But don’t they know the Tea Party is RAAAACIST?

August 5, 2010

A hostile media finds itself befuddled by Black Conservatives:

They must be Uncle Toms; it’s the only explanation. It couldn’t be that they’ve allied with conservatives out of genuine shared belief.

Nah. Thank Heaven the press is there to give us the straight facts without any editorializing.

(via Big Journalism)


More on Howard Zinn, historian and commie propagandist

August 5, 2010

Ron Radosh, himself a former Lefty and very familiar with the history of Communist and other radical movements in the US, has posted a very good examination of Zinn’s history as a Leftist in light of what was revealed in the recently released FBI dossiers.  Here’s one quote that shows I was wrong to call him a tool of Stalin; Zinn was actually to the Left of Uncle Joe and the CPUSA:

By this time, it is clear that Howard Zinn had long departed from CP ranks. If anything, he was far to the left of the official American CP. During the war in Vietnam, they backed the moderate group known as “Negotiations Now,” which sought a negotiated settlement of the war, and had the support of people like Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. and Irving Howe. Zinn became the architect of advocacy of unilateral withdrawal from Vietnam and a North Vietnamese victory. In 1978 he and others went to North Vietnam in a solidarity trip, and to arrange the release of a tiny minority of American POW’s, a propaganda coup for the North Vietnamese government.

Internally, Zinn gave his support to the black radicals in SNCC, as well as the militant new group, the Black Panther Party. He called all blacks in American prisons “political prisoners,” and said that the United States “has been a police state for a long time.” He also gave his backing to myriad far left groups, including the Maoist Progressive Labor Party, the Trotskyist Socialist Workers Party, and the Third World revolutionary nations of Cuba and North Vietnam.  One did not need FBI reports to learn what he stood for. In a 1965 article found in the files, Zinn praised the New Left for having “no illusions about Reds,” and for seeing “Stalinism unmasked.” His position was one of “moral equivalence,” in which he equated the totalitarian East with the democratic West as evil centers of power, the United States being the most culpable.

And the textbook this clown wrote is now considered a standard in many high school and college classes. Nice.


Credit Sharron Angle with a sense of humor

August 5, 2010

Sharron Angle‘s campaign to unseat Harry Reid in Nevada has stumbled badly in the first few weeks since she won the Republican nomination, making what should have been a runaway victory over the unpopular Senate Majority Leader a tight race, instead, with Harry enjoying a small lead.

But, I’ll give her this: whether her own people are coming up with them or she’s getting help from the national Republicans, her commercials are funny:

And effective. Reid’s tenure has been a disaster for Nevada, and the progressive policies he’s pushed in the face of strong national opposition have only made a bad situation worse. The stimulus package was sold a way to keep unemployment from rising above 8%, but the national rate is around 9.75% and Nevada’s is much worse than that. But, don’t worry, Silver Staters; at least the chimps are happy.

The Angle campaign is smart to keep hammering Pinky Reid on the economy; it’s where he’s the weakest and avoids some of Angle’s more controversial social-policy positions. And I’ve always said satire is one of the most effective weapons in the fight against a crappy politician.

Keep them laughing at him, Sharron. It’s Pinky’s glass jaw.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


On judges and “the will of the People”

August 5, 2010

Among the various reactions to Judge’s Vaughn Walker’s decision in Perry v. Schwarzenegger to overturn California’s Proposition 8 and allow same-sex marriage here, I noticed a disturbing theme among commenters at blogs and on Twitter: the idea that the judge had no right to overturn a state constitutional amendment that directly reflected the will of the people.

To which I say, “hogwash.”  Not talking

Don’t get me wrong: I’m a staunch believer in judicial restraint. Judges should interpret the law, not make it. They, as unelected officials, should grant great deference to the elected legislatures, which (the current Congress excepted) represent the people’s will. And this is especially true when the People act directly as a legislature, as in the case of ballot initiatives.

But, conservatives who say the judge had no right to do what he did are missing a very important point: ours is a constitutional republic under the rule of law, not a majoritarian direct democracy. Our constitution was set up, in part, to protect the rights of political minorities from the passions and whims of a majority, to prevent a majoritarian tyranny. Under our system, even the People have to obey the restraints on power put in place by the Constitution. They can change the Constitution if they like, but they are not free to ignore it. If a state were to pass a bill prohibiting Asian immigrants from owning property and forcing them to sell what they did own, a federal court would rightly strike this down* as violating the Bill of Rights even if it were an amendment to the state’s constitution enacted by popular referendum.

To turn back to Judge Walker’s decision in Perry, I make no claims as to whether it was correct. (For interesting criticism, see Ed Whelan and Dale Carpenter) But, if the judge honestly believed Proposition 8 violated homosexuals’ constitutional rights, then he had not only the right to rule as he did, but also a positive duty to do so. To say otherwise is to deny wholesale the principle of judicial review, a cornerstone of our system since 1803.

So, Judge Walker may be wrong on the law and his decision subject to reversal, and he may become a poster child for judicial imperialism, but those are questions separate from whether he has the authority.

Babies. Bathwater. Let’s remember the difference.

*(Sadly, in the real case of California’s Alien Land Law of 1913, the court took way too long to finally overturn it.)