Andrew Sullivan on Failure of DADT Repeal

I rarely read Sullivan anymore. He's an afterthought, really. But clicking on his link right now at Memeorandum I find an interesting bit of drama, frankly. The video's a year old, but it's a change of pace worth sharing at the least. He's certainly articulate, not to mention passionate. "The gay community has been betrayed by its leadership," he warns. I favor repeal, so that puts me on the same side as Sully on this issue. I probably can't put in another good word for him, however. So, for what it's worth, "McCain Wins On DADT":

I think this could be a huge deal for the relationship between gay voters and the Democratic party. Over 75 percent of the public wants the ban ended, and yet even when the Democrats control both Houses and have a president opposed to the policy, they failed to end it in two years. Why? Because, sadly, it was not a real priority; and because the main lobby group, the Human Rights Campaign, is so enmeshed in the Democratic party establishment, it has no clout at all.

RELATED: Joe.My.God is alleging that a staffer in Senator Saxby Chambliss' office left a comment at the blog saying "all faggots must die." Obviously not good, if true, although something feels just too neat about this story, and considering how far lefties will go to destroy conservatives, I'm waiting 'till all the facts are in.

'We’re going to vote on the DREAM Act. It's only a question of when'

Michelle's been live-blogging the congressional action. That's Harry Reid's lament at the end of the day. Below is Sharron Angle's new ad:

RELATED: "Republicans stall immigration Dream Act."

Senate Republicans Block Repeal of DADT

And Lady Gaga's not pleased.

At Politics Daily, "Republicans Block Repeal of Military's 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' Policy":

Senate Republicans blocked the Defense Department bill Tuesday, objecting to gay rights and immigration language in the annual legislation that sets policies and spending levels for the Pentagon. Majority Democrats, needing 60 votes to break a filibuster and begin consideration of the bill, fell short 43 to 56. Arkansas Democrats Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor joined all 40 Republicans in voting no.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid also voted against the bill, but for procedural reasons. Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) missed the roll call.

GOP senators said two controversial additions -- language to begin the repeal of the ban on gays serving openly in the military and a last-minute amendment based on the DREAM Act to give young illegal immigrants a path to citizenship if they complete two years of college or serve that long in the military -- made the bill impossible to support.

"In Senator Reid and the Democrats' zeal to get re-elected, they've used a cynical political ploy to try to galvanize and energize their base," said Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) the top Republicans on the Senate Armed Services Committee. "In the case of the DREAM Act, it's the Hispanic vote...The repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell is an appeal to the gay and lesbian base. I've been around here a long time and I have never seen such a cynical use of the needs of our men and women in the military."

RELATED: "Lady Gaga and Harry Reid's Twitter Lovefest on 'Don't Ask, Don't Tell'."

Ground Zero Imam's Group Trained New York Times Mosque Reporter

Surprise. Surprise.

At NewsBusters:

A New York Times reporter, who has co-authored several fawning articles on the Ground Zero mosque, previously attended a media training program run by the mosque's organizer, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, according to the group's website.

The journalist, Sharaf Mowjood, participated in an April, 2009 media training program led by Rauf's American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA), reported the Investigative Project on Terrorism on Sept. 20. Rauf founded ASMA in 1997, and currently serves as the group's CEO.

Mowjood's first article on the Ground Zero mosque - a glowing, 1,200-word piece titled "Muslim Prayers and Renewal Near Ground Zero" - was co-authored with Ralph Blumenthal in December, 2009. All eight of the sources cited in the piece said they approved of the Ground Zero project or lauded its leader Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf.

Mowjood was also a contributing reporter to a similarly sympathetic piece on the mosque on Aug. 11, as well as a flattering front-page profile on Rauf that ran in the paper on Aug. 22.

And get this:

In addition to his ties with ASMA, Mowjood also held a government lobbying position at the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) up until at least March of 2008. CAIR, which calls itself a "grassroots civil rights and advocacy group," has come under fire in the past for its alleged ties to international terrorist organizations.

Excerpts from Mowjood's work could possibly pass as press releases for groups like CAIR or ASMA. His Times articles were extremely favorable toward Rauf and the Ground Zero mosque.

I'd be understated to say I'm bothered.

But what can you do but just keep fighting. I mean, wow.

Bristol Palin on Dancing With the Stars

So Bristol did pretty well last night?

Los Angeles Times has a bit on that, and Robert Stacy McCain let's it rip like no one else: "Levi Johnston is a total loser who’s never gonna have another chance at anybody half as fine as Bristol Palin!"

Talking Points Memo Defends Sexist Harry Reid's Announcement of Kirsten Gillibrand as 'Hottest Member' of the Senate

I couldn't pass this up.

The main story's at Politico, with a lengthy thread now building at Memeorandum. The best part is how the lefties are all over the place on this. An outraged Melissa McEwan slams the Democratic Majority Leader, for example:

Oh, well, as long as he praised her for her work, then it's totally fine that he SEXUALLY OBJECTIFIED A SITTING US SENATOR.

The Democrats want my support, my money, and my votes. They constantly assert to be the party that values women and women's issues. And yet their Senate Majority Leader publicly humiliates a fellow Democrat by commenting on her "hotness" at a fundraising event, and then sends out his spokesperson to argue with a straight fucking face that it's not inappropriate.

I just...wow.

I probably wouldn't put it in so many words, but I doubt I could get away with calling some of my female colleagues the "hottest" members of the department. Thus it's pretty hilarious that TPM's going to bat for Senator Reid:

It should be noted that Gillibrand was in fact recently declared number three on The Hill's Top 50 Most Beautiful People list -- and neither of the top two are members of the Senate. So logically speaking, this would make her the hottest member of the Senate according to a major Washington publication.

So objectifying New York's junior senator as a "hottie" is totally cool then. Hey, a "major Washington publication" says she's hot, so let's just follow the drill at a party fundraiser. Got it.

Meanwhile, Weasel Zippers removes the, er, blinders:

Change! Health Insurers Drop Coverage for Children Ahead of ObamaCare

At The Hill (via Memeorandum):

Health plans in at least four states have announced they're dropping children's coverage just days ahead of new rules created by the healthcare reform law, according to the liberal grassroots group Health Care for America Now (HCAN).

The new healthcare law forbids insurers from turning down children with pre-existing conditions starting Thursday, one of several reforms Democrats are eager to highlight this week as they try to build support for the law ahead of the mid-term elections. But news of insurers dropping their plans as a result of the new law has thrown a damper on that strategy and prompted fierce push-back from the administration's allies at HCAN.

The announcement could lead to higher costs for some parents who are buying separate coverage for themselves and their children at lower cost than the family coverage that's available to them.

And the HCAN thugs are mad? Costs drive behavior. Businesses want to stay in business. The administration's commie-care health plan is driving firms out of the market. Simple as that.

More details at WaPo, "Major health insurers to stop offering new child-only policies."

Hamas Video Threatens Gilad Shalit

At Jerusalem Post, "Schalit family attacks Hamas posting of new Youtube clip" (via Memeorandum):

Family denounces Hamas's "ongoing war crime;" video shows Schalit surrounded by two masked men, concludes with sound of gunshots.

In response the video, the Schalit family released a statement on Monday attacking Hamas's actions. The statement read, "[We are] troubled that instead of worrying about the hundreds of Palestinian prisoners jailed in Israel, Hamas leaders have chosen to continue holding Gilad, our son, captive as a hostage for their political aspirations, an act which is an ongoing war crime according to international law."

The statement continued, "In addition, Hamas leaders in Gaza and Damascus are not hesitant to add, and even take a new approach, to the psychological warfare of the lowest level against the Schalit family, instead of respecting international law and conventions."

Hamas posted a video of kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Schalit on Youtube on Monday, suggesting he would be killed if a deal was not soon reached.

In the animated video, two masked men are shown standing on either side of Gilad Schalit in a dark room, with one of them holding an AK-47 assualt rifle.

At the end of the 24-second video, gun shots are heard as the movie goes black and the words "Is the mission completed?" are seen written in Arabic.

In response the video, the Schalit family released a statement saying that, "The Schalit family is troubled that instead of worrying about the hundreds of Palestinian prisoners jailed in Israel, some of which could have been at home long ago, Hamas leaders have chosen to continue holding Gilad, our son, captive as a hostage for their political aspirations, an act which is an ongoing war crime according to international law." The statement continued, "In addition, Hamas leaders in Gaza and Damascus are not hesitant to add, and even take a new approach, to the psychological warfare of the lowest level against the Schalit family, instead of respecting international law and conventions."

Jawa Report has more, "Facebook Jihad: KILL A JEW DAY/JihadTube: KILL A JEW DAY (Hamas/Galid Shalit)."

'Sanctimonious Bigots' – Leftist Professors and Double Standards

Sanctimonious?

I doubt that's a strong enough condemnation, but hey, there's no anti-Semitism on the left, right? There are two links, at Beltway Confidential, "Prof calls fellow academics ‘sanctimonious bigots’," and FrontPage Mag, "Leftist Professors and Double Standards."

After Dr. Fred Gottheil found an anti-Israel petition signed by "900 Academics" he decided to conduct a similar project: launching a " Statement of Concern," an academic petition "expressing concern about human rights violations in the Muslim Middle East, such as honor killing, wife-beating, female genital mutilation, and violence against gays and lesbians ..." Professor Gottheil, who teaches economics at the University of Illinois, was completely ignored. He didn't hear from anyone. He chalks up the double-standard to the usual suspects: anti-imperialism and not a little bit of anti-Semitism. And he concludes at the FrontPage interview:

The academic leftists are caught in an ideologically discriminatory trap of their own making. It turns out that with all their professing of principle, they are sanctimonious bigots at heart. And some are so obsessed about Israel that they would undermine their own self interest. Witness the faculty in gender studies who signed the anti-Israel petition but didn’t sign my “Statement of Concern” which is about discrimination of women, gays, and lesbians in the Muslim Middle East. Sort of pathetic, actually.

Confronting the Ideology of Hate

See Andrew Marcus, "Andrew Breitbart Forces President Obama’s Protesters to Fold Up Shop" (via Memeorandum):

Chris Coons' New Attack Ad On Christine O'Donnell

Via AoSHQ:

Dilma Rousseff, Former Marxist Guerrilla, Set to Become Brazil's President

Yeah, because there are no communists anymore, well, not the "bad" ones, at least.

From London's Telegraph, (via Theo Spark):

She is a former Marxist guerrilla whose organisation once stole $2.5 million from the safe of the governor of São Paulo.

Locked up and tortured by the dictatorship which ran Brazil during the 1970s, she was once branded by a prosecutor as the "Joan of Arc of subversion".

Yet in less than a month's time Dilma Rousseff is on course to become Brazil's first woman president, entrusted with running the largest and fastest-growing economy in Latin America ....

For someone who was once an active member of an armed Marxist group, fighting to overthrow the dictatorship, it is quite a change.

The daughter of a middle class Bulgarian immigrant and a schoolteacher in Belo Horizonte, southeastern Brazil, she realised upon leaving a privileged school that the world was "not a place for debutantes".

She was 16 when Brazil fell prey to a military coup in 1964 and like many was soon drawn into the world of underground opposition.

Introduced to Marxist politics by the man who became her first husband, Claudio Galeno, she helped build up one of the guerrilla organisations trying to overthrow the government - at one point spending three years in prison.

After democracy was restored she had a daughter, Paula, now a 33-year-old lawyer, with her second husband Carlos Araújo, a revolutionary leader who had met Fidel Castro and Che Guevara. She trained as an economist she entered conventional left-wing politics and professional public service.

In 2001, by now divorced again, she joined Lula's Workers' Party and her experience in the country's energy ministry quickly impressed the new president. A cabinet job as energy minister followed before she was appointed his chief of staff in 2005.

But many have questioned how she can be running for the presidency.

Critics say she was simply the last senior Lula crony standing since one aide after another was forced to quit in scandals over alleged slush funds, bribery or blackmail - including, last week, her own former aide who had followed in her footsteps as Lula's chief of staff.

Her lumbering speaking style and lack of personal charisma do not make her an obvious candidate and - in what was seen as a thinly-veiled attempt to protect Ms Rousseff - the government made it illegal for television and radio broadcasters to make fun of the candidates.

'I've been told that I voted for a man who was going to change things in a meaningful way for the middle class, and I'm waiting, sir, I'm waiting.'

Man, that's harsh. And it's a black woman who voted for The One back in the day. She says she's "exhausted of defending you." Brutal. The story's at New York Times, via Sister Toldjah (and Memeorandum):

Anti-Intellectualism and the Marxist Idea

I had a brief exchange the other day with Brendan of BJKeefe blog. I don't normally go over there, but his link showed up in my Sitemeter and I found a post suggesting that someone should "take the shovel away from Donald Douglas." Brendon apparently thinks leftist demonization is a barrel of monkeys, and as I disabled comments to avoid the abuse, Brenden writes: "Nothing like the wingnutosphere's love for the frank and open exchange of ideas!" Check the post for what follows. Actually, it turns out Brendan's not so intellectually prepared for the "open exchange of ideas." For starters, I left one of the Sadly No! sample comments from my blog: "... you're nothing but a bag of meat and your thoughts and desires are meaningless and you are a worthless piece of" shit. Sure. And I guess that's quality high-octane exchange for lefties. So I respond to Brendan, "So you wanna debate, bonejobkeefe? Bring it on." And what's he do? Runs from debate!

Thanks also for the invitation to debate. Perhaps someday we shall. I do not think it likely in this case, however. Take whatever admiration you have for David Horowitz and multiply it by -100, and that will approximate how I feel about him. On this matter, to borrow from someone whose name I have forgotten, sorry, but our views of reality do not overlap sufficiently to make discussion possible.

For the record, my own sense of Horowitz is this: If in the past decade he's said anything beyond "Yes, waitress, I'll have some more coffee, please" that isn't utter lunacy, it's escaped my notice. One does not engage with so determined a conspiracy theorist. One simply abandons him to his milk crate at Speakers' Corner and seeks more worthwhile voices elsewhere.

I would say in particular that this phrase from your blurb of his book -- "the freakish nihilism of the radical left" -- doesn't even make sense in light of what this book of his is supposed to be about: "the Left has continued to advance its socialist schemes …" Stipulating for the moment that We have such an Agenda, it can hardly be said to be nihilist to have one -- to seek to advance a different social order (or to foist one upon you, if you insist) is not at all the same thing as wanting to do away with any and every social order, just for the sake of destruction.

Two things of interest right away: (1) The complete dismissal of David Horowitz's ideals as sheer lunacy, and (2) the rejection of my use of the phrase "freakish nihilism" to describe the ideological agenda of the left. There's a word for this: Anti-intellectualism. And that stance marinates in a devilish sauce of hard left-wing hubris and deceit. It's further soaked in hatred, for to hate one's enemies is to categorize them as beyond the pale of reason and civilization. Perhaps there's some psychology at work for Brendan. Someone as esteemed as David Horowitz, who lived through --- in direct participation --- all the cultural revolts of the last couple of generations, is ridiculed as a crazed milk crate screamer? Brendan certainly thinks he's got it all figured out. But I doubt he's actually read the book in question, Horowitz's The Politics of Bad Faith. I respond at the post, in any case:

I guess we have nothing to talk about then, since with the exception of Melanie Phillips, I can't think of someone more penetratingly clear on the left's ideological campaign of death and destruction. (And you're down with that, apparently.)

And seriously, you should at least read the book (cited at the link below) before you blow off "nihilism." The left has recycled Soviet Marxism-Leninism, giving a pass to the murder of 100s of millions. When those apologies for totalitarianism --- what leftist refer to as "actually existing socialism" --- become a defense of a failed ideology, all you have left is utter nothingness, hence nihilism.

Now note something here: This is substantive. There are ideas on the table, postulates to consider. It doesn't matter who's producing them. A hypothesis is just out there, to be evaluated. And how does Brendan respond? With more anti-intellectualism. My comment was caught in the Blogger spam filter, and Brendan takes that as a launch pad for some wise cracks, and then the non-response:

I have to say, now that I have restored your comment of 1:57 PM, September 18, 2010, maybe I am not completely surprised that it got flagged as spam. Because it sure does read just like the wingnut chain emails one sees on Snopes, for example. Are you really a college professor? At an accredited school? And not, say, teaching math or something?

Anyway, our discussion so far:

You: Let's debate! Let's talk about David Horowitz and how great he is!

Me: There, we have nothing to talk about.

You: Let's talk about David Horowitz and how great he is! No, how he's greater than great!!!1! Because left nihilist leftist soviet Marxist death evil left effete dark side BLARGH BLARGH blargh …

Me: Nice milk crate.

And so, David Horowitz, and myself, apparently, are out standing on a corner, on milk boxes, raving like alleged lunatics? This is what Brendan calls debate. As I said, concepts are in play here. Ideas have consequences. Why is it that Democrats utter nary a peep when declared Stalinist ideologues wind up gaining access to the top levels of the Obama administration? These same folks, including many Democrats in Congress --- including dozens who have open affiliations with the Democratic Socialist Party of America --- call for and implement a Castro-style healthcare regime in the U.S. Of course, these people blow off the mass murder and desolation of the such communist thugs. It's not what they do, it's the ideals of humanity and transcendence that count! And thus with Brendan, to contemplate the nothingness in the wasteland of leftist neo-communist ideology is to scream "BLAARRGGHHH!!"

Yeah. And how about that "exchange of ideas" Brendan was pumping up? Not so much, eh?

But that's not all. Brendan tells me to "grow up." No kidding:

I was not typing "Blargh" in response to your effort to twist the definition of nihilism to fit your own preconceived notions. It was in response to everything else.

Seriously, Donald, be your age. Do you really think you're going to interest me in any sort of discussion where you start off by howling how everything Left is irredeemably evil? I'd just as soon discuss spherical geometry with a Flat Earther.

This is pure dismissal. It's definitely not intelligent discussion. Check the link to the post. I'm not going to waste more time on someone who is that closed-minded, at least not at that entry. What you see here is the notion that leftist ideology is UNCHALLENGEABLE. There's nothing that can penetrate the hard-shell of neo-communist ideology. Anyone with a different idea is literally a "Flat Earther."

Truly amazing. Meanwhile, these people and their grand schemes for a nationalization of the U.S. health delivery system under ObamaCare socialism are running for the hills. It's not working. Costs are not going down. Firms are responding by not hiring, precisely at the same time that unemployment keeps rising. It's statism that's failing, and the idea that state planning --- THE CENTRAL COMPONENT OF ALL SOCIALIST IDEOLOGY --- is proving just one more disaster rammed down American throats by the mandarins of the Democrat-Socialist Party in Washington.

I don't know how old Brendan is. He is idealistic. Perhaps the real world will intrude sometime in his life, and he'll learn to appreciate an actual argument for what it is an not the twisting evasion of some wingnut hokus pokus.

In any case, sometimes it's necessary to actually read the writings of your political enemies. (I didn't love wading through Markos Moulitsas' American Taliban, but I don't begrudge him for writing it. I know exactly where he stands now, and I'm all the more determined to resist him.) Perhaps Brendan might actually exhibit a little bit of personal maturity and actually attempt to engage some of these ideas, for example, this passage on Page 57 of The Politics of Bad Faith:

Totalitarianism is the possession of reality by a political Idea --- the Idea of socialist kingdom of heaven on earth; the redemption of humanity by political force. To radical believers this Idea is so beautiful it is like God Himself. It provides the meaning of a radical life. This is the solution that makes everything possible; the noble end that justifies the regrettable means. Belief in the kingdom of socialist heaven is faith that can transform vice into virtue, lies into truth, evil into good. In this revolutionary religion, the Way, the Truth, and the Life of salvation lie not with God above, but with men below --- ruthless, brutal, venal men --- on whom faith confers the power of gods. There is no mystery in the transformation of the socialist paradise into Communist hell: liberation theology is a satanic creed.

I'll have more later. Maybe tomorrow, even.

Obama's Assault on the Tea Parties

Love that Drudge Report graphic. And the link goes to NYT, "Obama Aides Weigh Bid to Tie the G.O.P. to the Tea Party." (Via Gateway Pundit and Memeorandum.) I'm reminded of the debates we have on crowd size whenever there's some big tea party event. Remember the Glenn Beck rally? Check the links here and here to see how invested folks were in attempting to minimize the significance of the event. Steve Benen, one of those seeking to minimize the heft of the tea parties, wrote on August 28th, the day of Glenn Beck rally at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial:

Beck and his minions don't quite appreciate why they're an embarrassment to themselves, and that's a shame. They can't comprehend why King was a giant, and Beck is a small, sad cynic. They have no idea why America is so much better and stronger than their hate-filled demagoguery.

And now, the administration is planning an ad blitz to sow a campaign of disinformation against the tea parties? So much for that America that is "so much better and stronger." This is the sound of abject fear:

President Obama’s political advisers, looking for ways to help Democrats and alter the course of the midterm elections in the final weeks, are considering a range of ideas, including national advertisements, to cast the Republican Party as all but taken over by Tea Party extremists, people involved in the discussion said.

White House and Congressional Democratic strategists are trying to energize dispirited Democratic voters over the coming six weeks, in hopes of limiting the party’s losses and keeping control of the House and Senate. The strategists see openings to exploit after a string of Tea Party successes split Republicans in a number of states, culminating last week with developments that scrambled Senate races in Delaware and Alaska.

“We need to get out the message that it’s now really dangerous to re-empower the Republican Party,” said one Democratic strategist who has spoken with White House advisers but requested anonymity to discuss private strategy talks.

Obama, Netanyahu, and the Perils of Peace Talks

From Caroline Glick:

The current flurry of diplomatic activity is deeply disturbing. It isn't simply that the Obama administration has strong-armed Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu into participating in diplomatic theater with the PLO whose successful completion will leave Israel weaker and less defensible. It isn't merely that the newest "peace process" diverts our leadership's attention away from Iran and its nuclear weapons program.

The most disturbing aspect of the latest round of the diplomatic kabuki is that Israel's leaders and Israel's staunch friends in the US are enthusiastically participating in this dangerous project.

True, Netanyahu is in an unenviable position, situated as he is between US President Barack Obama's rock and hard place. Instead of standing up to this hostile American leader, Netanyahu is desperately seeking a magical concession to get Obama off his back.

Netanyahu's preference for appeasement is both ironic and destructive. It is ironic because he has turned to appeasement at the very moment that the notion it is possible to appease Obama has self-destructed.

Ten months ago Netanyahu found what he hoped was a magic concession. Capitulating to Obama, the Jewish state's leader prohibited all Jewish building in Judea and Samaria for a period of 10 months. This unprecedented move to discriminate against Jews was supposed to get Obama off Netanyahu's back. It didn't.

Obama's public demand this week that Netanyahu extend the abrogation of Jewish property rights shows he will not be appeased.

There is no magic concession. Every concession to Obama - like every Israeli concession to the Arabs - is considered both permanent and a starting point for further concessions.

And so Netanyahu concedes more. Not only has he effectively agreed to extend the discriminatory ban on Jewish rights. Netanyahu has moved on to even more outrageous concessions.

According to the Lebanese media, Netanyahu has agreed to surrender large swathes of the Golan Heights to Iran's Arab puppet, Syrian dictator Bashar Assad. According to the reports, Netanyahu empowered Obama's emissary George Mitchell to present his offer to Assad in Damascus and even furnished Mitchell with detailed maps of his proposed surrender.

If Netanyahu thinks that this move will diminish US pressure for a full withdrawal from Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria, he is in for an unpleasant surprise. Mitchell made this clear at his press conference Wednesday. Mitchell said the "two tracks can be complementary and mutually beneficial if we can proceed to a comprehensive peace on more than one track."

In plain English that means that the administration feels perfectly comfortable pressuring Israel to surrender to the Syrians and to the Palestinians at the same time.

RTWT.

Reagan Responds

Via Far Left Coast:

Truths About the Political Left

Revealed by the debate over Ground Zero, via Dennis Mitzner:

The left’s contempt for the majority of Americans is an indication of its soul. The left has abandoned the principles of universal values at the expense of defending and tolerating the indefensible and the intolerable. It is now an insular mass movement which has become largely blind to its own failures.

RTWT.

O'Donnell Responds

At Fox News (via Michelle):

Delaware Republican Senate nominee Christine O’Donnell responded to old clips that surfaced over the weekend where she said she had once “dabbled in witchcraft,” clarifying at a GOP picnic in Delaware Sunday, “I was in high school, how many of you didn’t hang out with questionable folks in high school? But no, There’s been no witchcraft since, if there was, Karl Rove would be a supporter.”

Leftist Blogger Equates Christine O'Donnell to Taliban Murderers

There's a post at Down With Tyranny! that's nothing but outrageous. It's not new, since I've reviewed this before, but to consider the thought that anything Christine O'Donnell's ever said is remotely as dangerous as the ideology of jihadi extermination is actually sickening. But this is how the left characterizes its enemies, and the MFM just greases the skids:

The teabaggers, Republicans, republikooks, or whatever we're supposed to call our culture's wackjob element these days are always fine ones to talk about things like "personal liberty" and "taking away our freedoms" but, the Republican nominee for senator from Delaware (who is also an evolution denier) has given us a quick peep at what the Repug set have in store for us in the future if they yank the power of Congress away from the Democrats. They always push it further and further and further. For the Republicans, it's no abortions, no condoms, no birth control of any kind. The kook running against Alan Grayson is opposed to divorces. Their next frontier? No masturbation! No wanking! Will stiff prison sentences be proposed? Who will be checking? Will this require some new "big government" agency with a spanking new building? What will outside columns and the statue in the lobby look like? Expect a rise in juvenile crime. And, of course, Republicans will soon be requiring all women to wear burkas (but don't you dare mention The American Taliban which is so mean to rightists). Who needs crazy Muslim fundamentals when we have plenty of crazy Republican fundamentals right here, right now. Made in America!

Digby thinks it's all hilarious. And God forgive me, but somehow I don't think I'd be bothered to see leftists in these videos. Perhaps they'd take this stuff more seriously if they took the place of folks like Daniel Pearl: