does not grow on trees, that government programs must be paid for, and that promising unaffordable benefits is reckless, unjust and a long-term threat to maintaining free institutions.

But conservatives also combat government expansion and centralization because it can undermine the virtues upon which a free society depends. Big government tends to crowd out self-government—producing sluggish, selfish and small-minded citizens, depriving individuals of opportunities to manage their private lives and discouraging them from cooperating with fellow citizens to govern their neighborhoods, towns, cities and states.

Yes, so let's crush progressivism in November. Let's break Markos Moulitsas' back, and crush the progressives' spirits.

NewsBusted — Justin Bieber Tweets Digits of Obsessive Fan!

Via Theo Spark:

Rule 5 Penelope Cruz — Where Have You Been Edition??!!

Man, I'm slacking!

I've got to get back to some regular Penelope Cruz blogging! I'm sure Linkmaster Smith will agree!

Don't Cry For Me, Next Door Neighbour...

Tubthumping, the ultimate one-hit wonder (although the band's been around for years):

Does Islam Suck?

Via David Swindle:

Sharia Compliant

Via No Sheeples Here!

Increasing Youth Participation in Politics

During classes this semester I've been asking students if they voted in the June primary. The response hasn't been overwhelming. That's one more reason I enjoy listening to young people like this gentleman:

Cultural Sensitivity Training for the Classroom

Look, I teach assimilation and the American political culture. We've got loads of multicultural curriculum in the classrooms. What we don't need is the radical reconquista agenda (combined with the new black nationalism that screams F*** YOU CRACKER!).

But hardline anti-assimilation groups keep escalating the agitation, and educational bureaucracies keep caving:

Lindsay Lohan Celebrity Rule 5

The paparazzi are in heaven now that Lindsay Lohan's out of rehab.

American Perspective should be working on some fabulous Rule 5 material, and Linkmaster Smith will round it all up: