Republicans Test the Waters for 2012 Presidential Race

At LAT, "Republican Hopefuls Lay Groundwork for 2012":

By one measure, the 2012 presidential campaign is off to a slow start.

No major candidate has officially jumped in, unlike four years ago, when nine White House hopefuls had declared their bids by the end of January 2007. Mindful that the first nominating contests in Iowa and New Hampshire might be pushed back a month, and wary of an anti-incumbent mood among voters that could make life difficult for a front-runner, potential Republican candidates are staying on the sidelines for now.

But by another measure — money — the campaign is in high gear.

President Obama's potential challengers are busy cultivating donors, recruiting staff and testing campaign messages — conducting proxy campaigns that illuminate the approach they would take as White House hopefuls.

Some are building sizeable war chests through so-called leadership political action committees, which can collect as much as $5,000 per contributor for use in political activities not directly related to an official presidential candidacy. Others are using private groups to raise money and promote causes that may figure in their future campaigns.

Because the top likely contenders are not federal officeholders, they can raise money through state PACs, including those that have few or no limits on corporate and individual contributions.

By waiting to register with the Federal Election Commission as presidential candidates, they can raise money in large-dollar amounts and also keep lucrative television gigs that they would have to relinquish as candidates.

"The way the system is set up, it permits people to go around and spend some time effectively testing the waters," said E. Mark Braden, an election law attorney who served as general counsel to the Republican National Committee. "On the whole, so long as prospective candidates avoid saying, 'I'm running,' or some synonym of that, the [Federal Election Commission] has pretty much avoided getting involved in that gray area."

More at the link.

The article discusses the progress of the top-tier likely candidates, especially Mitt Romney and Sarah Palin. There's also discussion of Pawlenty, Barbour, and Gingrich, none of whom I expect to do well. Mike Huckabee is mentioned only in passing, although I expect he'll be top-tier, and by the end of the primaries will likely be one of the last three standing, along with Romney and Palin.

RELATED: "Romney Wins New Hampshire Republican Party Committee Straw Poll" (via Memeorandum). And at The Other McCain, "Herman Cain Tops Santorum, Christie, Daniels, Pence, Huckabee in N.H."

Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession? Or Just Too Pro-Business?

The main story's at LAT, "Obama Touts U.S. Innovation in State of the Union Preview." And at NYT, "Obama Urges U.S. Competitiveness Ahead of Speech."

What's interesting about this is how progressives are quick out of the gate attacking the agenda. You've got Robert Reich, who was President Clinton's Secretary of Labor, with "American Competitiveness, and the President’s New Relationship with American Business." And by some really bizarre tricks of witchcraft, Emptywheel is able to turn Reich's attack on the agenda as a diatribe against the military industrial complex. Seriously. "“Competitiveness” Is Peace":

If we want to be competitive ... we have to stop wasting so much money on our war machine and instead invest it in our own country.

This, for want of a better phrase, is rank unadulterated bullshit.

That said, you gotta love Paul Krugman's piece, "Competitiveness." Krugman's mostly just agreeing with Robert Reich. That is, the attacks on Obama's agenda are mostly attacks on American business, which is the enemy of the progressive left. The administration is way too cozy with Wall Street and the big corporations like GE, and it drives lefties crazy. What's interesting is that Krugman links to his one-time classic article at Foreign Affairs, "Competitiveness: A Dangerous Obsession." Published in 1994, the piece was a big deal at the time, since it broke with the orthodoxy on the epic challenges of head-to-head competition with Japan. And the actual analysis is straightforward, that nations are not firms, and the problems of competitiveness arise from a range of factors beyond mere worker productivity, currency values, and high value-added manufacturing sectors. But I'll leave that to the economists (and Krugman was a respected economist on one time). What's so funny about Krugman is what a sexist troglodyte he is (or was back in the day). I'll never forget how he spoke of Laura D'Andrea Tyson as President Clinton's "Chairman" of the Council of Economic Advisors:

Most writers who worry about the issue at all have therefore tried to define competitiveness as the combination of favorable trade performance and something else. In particular, the most popular definition of competitiveness nowadays runs along the lines of the one given in Council of Economic Advisors Chairman Laura D'Andrea Tyson's Who's Bashing Whom?: competitiveness is "our ability to produce goods and services that meet the test of international competition while our citizens enjoy a standard of living that is both rising and sustainable." This sounds reasonable. If you think about it, however, and test your thoughts against the facts, you will find out that there is much less to this definition than meets the eye.

Laura Tyson is, of course, a woman. I guess that didn't occur to Krugman, or the editors at Foreign Affairs, for that matter. More recently, Christina Romer served as "Chair" to President Obama's Council of Economic Advisors. But by 2008 most media commentators spoke appropriately of Romer as the "chairwoman of Pres. Obama's Council of Economic Advisers."

My how times change.

It's good for a laugh, in any case. And big time radical progressives like Paul Krugman and Firedoglake's Marcy Wheeler come off looking like dolts one more time.

New York Times Whitewashes Marxist Revolutionary Frances Fox Piven

"I have considerable respect for non-violence, but I don’t treat it as inevitably a necessary rule ..."

That's the quote from Frances Fox Piven's discussion at the C-SPAN clip above.

Piven is a long-established Marxist revolutionary of the slow-burn academic variety. She's notorious for her longstanding call to break the American system through a revolt of the masses from below, called The Cloward-Piven Strategy.

But lately she's been aggressively promoting a more spontaneous form of violent unrest, massed street revolts to topple the American regime.

As reported a couple of weeks ago at The Blaze, "Frances Fox Piven Rings in The New Year By Calling for Violent Revolution":

She’s considered by many as the grandmother of using the American welfare state to implement revolution. Make people dependent on the government, overload the government rolls, and once government services become unsustainable, the people will rise up, overthrow the oppressive capitalist system, and finally create income equality. Collapse the system and create a new one. That‘s the simplified version of Frances Fox Piven’s philosophy originally put forth in the pages of The Nation in the 60s.

Now, as the new year ball drops, Piven is at it again, ringing in 2011 with renewed calls for revolution.

And see also Matthew Vadum's piece, "Marxist Frances Fox Piven Calls For a Violent Uprising Against the American System."

But you wouldn't know it from the New York Times, which has a piece this morning in the left's classic genre of disinformation and propaganda, "Spotlight From Glenn Beck Brings a CUNY Professor Threats":

On his daily radio and television shows, Glenn Beck has elevated once-obscure conservative thinkers onto best-seller lists. Recently, he has elevated a 78-year-old liberal academic to celebrity of a different sort, in a way that some say is endangering her life.

Frances Fox Piven, a City University of New York professor, has been a primary character in Mr. Beck’s warnings about a progressive take-down of America. Ms. Piven, Mr. Beck says, is responsible for a plan to “intentionally collapse our economic system.”

Her name has become a kind of shorthand for “enemy” on Mr. Beck’s Fox News Channel program, which is watched by more than 2 million people, and on one of his Web sites, The Blaze. This week, Mr. Beck suggested on television that she was an enemy of the Constitution.

Never mind that Ms. Piven’s radical plan to help poor people was published 45 years ago, when Mr. Beck was a toddler. Anonymous visitors to his Web site have called for her death, and some, she said, have contacted her directly via e-mail.

In response, a liberal nonprofit group, the Center for Constitutional Rights, wrote to the chairman of Fox News, Roger Ailes, on Thursday to ask him to put a stop to Mr. Beck’s “false accusations” about Ms. Piven.

“Mr. Beck is putting Professor Piven in actual physical danger of a violent response,” the group wrote.

Notice that? The classic propaganda whitewash. The country's unofficial newspaper of record is mounting a disinformation campaign against Glenn Beck. The MFM has been widely rebuked for its libelous reporting on the Arizona shooting, but there's clearly a demand for stories of this sort, since the political payoff has been considerable. While the Times is at pains to indicate that Piven wrote an article "45 years ago" calling for mass uprising, the piece doesn't report that Piven called for revolt once again, just two weeks ago, in the same journal, The Nation, "Mobilizing the Jobless":

Protests among the unemployed will inevitably be local, just because that's where people are and where they construct solidarities. But local and state governments are strapped for funds and are laying off workers. The initiatives that would be responsive to the needs of the unemployed will require federal action. Local protests have to accumulate and spread -- and become more disruptive -- to create serious pressures on national politicians. An effective movement of the unemployed will have to look something like the strikes and riots that have spread across Greece in response to the austerity measures forced on the Greek government by the European Union, or like the student protests that recently spread with lightning speed across England in response to the prospect of greatly increased school fees.

A loose and spontaneous movement of this sort could emerge. It is made more likely because unemployment rates are especially high among younger workers. Protests by the unemployed led by young workers and by students, who face a future of joblessness, just might become large enough and disruptive enough to have an impact in Washington. There is no science that predicts eruption of protest movements. Who expected the angry street mobs in Athens or the protests by British students? Who indeed predicted the strike movement that began in the United States in 1934, or the civil rights demonstrations that spread across the South in the early 1960s? We should hope for another American social movement from the bottom -- and then join it.

These aren't the obscure rants of some raving idiot out in the progressive netroots fever swamps. Piven is establishment. But taking the Times' propaganda one step further is useful idiot Steve Benen:

If you've never heard of Frances Fox Piven, don't feel bad. Up until a couple of weeks ago, I hadn't either. Apparently she wrote some radical stuff about poor people and political activism in 1966, and the voices in Beck's head tell him this is important and relevant in 2011, never mind the fact that the vast majority of liberals haven't read her work and have no idea who she is.

That's a lie. Anyone who reads The Nation knows exactly who she is.

Leftists are liars.

They're liars. They're propagandists. And they're evildoers.

Exit videos from London and Toronto, featuring the kind of spontaneous unrest that Francis Fox Piven wants to bring to America:

See also Left Wing Rebel (via Memeorandum).

State Lawmakers Pushing Aggressive Campaigns to Limit Abortions

This is what freaks out the utterly demonic pro-choicers, and I couldn't be more pleased.

At NYT, "Conservative Lawmakers in Dozens of States, Energized by Midterm Electoral Gains, Are Working Aggressively to Limit Abortions."

And don't miss Michelle's essay, "The Philadelphia Horror: How Mass Murder Gets a Pass" (via Memeorandum):

The mainstream news reports about Philadelphia’s serial baby-killer Kermit Gosnell and his abortion clinic death squad only scratch the surface of his barbaric enterprise. You must, must, must read the entire, graphic, 281-page grand jury report (embedded after my column below) to fully fathom the systematic execution of hundreds of (not just seven) healthy, living, breathing, squirming, viable babies — along with an untold number of mothers who may have lost their lives in his sick, grimy chamber of horrors as well. It is explicit. It is enraging. It will haunt you.

Ask yourself why you are not hearing about which root causes and whose rhetoric are to blame for this four-decades-long massacre — just the tip of a blood-soaked iceberg defended by the predators of Planned Parenthood. You know the answer: If it doesn’t help the Left criminalize conservatism, it’s not worth discussing.

Also, The Other McCain has a great post and roundup, "Feminism Is to Honest Debate What Kermit Gosnell Is to Humanitarianism."

RELATED: "Kermit Gosnell, Phila. Abortion Doctor, Seems Confused by Murder Charges, Shocked by No Bail."

Glenn Beck – Jan 21, 2011

A follow-up to "Full Transcript for Glenn Beck's 'Shoot Them in the Head' Comments."

I was watching Beck's broadcast while working on the post. He's been on Fox two years, and the introduction reminded me of the program in early 2009, just after Obama took power. I nice flashback and update:

Ace of Spades — Motörhead's Lemmy Kilmister Still Touring at 65

The guy is legend.

I remember seeing Lemmy hanging out at gigs in London in 1985. I thought it was amazing seeing him out and about, partying like a regular guy. And I guess he is, actually. At LAT, "Lemmy: Rock 'n' Roll's Ace of Spades":

From the beginning, Motörhead played fast and loud, drawing inspiration from the MC5 and Deep Purple, while setting a pace for the coming generation of thrash metal bands: Metallica, Anthrax, Slayer, etc. The newest Motörhead album, "The Wörld Is Yours," is set for release Feb. 8, and delivers on the same driving, back-to-basics grind.

Motorhead, with guitarist Phil Campbell and drummer Mikkey Dee, is set to perform at the House of Blues in Anaheim on Jan. 25, and return to Los Angeles on March 11 at Club Nokia.

"The music is damaging. It bruises you," says Henry Rollins, the former Black Flag shouter and spoken-word artist. "He still has this force in the universe, and that is not mellow music. He is not going gently into the good night."

Kilmister has managed to survive decades of hard living, the booze and recreational drugs, including a taste for speed, but never heroin. "It was dumb luck. We all could have gone anytime. Especially in the '60s, when it was, 'If it fits in my hand and my mouth, I'll take it,'" he says.

He's still able to rage easily through 90 minutes of hard rock onstage night after night, but diabetes means his legs aren't always up to the two-block stroll from his apartment to the Rainbow and back. He was treated for a heart murmur in 2003 and now takes blood pressure medication, but retirement is no option. And the age limit to rock edges ever higher.

Guitarist Scott Ian of Anthrax calls Kilmister "a true pirate" in the tradition of Rolling Stones guitarist Keith Richards and gonzo journalist Hunter S. Thompson, "People who live life exactly on their own terms."

More at the link.

And there's a new biopic, "Lemmy: 49% Motherfucker, 51% Son of a Bitch."

Keith Olbermann Quits Countdown — The Left's Chickens Coming Home to Roost? ... UPDATE! — NBC Fired Olby

I rarely watch Countdown.

I happened to click on The Daily Caller and saw this: "Keith Olbermann’s ‘personal responsibility’ for Tucson: We watch, because we’re paid to." I thought nothing of it at the moment. Working on something else, I kept surfing and landed on New York Times. Olby's picture was at the top with the headline: "Olbermann Leaves ‘Countdown’ on MSNBC." Cruising around further, I checked Twitter, and the link to Howard Kurtz, "MSNBC's liberal crusader abruptly resigned on air tonight, ending a provocative eight-year run."

Keith Olbermann, the liberal crusader whose combative style put him increasingly at odds with his network bosses, resigned abruptly from MSNBC tonight.

The cable channel confirmed his unexpected departure as Olbermann was rather calmly announcing the demise of Countdown after an eight-year run that included a bitter feud with Bill O'Reilly, fiery denunciations of Republicans and occasional acknowledgements that he had gone too far.

Olbermann thanked his audience—"my gratitude to you is boundless"—and a list of people who have worked with him, notably excluding MSNBC President Phil Griffin, whom he has known for three decades.

A knowledgeable official said the move had nothing to do with Comcast taking control of NBC next week, although the cable giant was informed when it received final federal approval for the purchase that Olbermann would be leaving the cable channel. This official described the dramatic divorce as mutual.

Olbermann, who quit MSNBC once before—in 1998—as well as ESPN, almost single-handedly revived the network by leading it on a leftward march and aggressively attacking the rival operation he called Fox Noise. But his relations with top NBC and MSNBC executives sharply deteriorated when he was suspended for making donations to Democratic candidates, and they began to talk about how the channel was now on solid enough footing to survive without him.

More at the link.

Kurtz notes that Olbermann was taking a lot of heat for the heat of his show.

I'll update after I pin down for sure that he was fired. But check Gateway Pundit, "Sanity Wins! … Crazy Keith Olbermann Is Out at MSNBC – Effective Immediately." And Allah sorts through the speculation, "Breaking: Olbermann announces the end of “Countdown”." Also at Memeorandum.

*********

UPDATE: From Richard Adams' Guardian headline at Memeorandum, "Keith Olbermann abruptly fired by NBC." But there's a change on the homepage, "Keith Olbermann dropped by NBC ... the controversial MSNBC cable news host, has his contract abruptly terminated by parent company NBC."

Plus, a roundup at Instapundit, "MSNBC SAYS SAYONARA TO KEITH OLBERMANN."

And at TMZ, "Keith Olbermann -- Fired By MSNBC."

Gabrielle Giffords Smiled Inside Ambulance as She Heard Applause During Dramatic Send-Off

Here's the video from the presss conference:

PREVIOUSLY: "Doctors in Houston Report Gabrielle Giffords Aware of Surroundings."

Full Transcript for Glenn Beck's 'Shoot Them in the Head' Comments

Part of the initial explanation for the left's jumping the gun (metaphor) on the news of the Tucson shooting is that the Democrat-Socialists have been so thoroughly repudiated at the polls. Daniel Henninger argued at the Wall Street Journal that last November "was no ordinary election. What voters did has the potential to change the content and direction of the U.S. political system, possibly for a generation."

This reality will be the driving fact of life in politics over the next couple of years, and as William Jacobson pointed out --- and Rush Limbaugh reiterated on the air --- we now have a foretaste of the kinds of progressive delegitimation campaigns that will be deployed for Obama's reelection efforts. And recall, a majority of Democrats continue to believe that Sarah Palin was at least partially responsible for the shooting. So it pays to remember that the left is working on a program of lies, disinformation, and propaganda.

The latest example is the next iteration of the left's campaign to destroy Glenn Beck. Patterico decimated Charles Johnson's anti-Beck smears yesterday, "No, Charles Johnson, Glenn Beck Did Not Tell His Viewers to Shoot Anyone in the Head." But the story's still trending at Memeorandum. And even though the full transcript proves that Beck's segment was pure commentary on the left's neo-communism --- and the buyer's remorse of the Democrats' progressive base --- dishonest leftist bloggers continue to allege that right-wing rhetoric is causing outbreaks of violence. But a simple perusal of the transcript reveals perfectly that Beck was warning elected Democrats that the violent progressive proletariat had them in the crosshairs:

I want to warn you now, Democrats, your party is over. And I don't mean — all tea parties and Republicans are going to beat you in November. I mean the Democrats, as we used to know them, the Democrats that were in my family growing up, are over.

I'm going to show you the civil war, the video evidence in the civil war in the Democratic Party that's happening right now. And no one in the media is exposing it. And it is dangerous, what is happening.

The radicals have infected the party. They have been brought in by politicians who don't really care about anything. They just want to win. They've been tolerating the revolutionaries — the Democrats have.

But more importantly, the revolutionaries have been tolerating those politicians. For the moment, the radical fringe of the party is now. Just today, Van Jones was speaking at America's Future Now conference.

He is speaking to a group of progressives. I find this extraordinarily disturbing, because I believe this man is sending a message. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VAN JONES, FORMER WHITE HOUSE ADVISER FOR GREEN JOBS: I think that when we look back to the history of the Obama administration and look back at the history of our progressive movement, that this week will mark a historic inflection point when progressives decided to be progressive again in this country. I think something shifted this week.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BECK: Yes, it has. It has. This is an ominous statement coming from a revolutionary. Please go to GlennBeck.com and look up "STORM: Reclaiming Revolution." This is his organization. He is in this. From a revolutionary.

I'm sorry but when did the Obama administration not be progressive? Excuse me? They were normal? We have seen progressives. We haven't seen the actual spooky progressives yet. I think you are about to. Something has changed this week. He's right.

But what the politicians don't understand, the ones who have co-opted these revolutionaries and brought them in the process, is they are dangerous. Why? Why? Well, because a lot of them have called for violent revolution in the past and they never distanced themselves from it.

You cannot co-opt and lie to people who believe in something. Why is Ahmadinejad dangerous? Well, because he says he wants to wipe Israel off the face of the Earth, OK? The press and the politicians — "Oh, he's just saying that."

Why do they say that? Because nobody in the press and nobody in Washington actually believes a damn thing, except their own image. That's it. This man is a twelver. Look it up. Do you know what it is? It's a revolutionary so dangerous that the Ayatollah Khomeini banned twelvers.

OK. Here's the Ayatollah Khomeini, who is a revolutionary — he says stay away from these guys. They're spooky. He didn't co-opt them because he understood they believed in the 12th Imam coming back, and the way to bring the 12th Imam back is wash the world in blood.

There are politicians like the Ayatollah Khomeini who will do revolution for power. And then there are people like this who are mad men. I never thought I'd say we better learn something from the Ayatollah Khomeini, but here it is.

The media and the politician have all of this wrong. In every single walk of life — you want to know why TV doesn't reflect you? You want to know why Washington doesn't reflect you? Because they don't understand, from the radical revolutionaries to the Islamic extremists — and yes, DOJ, they do exist — to the Tea Party movements.

Just because you in Washington and you who are so out of touch with life in the media, just because you don't believe in anything doesn't mean nobody else does. We do. You know why you're confused by this show? It's because I believe in something. You don't.

Tea parties believe in small government. We believe in returning to the principles of our Founding Fathers. We respect them. We revere them. Shoot me in the head before I stop talking about the Founders. Shoot me in the head if you try to change our government.

I will stand against you and so will millions of others. We believe in something. You in the media and most in Washington don't. The radicals that you and Washington have co-opted and brought in wearing sheep's clothing — change the pose. You will get the ends.

You've been using them? They believe in communism. They believe and have called for a revolution. You're going to have to shoot them in the head. But warning, they may shoot you.

They are dangerous because they believe. Karl Marx is their George Washington. You will never change their mind. And if they feel you have lied to them — they're revolutionaries. Nancy Pelosi, those are the people you should be worried about.

Here is my advice when you're dealing with people who believe in something that strongly — you take them seriously. You listen to their words and you believe that they will follow up with what they say.

Didn't we learn that lesson from Usama bin Laden? I heard his warning in 1998. I said on the air at the time, listen to him. We didn't listen. We didn't listen to the revolutionaries in Germany, the revolutionaries in Russia or Venezuela or Cuba — no, no, no. They all have one thing in common. They have all called for revolution.

They want to overthrow our entire system of government, and their words say it. Why won't you believe it?

The passage at the video is highlighted in bold italics at the fifth paragraph from the end of the blockquote.

Glenn Beck isn't inciting violence. He's warning, quite powerfully, of the growing and potentially violent unrest that's brewing at among the announced revolutionaries of the progressive base.

Doctors in Houston Report Gabrielle Giffords Aware of Surroundings

At CBS News:

(CBS/ AP) Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords knows what's going on based on squeezing his hand the first day and going through streets of Tucson, said Dr. Randall Friese, Giffords' trauma surgeon at UMC in Tucson.

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords smiled inside an ambulance as she heard applause during a dramatic send-off from her hometown Friday, and doctors say her transfer by jet and helicopter to a hospital in Houston went flawlessly.

"She responded very well to that - smiling and even tearing a little bit," said Dr. Randall Friese, a surgeon at the University Medical Center trauma center in Tucson. "It was very emotional and very special."

Friese and Giffords' doctors in Houston spoke Friday afternoon at a news conference at Texas Medical Center. Doctors say Giffords has a drain in her brain because of a fluid buildup, so she will stay for now in the ICU. She will be moved later to the center's TIRR Memorial Hermann rehabilitation hospital.

Giffords still has a craniectomy, and it might be a month before her skull is shaped. Until then the Congresswoman will wear a specially measured helmet with the Arizona flag on it to protect her cranium.

"Whether she will form words, we will have to wait and see," said Dr. Dr. Dong Kim, a neurosurgeon at the hospital.

Dr. Kim also said Giffords is in the top 5 percent of what they would expect from a gunshot injury to the brain.

Also, at LAT, "Gabrielle Giffords Leaves Tucson."

The Founding Fathers Would Have Hated Liberals Progressives

I reported on this earlier: "The Lies of Bill Maher — And the Epic Struggle Between Good and Evil in the Aftermath of Tucson, 1/8/11."

Now here's John Hawkins, "The Founding Fathers Would Have Hated Liberals":

You gotta love it. I've been harping to John about how he calls these folks "liberals." They're not. The founders were liberals, actually, "classical liberals," to be precise. And what best way to illustrate how un-liberal the progressives are is to take a look at Sadly No!'s recent attack on none other than John Hawkins, "There Will Be No Apologies Here Either":

The irony to which Hawkins is referring is that CNN apologized for the use of the word “crosshairs.” “Ha, wussies,” Hawkins harumphs:

Just for the record, we here at Right Wing News don’t apologize for using the word “crosshairs.” Other words we don’t apologize for include job killing, kneecapping, firepower, shotgun, cut, campaign, brass knuckles, slaughter, eviscerate, obliterate, fire, snipe, carve, kill, reload, targeting, gut, bombed, terminate, axe, attack, and of course, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious murder-go-round. We also don’t apologize for calling CNN an embarrassing bunch of weenies who should man up, try to develop some testicular fortitude, and stop acting like such a bunch of little girls.

And, just for the record, we here at Sadly, No! don’t apologize for using the word whale, leviathan, behemoth, hippo, big fat candyass and, of course, mother-fricking ginormous. We also don’t apologize for calling Hawkins an embarrassing mound of man-boobed lard who should back away from the fried food buffet, lace up some tennis shoes, and take a run around the block, particularly so that he could become aware that almost any “bunch of little girls” could outrun him in heels and without breaking a sweat .

Indeed, irony does seem to be made out of ice cream.

Check the Sadly No! freaks for the full post.

And to repeat, they're not "liberals."

RELATED: "Progressives Are Communists (If You Didn't Know)."

Woman Sues After Falling in Fountain While Texting

At Fox News, "Woman Falls In Fountain While Texting, Sues." Also, "Mall Worker Who Fell in Fountain Threatens Legal Action, Has Criminal Record."

And, surprisingly, an interview yesterday with the "fountain woman," at ABC News, "Fountain-Falling Texter in Court for Alleged Theft: Woman Considers Suing After Mall Fall Becomes a Viral Video Sensation" (at Memeorandum):

Here Come Chinese 'Trophy Acquisitions' in the U.S.

In 1989, the editorial board of the New York Times asked, "Is the transfer of American assets to Japanese ownership something to worry about?"

The answer was no, "of course." But the Times board when on to suggest that this was "a sharp reminder of Japan's growing economic strength." So true, but within just a few years, by the mid-1990s, those fears of "Japan as Number One" quickly dissipated as that nation floundered in the fallout from its overheated bubble economy.

I'm reminded of this by the news this morning that China's Industrial and Commercial Bank of China Ltd. (ICBC) has made a bid for ownership entry into the U.S. financial market. See WSJ, "China's ICBC Bids for U.S. Entry":

CHICAGO—Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd. on Friday signed an agreement here to acquire a majority stake in Bank of East Asia Ltd.'s U.S. subsidiary, becoming the first state-owned Chinese bank to make an acquisition of a U.S. deposit-taking institution.

The deal, signed on the last day of Chinese President Hu Jintao's state visit to the U.S., represents what could be the start of big expansions by Chinese financial institutions in the world's largest economy.

The deal comes as both Beijing and Washington are calling for greater commercial ties between the two countries. China is prodding the U.S. to ease its export controls, especially those involving high-technology products, while the U.S. is asking for more Chinese purchases of made-in-America goods and services.

Still, the Bank of East Asia transaction promises to be carefully scrutinized by U.S. regulators, including the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, known as Cfius, because of the state-controlled nature of ICBC, China's largest lender. Bank of East Asia is a publicly traded bank based in Hong Kong.

RTWT.

And also at WSJ, "Why China’s ICBC Bank Deal is Important."

The Chinese are coming to America. And we'll soon see, no doubt, some "trophy acquisitions" that raise hollers far and wide. But as we've learned from previous experience, this hardly means the end of American world preeminence.

In any case, Daniel Drezner has a roundup on those "writers who vastly exaggerate China's rise!" See, "The most absurd edge of the 'China as behemoth' meme."

Related: Paul Krugman on China (via Memeorandum).

I'll have more later ...

Civil Discourse at Barbara O'Brien's Mahablog

How's that civility thingy going?

Not too well at The Mahablog, it turns out. As we can see at the screencap, Barbara O'Brien viciously attacks WSJ's James Taranto, who called out the progressive left for its continuing derangement campaign against Sarah Palin. That's just a "small exaggeration," of course.

Taranto's piece is here: "Palinoia, the Destroyer: What's Behind the Left's Deranged Hatred."

Taranto's a national treasure. You gotta love this, from the essay:

For many liberal women, Palin threatens their sexual identity, which is bound up with their politics in a way that it is not for any other group (possibly excepting gays, though that is unrelated to today's topic).

An important strand of contemporary liberalism is feminism. As a label, "feminist" is passé; outside the academic fever swamps, you will find few women below Social Security age who embrace it.

That is because what used to be called feminism--the proposition that women deserve equality before the law and protection from discrimination--is almost universally accepted today ....

To the extent that "feminism" remains controversial, it is because of the position it takes on abortion: not just that a woman should have the "right to choose," but that this is a matter over which reasonable people cannot disagree--that to favor any limitations on the right to abortion, or even to acknowledge that abortion is morally problematic, is to deny the basic dignity of women.

To a woman who has internalized this point of view, Sarah Palin's opposition to abortion rights is a personal affront, and a deep one. It doesn't help that Palin lives by her beliefs. To the contrary, it intensifies the offense.

He hits the bullseye so directly (if I may use that metaphor) that Barbara O'Brien just can't continue:

Anyway, I didn’t get past the sentence about sexual identity ...

That's gold.

Barbara obviously can't handle the truth. Her progressive sensibilities immediately erect a cognitive road block preventing comprehension that, oh noes!, Taranto's got her number!

Majority of Americans Would Reject Obama 'If the 2012 Presidential Election Were Held Today'

At Fox News, "Obama Falling Below Expectations at Two-Year Mark."

At at the raw survey form, 51 percent would vote for someone else, 36 percent definitely and 15 percent probably (via Gateway Pundit):

And the kicker is that the survey oversampled Democrats.

Ouch.

The Left's Opportunistic Antiwar Movement

A good clip, from Reason.tv:

It's obviously true that the antiwar movement of the early 2000s was an anti-Bush, anti-GOP campaign. But what's not mentioned is that the ANSWER folks are an all-purpose perpetual protest organization. They latch on to any developments on the far left and attempt to seize the initiative. That happened at the outset of the protests against Prop. 8 and also during the anti-S.B. 1070 protests in Arizona. And while Democrats have clearly dropped any pretense of being antiwar during the Obama interregnum, these same partisans have little compunction against allying with Stalinists of the ANSWER sort. It's all about timing. ANSWER keeps itself afloat with non-stop outrage, but they're just one segment of the broader progressive left that is anti-American and neo-communist. Code Pink would be a good example. Friendly with President Obama, they advocate extreme positions on the revolutionary left. Recall what John Tierney wrote in 2005:

The irony of the modern “peace” movement is that it has very little to do with peace — either as a moral concept or as a political ideal. Peace is a tactical ideal for movement organizers: it serves as political leverage against U.S. policymakers, and it is an ideological response to the perceived failures of American society. The leaders of anti-war groups are modern-day Leninists ...

And speaking of ANSWER, they're gearing up for their 8th anniversary protest march in Hollywood: "STOP THE WARS: Resist the War Machine! — 8th Anniversary of the Invasion of Iraq."

Saturday, March 19, 2011, the anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, will be an international day of action against the war machine.

Protest and resistance actions will take place in cities and towns across the United States. Scores of organizations are coming together. Demonstrations are scheduled for San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, Washington, D.C., and more.

I covered last year's protest, which saw about two thousand demonstrators on hand. I expect to be there again this year, so expect more top-quality coverage.

Assemblyman Tim Donnelly Shreds Governor Brown's Budget

Cool video:

And at LAT, "GOP lawmaker tears up Jerry Brown's budget. Literally.‎"

Leftists Get Lifeline to Hell With Philadelphia Abortion Case

I've probably said it before, but I'm simply blown away. Is there no bottom too deep for the progressive left? The politicization of the Arizona shooting was pure evil and hard to beat. But after yesterday's news of the arrest of Dr. Kermit Gosnell, I think progressives got a lifeline to Hell.

I commented yesterday on Barbara O'Brien's cheers for Dr. Kermit Gosnell. And now coming back to it, it turns out the line on the progressive left is that the Philadelphia case is an argument for more abortions, that is, more support for purportedly legal and safe abortion, rather than legislation to further restrict access. I don't make a case either way. Perhaps there are some extreme medical circumstances in which obtaining an abortion is absolutely necessary. But over the past few years it's been clear that the right to an abortion has become the equivalent to a license for death. And while it's impossible to imagine a more heinous case, the Philadelphia horror is the direct result of the left's destruction of the sanctity of life. One thing leads to another. God help the poor women who come into the wrong circle of people, who direct them to the clutches of the likes of Dr. Gosnell.

Of course, progressives couldn't care less about God, so it's pretty easy for them to choose up sides. Notorious atheist PZ Myers sums up progressive thinking on the case:

No one endorses bad medicine and unrestricted, unregulated, cowboy surgery like Gosnell practiced — what he represents is the kind of back-alley deadly hackery that the anti-choice movement would have as the only possible recourse, if they had their way. If anything, the Gosnell case is an argument for legal abortion.

The statement's false, if not an outright lie. Gosnell was practicing for thirty years, and clinics like that are sustained by huge networks of pro-choice activists. This is the logical outcome of the left's culture of death. Unrestricted access is exactly what progressives want, screw the quality, obviously. Myers simply drills the point home by suggesting this is the case for legal abortion.

And go read Scotty Lemieux at Lawyers, Gays and Marriage. He's a clinical monstrosity himself, not only stupid but completely unoriginal. And I've responded to dim bulb Malaclypse at the post.

Top 10 Tragedies Exploited by the Left

From Megan Fox, at NewsReal Blog:

By now, Americans should be hip to the Left’s jive. Exploiting the dead and the tragic is a premeditated, proven attack plan that is a staple of the Left. They have one goal and that is to destroy their opposition by any means necessary. Slander, libel, slime and lies is the name of the game. And they aim to win. The pattern is evident. The minute a tragedy occurs and there is any way to tie a conservative to it, they will do it before the bodies are cold. Once they’ve assigned blame they start trying to legislate away more personal freedoms. This is the formula. Tragedy+Outrageous Blame Shifting=Legislative Victory. There is no shame on the Left, only shameful behavior.

RTWT.

Rush Limbaugh Reads Legal Insurrection's, 'We Just Witnessed the Media's Test Run to Re-Elect Barack Obama'

Congratulations to William Jacobson. That's called having an impact:

This Day in History: Inauguration of President Ronald Reagan

Exactly 30 years ago today:

And see USA Today, "Ronald Reagan: A 'Folklore' President Who Led a Revolution":

Thirty years ago, Reagan was sworn in as president of a downbeat nation that elected him despite concerns about his age — at 69, he would be the oldest president in history at inauguration — and his ideology. Was he too hawkish toward the Soviet Union, too hostile to social safety-net programs?

Now his estimation by presidential scholars and the American people continues to rise, though skeptics say acolytes exaggerate his legacy.

In a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll, nearly one-third of Americans predict history will judge him an outstanding president, double the number who held that view when he left office. Among modern presidents, only John Kennedy gets higher ratings.

A C-SPAN survey of 65 historians in 2009 ranked Reagan near the top tier of presidents, 10th of 42. A Siena College poll of 238 presidential scholars in 2010 put him in the middle range, 18th of 43, though he ranked in the top five for communication skills, leadership of his party — and luck.

His two terms marked "a clear turning of a chapter" from the Great Society liberalism of the 1960s to a new conservatism, presidential historian Douglas Brinkley says. And his personal connection to many Americans endures.

Adding to his story: surviving an assassination attempt with reassuring humor two months after his inauguration in 1981, and leaving the public scene in 1994 with a letter to the American people revealing his diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease.

He was 93 when he died June 5, 2004.

"He's become a folklore president," says Brinkley, who edited Reagan's diaries. "He's as much Buffalo Bill or Kit Carson as he is Harry Truman or Lyndon Johnson."

Admirers credit Reagan with ending the Cold War — he both increased defense spending by a third and embraced Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev— and reviving the economy. After the unhappy tenures of Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter, Reagan returned a sense of optimism and buoyancy to the White House.

"No matter what political disagreements you may have had with President Reagan — and I certainly had my share — there is no denying his leadership in the world, or his gift for communicating his vision for America," President Obama says in an appreciation written for USA TODAY.

"It was a hell of a record," says James Baker, who ran the campaign of Reagan's chief rival in the 1980 GOP primaries and then became Reagan's White House chief of staff and Treasury secretary. "What I mean is, you did have 25 years of sustained, non-inflationary growth. You had a restoration of the country's pride and confidence in itself. You had peace. What more could you ask for?"

Since Reagan left the White House in 1989, just about every Republican presidential hopeful has sought to claim his mantle, including those weighing bids for next year's nomination.

Former House speaker Newt Gingrich has co-produced a documentary of Reagan's life called Rendezvous With Destiny; he'll screen it in Tampico at the town's centennial celebration of its most famous son.

Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin routinely quotes Reagan in her Facebook postings. Indiana Rep. Mike Pence's paean to American exceptionalism recalls Reagan's oft-repeated description of the United States as a "shining city on a hill."

Read the whole thing.

The Sienna presidential poll is not to be trusted, as I reported earlier, "Who Are the 238 Presidential Scholars, Historians, and Political Scientists Polled for the SRI Presidential Rankings?"

I think the USA Today/Gallup rankings sound reasonable. And speaking of ranking, at CNN, "CNN Poll: JFK Remains Most Popular Past President." And Althouse has the nostalgia, "Half a century ago, the inauguration of JFK."

JFK died when I was two year-old. He'll always be one of my favorites, but Reagan and George W. Bush are tops for me.

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords to Be Relocated to Houston’s TIRR Memorial Hermann Rehabilitation Hospital

At ABC News, "Rep. Gabrielle Giffords Stands on Both Feet, Looks Out Window: Giffords to Be Moved to Houston Rehab Facility":

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords stood on both feet with assistance and looked out a window, another milestone in her recovery after a gunman fired a bullet through her brain during an attack in Tucson, Ariz., 11 days ago, according to University Medical Center officials.

She soon will be moved to a hospital in Houston.

Giffords is expected to be transported Friday to the Institute for Rehabilitation and Research at Houston's Memorial Hermann hospital, which specializes in brain injuries, her office said today. The exact day of the move could change, depending on Giffords' condition.

The institute, also known as TIRR Memorial Hermann, is part of the Texas Medical Center, the largest medical center in the world. Giffords' office said in a statement that facilities across the country had been considered for her rehabilitation but TIRR was chosen because of its reputation and proximity to Tucson.

Her husband, astronaut Capt. Mark Kelly, lives in Houston, where he trains at NASA's Johnson Space Center.

More at the link.

Bloggers Quitting

Blue Crab Boulevard took a long hiatus late last year, and I was reminded of it while reading this piece, "Bloggers Quitting What They Call a Demanding Task With Few Rewards." The main thing I can relate to is the time commitment. Jules Crittenden mentioned that, and the fact that he'd pretty much done all he'd wanted to do. The article is about business blogging, but I think political bloggers can take away a few nuggets in any case. You gotta love it and you gotta work it. Self-promotion isn't an option if folks are looking to have any kind of impact, and you gotta write like a mofo. Give no quarter and don't look back. The progressive nihilists will chew you up and spit you out faster than a wad of raw Southern snuff. Shoot, these f**kers will kill you given the chance. More later, in any case. I'm still fighting the good fight.

National Archives of Canada Cancels Screening of 'Iranium'

After getting "unspecified" threats.

Blazing Catfur has been all over the story, and see also Ottawa Citizen, "Film cancelled after Iranian request: Library and Archives staff report threats after embassy's formal complaint." Plus, at National Post, "Archives Canada cancels screening of Iranian film" (via Memeorandum).

The End is Near for Southern California's Conventional Aircraft Manufacturing

At LAT, "Boeing cutting 900 Jobs at Long Beach C-17 Plant":

Time is running out at Southern California's last major conventional aircraft factory.

Citing declining orders for its C-17 cargo planes, Boeing Co. said it was cutting 900 of the 3,700 jobs at its sprawling Long Beach plant. Barring congressional intervention or a spate of foreign orders — which analysts say is unlikely — the factory is expected to shut down completely by the end of next year.

"There's just not that much of a market for this aircraft," said Scott Hamilton, an aviation industry consultant in Issaquah, Wash.

The layoffs, which the company announced late Wednesday, continue the decline in local aerospace jobs. The industry, which employed more than 160,000 people in Southern California in 1990, had an estimated workforce of about 47,650 last year.

The C-17 Globemaster III, a massive, four-engine jet that hauls 60-ton tanks, troops and medical gear across continents and yet lands on short runways, has been in production since the early 1990s. The plant, next to Long Beach Airport, is a symbol of a bygone era in Southern California when factories ran around the clock building colossal aircraft.

"Our rich history of aerospace manufacturing makes this an emotional day for Long Beach, as the C-17 plant is the last of what was previously a robust aerospace manufacturing industry in California," Long Beach Mayor Bob Foster said.

Boeing once built the 717 jetliner in Long Beach. It was also where McDonnell Douglas manufactured the MD-80 commercial jet. Farther north, Lockheed Corp. produced the Constellation and Electra in Burbank. Now, those facilities have been shuttered.

In recent years, the industry has transformed from blue-collar manufacturing work to more white-collar engineering, concentrating on high-tech systems such as spy satellites, precision missiles and robotic planes. But this work doesn't need nearly as many people.

Newly laid-off workers will also face a tough hiring environment. Unemployment in California stands at 12.4%. In Los Angeles County, it is 12.9%. Workers were told about the layoffs Wednesday, and termination notices will begin to be issued Friday, the company said.

"There are a lot of people upset about it," said Ray Luciani, 60, a maintenance mechanic at the plant. "I'm just hoping to last three more years to get my pension."

My college is right next to the old 717 plant. It's a ghost town around the facility, and it's weird.

More on this later.

The Tolerant, Compassionate Non-Violent Left

Here's a couple of interesting posts, from Nice Deb, "Leftism Really is a Mental Disorder." And at Kathleen McCaffrey at Legal Insurrection, "Evil Schmevil." Kathleen examines the question of whether Jared Loughner is "insane or just evil?"

At the comments, I suggested that Loughner's crazy. The left's exploitation of him is evil.

The System Worked: Mahablog Cheers 'House of Horrors' Abortion Doctor Who Killed Seven Babies by Severing Their Spinal Cords With Scissors

The main story is at Wall Street Journal, "Philadelphia Abortion Doctor Charged With Murder":

Warning: The following will likely be the most disturbing story you read here all day all month.

With that disclosure, here goes.

A Philadelphia doctor who provided abortions for minorities, immigrants and poor women has been charged with eight counts of murder in the deaths of a patient and seven babies who were born alive and then killed with scissors, prosecutors said Wednesday. Click here for the AP story; here for the Philadelphia Inquirer story.

Working out of his Philadelphia office (pictured), Dr. Kermit Gosnell, 69, made millions of dollars over 30 years, performing as many illegal, late-term abortions as he could, prosecutors said.

Gosnell “induced labor, forced the live birth of viable babies in the sixth, seventh, eighth month of pregnancy and then killed those babies by cutting into the back of the neck with scissors and severing their spinal cord,” Williams said.

Nine of Gosnell’s employees also were charged ...

And at Lonely Conservative, "Abortionist Charged With Multiple Murders":

This has to be one of the most horrific things I’ve ever heard .... Ghastly doesn’t begin to describe it. Good Lord.

And it's true. Here's this from the Grand Jury report:

This case is about a doctor who killed babies and endangered women. What we mean is that he regularly and illegally delivered live, viable, babies in the third trimester of pregnancy – and then murdered these newborns by severing their spinal cords with scissors. The medical practice by which he carried out this business was a filthy fraud in which he overdosed his patients with dangerous drugs, spread venereal disease among them with infected instruments, perforated their wombs and bowels – and, on at least two occasions, caused their deaths. Over the years, many people came to know that something was going on here. But no one put a stop to it.

Let us say right up front that we realize this case will be used by those on both sides of the abortion debate.We ourselves cover a spectrum of personal beliefs about the morality of abortion. For us as a criminal grand jury, however, the case is not about that controversy; it is about disregard of the law and disdain for the lives and health of mothers and infants. We find common ground in exposing what happened here, and in recommending measures to prevent anything like this from ever happening again.

I'm glad the Grand Jury placed that disclaimer at the beginning of the report, because for me, this isn't so much about abortion politics as it is the normalization of evil. I wish women didn't have abortions, although I'd never deprive a woman her right to make the decision. But this isn't about that. What happened in Philadelphia, over a period of years, it turns out, is what happens when life itself becomes cheapened and coarsened at the altar of civil liberties. Just because one has the right to do things doesn't mean they ought to do them. And here the case could be made that that right itself is illegitimate if not exercised with the same kind of common sense and professionalism that we'd expect of those providing any kind of medical service, from routine doctor visits to open-heart surgery. That is to say, if one's going to perform this service, shouldn't it be treated with the same kind of dignity as any other operation? Instead what's revealed here is the production of death, and for what reason I can't possibly fathom. It's not so that women can exercise "choice." If someone is on the fence on the question of abortion, here's a case study of how badly things not only can go wrong but will go wrong, since taking scissors to just-born babies is the next logical step in the agenda of moral annihilation at the center of the pro-choice movement. And I think the point is illustrated at The Mahablog, where not once do we witness Barbara O'Brien's condemnation of the slaughter, but we instead gasp at her first impulse, which is to blame the right: "It appears to me this is not a bogus charge concocted by 'Right to Life' operatives." Seriously. Read the whole thing, especially this jaw-dropping conclusion:

This is the system working. If abortion is criminalized, thousands of clinics like this will spring up like mushrooms, operating underground, out of sight of the law.

No, Barbara, the system didn't work. But I will pray. I'm saddened by the industrial-scale death that you promote with your radical pro-choice ideology. And I'll pray for those babies --- and for you as well.

See also, The Other McCain, "Abortion Is Murder, and Sometimes We Are Brutally Reminded of That Fact." And Dr. Melissa Clouthier, "Abortion Abomination - Murder. Vile, evil, disgusting, loathsome murder." (Via Memeorandum.)

Obama Rides Wave of Support After Arizona Shooting: Seven-in-Ten Americans Reject Progressives' Blame-Righty Allegations

At WSJ, "President's Ratings Climb." The president is at 53 percent approval. It's a tragedy bump, to be expected following such a horrific event, and the sensational media coverage:

The poll was conducted days after a shooting rampage in Tucson, Ariz., in which six people died and 14 were injured, including Gabrielle Giffords, a Democratic congresswoman from the state.

Surges in presidential popularity are common after a galvanizing national tragedy, said Bill McInturff, a Republican pollster who co-directs the Journal/NBC News poll with Democrat Peter Hart. Bill Clinton saw a four-point jump after the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing. George W. Bush a huge surge after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

And at the raw pdf survey, 71 pecent said that the shooting was an "isolated incident by a disturbed person" (Question 35):

Thinking about the shootings of a Member of Congress, a Federal judge and others in Tucson, Arizona last weekend, do you feel the extreme political rhetoric used by some in the media and by political leaders was an important contributor to the incident or do you feel this is more of an isolated incident by a disturbed person that occurs from time to time?

That's 7-in-10 who reject the left's blame-righty campaign, although given a choice, substantial numbers say that radio and television, and blogs and the Internet, contributed "to a climate that some say encouraged the shootings" (at Question 37).

Encouraging overall, but those latter items remind me of William Jacobson's comments earlier:

The ruthless efficiency with which the left-wing blogosphere tied Palin to the shooting, and the success of their efforts in equating Palin with mass murder, is a lesson we should not forget.

Rep. Steve Cohen Compares GOP Healthcare Opposition to Nazi Party's 'Big Lie'

Well, fancy that.

Now that Democrats and fever-swamp progressives have been hammered for their blame-righty campaign following Tucson, we'll be hearing ObamaCare lackeys in Congress attacking GOP opposition as the "Big Lie."

That's sad, I gotta say. At Weasel Zippers, "Dem Congressman Compares GOP ObamaCare Claims to Nazi Propaganda Minister Joseph Goebbels, Lies About Jews That Led to Holocaust," and The Hill, "Democratic Lawmaker Compares GOP Health Law Claims to Nazi 'Lies'."

And from Michelle, "Civility Watch: Nazis and Crosshairs and Killers, Oh My":

When is it hate speech to compare politicians to Nazis? Only when the accusers are Tea Party activists or Republicans. When it’s Democrats, just move along. Nothing to see or hear ...

Democrats Continue to Blame Palin for Arizona Shooting

As we learned previously, in a CNN poll, a majority of 56 percent of Democrats thought Sarah Palin was to blame for the tragic shooting in Arizona.

And in a new Public Policy Polling survey released yesterday, 45 percent of Democrats believe that "Palin is at least partially responsible for what happened in Arizona." The survey contacted voters January 14-16, fully one week after the news broke. And of course it was known by Sunday at least that alleged killer Jared Loughner had acted without having seen Palin's target map, and by Tuesday, January 11, Loughner-friend Zach Osler reported that the shooter "didn't listen to political radio, he didn't take sides, he wasn't on the left, he wasn't on the right." And, according to William Jacobson, "We Just Witnessed The Media's Test Run To Re-Elect Barack Obama":

The false connection of the Palin electoral target map to the shooting did not start in the mainstream media. As I have documented, that false connection started with bloggers at DailyKos and Think Progress using Twitter to push the issue into the mainstream media within hours of the shooting with the help of their followers.

The ruthless efficiency with which the left-wing blogosphere tied Palin to the shooting, and the success of their efforts in equating Palin with mass murder, is a lesson we should not forget.

The Democrats and their mainstream media supporters were put back on their heels in 2010, and are regrouping. And if regrouping requires falsely accusing a major Republican figure of complicity in mass murder, and then amplifying that false accusation for several days in the face of contrary evidence until a substantial portion of the population believes it, they will do it.

Yeah, the progressive left got the meme going, but William discounts the epic lies of MFM Tuscon reporting, especially at the New York Times.

More later ...

CARTOON CREDIT: Saberpoint.