America’s fork in the road: the Tea Party vs. the Occupy Movement

December 1, 2011

Here’s a good video from Encounter Books and narrated by Bill Whittle on the choice the US faces in 2012 between two populist movements: the largely classical-liberal Tea Party and the progressive-and-further-Left Occupy movement (1). The video provides a clear and succinct summary of the deep philosophical differences between the two groups, and I think you’ll find the five or so minutes it takes to watch is time well-spent:

Every four years it seems people call the approaching election “the most important in our history,” and I admit I’ve become somewhat jaded to those claims. But there’s no doubting that the sequence of elections beginning in 2008 and perhaps climaxing in 2012 is very significant. In a process that began in 1980 with Reagan’s election and that continues to this day, the two parties are developing genuine (2) and serious ideological differences, as illustrated in the video.

It may not be the “most important election in our history,” but the choice is real and the repercussions will last for a long time.

Footnotes:
(1) Although I kind of hesitate to call Occupy “genuinely populist,” given the heavy backing from Big Labor.
(2) And, in the interests of authenticity, may I suggest the Democrat Party stop holding their Jefferson-Jackson Day dinners? You’ve gone so far down the Social-Democratic road that Presidents Jefferson and Jackson would run screaming in horror. (Well, Jackson might draw a sword, instead…)

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Advertisements

New Tone Watch: fellow Americans are sons of you-know-whats. UPDATED: Palin answers Hoffa

September 6, 2011

I have this vague memory of a time long ago —last January, in fact– when the President of the United States spoke at a memorial for the victims of the Tucson massacre and called for a calming of heated rhetoric and for a “new tone” in our political debates.

Silly me. That was then, this is now.

This last Labor Day, President Obama spoke in Detroit to an audience of union workers. Leading up to his speech, Teamsters President Jimmy Hoffa, Jr., (1) spoke to the crowd and gave us an example of that new tone in action:

Um… yeah. In case you missed that due to all the marbles in this thug’s mouth, here’s the key moment via RCP:

“We got to keep an eye on the battle that we face: The war on workers. And you see it everywhere, it is the Tea Party. And you know, there is only one way to beat and win that war. The one thing about working people is we like a good fight. And you know what? They’ve got a war, they got a war with us and there’s only going to be one winner. It’s going to be the workers of Michigan, and America. We’re going to win that war,” Jimmy Hoffa said to a heavily union crowd.

“President Obama, this is your army. We are ready to march. Let’s take these son of bitches out and give America back to an America where we belong,” Hoffa added.

(Emphasis added.)

About the only thing missing were the brown shirts and steel helmets. (And yes, I deliberately “went there.”)

Not to worry, though. Right after Hoffa’s speech, the President called him out and gave him exactly what-for:

That’s telling him! (What, you were expecting him to criticize a union boss?)

Let’s go back to that awful day in Tucson when Representative Giffords and several other people were gunned down by a delusional nut. Almost immediately, the baying hounds of the Democratic Party, their media allies, and the Left blogosphere jumped all over Sarah Palin for her supposedly violent rhetoric and an obscure campaign graphic for the 2010 election that used crosshairs to symbolize Democrats targeted for defeat. Though hunting and military imagery has been common in American politics for centuries, these sanctimonious yahoos acted as if Palin had herself whispered in the shooter’s ear, giving him orders. Hence Obama’s “above it all” call for a new tone.

Now, imagine if Sarah Palin, in Iowa and New Hampshire for rallies this weekend, had said what Hoffa said, calling fellow citizens SOBs and talking of war. How would the Democrats react? Or what would be the reaction in the media (2) if she or any Republican or conservative leader had said how proud she was of someone who cursed their political opponents and used indisputably violent rhetoric?

You and I both know they be all over this like ants at a picnic. (3)

Now, I’m not saying Hoffa was encouraging actual violence or that unions themselves are violent (Maybe. Kinda.) or that Obama ever would endorse violence (Well…), but, you see… To call it “rank, cynical hypocrisy” would be to state the obvious.

Meet the new tone, same as the old tone.

Footnotes:
(1) “Hoffa.” “Teamsters.” Now those are words any politician should want associated with his name. Yeesh. Well, maybe in Chicago…
(2) In case you’re wondering, most of the mainstream media have been silent on this story.
(3) For what it’s worth, so would most of the Right. But I doubt we’d have to, since our side doesn’t ally with legbreakers.

UPDATE: via Michelle Malkin, no wonder Jimmy Hoffa likes President Obama so much. “You scratch my back, and I’ll bust some heads for you.”

UPDATE 2: Sarah Palin answered Hoffa on her Facebook page today. No cursing, no calls to violence, just some honest  talk going over  the heads of the union bosses and straight to the membership. The key paragraphs:

To see where this leads, look at what’s happening to the working class in our industrialized cities. These cities are going to hell in a hand basket thanks to corruption, crony capitalism, and the union bosses’ greed. The union bosses derive their power from your union dues and their promise to deliver your votes to whichever politician they’re in bed with. They get their power from you, and yet their actions ultimately hurt you. They’re chasing American industry offshore by making outrageous, economically illogical demands that they know will never work. And now that they’ve chased jobs out of union states, they’re trying to chase them out of right-to-work states like South Carolina, so eventually the jobs will leave America altogether. But these union bosses will still figure out a way to keep their gig, and so will their politically aligned corporate friends. As long as these big corporations have a good crony capitalist in the White House, they can rely on DC to bail them out until the whole system goes bankrupt, which, I am afraid, is not very far off. When big government, big business, and big union bosses collude together, they get government to maximize their own interests against those of the rest of the country.

So, now these union bosses are desperately trying to cast the grassroots Tea Party Movement as being “against the workingman.” How outrageously wrong this unapologetic Jim Hoffa is, for the people’s movement is the real movement for working class men and women. It’s rooted in real solidarity, and not special interests and corporate kickbacks. It represents the needed reform that will empower workers and job creators. We stand with the little guy against the corruption and influence peddling of those who collude to grease the wheels of government power.

This collusion is at the heart of Obama’s economic vision for America. In practice it is socialism for the very rich and the very poor, but a brutal form of capitalism for the rest of us. It is socialism for the very poor who are reduced to a degrading perpetual dependence on a near-bankrupt centralized government to provide their every need, while at the same time robbing them of that which brings fulfillment and success – the life-affirming pride that comes from taking responsibility for your own destiny and building a better life through self-initiative and work ethic. And Obama’s vision is socialism via crony capitalism for the very rich who continue to get bailouts, debt-ridden “stimulus” funds, and special favors that allow them to waive off or help draft the burdensome regulations that act as a boot on the neck to small business owners who don’t have the same friends in high places. And where does this collusion leave working class Americans and the small business owners who create 70% of the jobs in this country? Out in the cold. It’s you and your children who are left paying for the cronyism of Obama and our permanent political class in DC.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


The right logo for Election 2012

June 12, 2011

One of the authors at the Chicago Boyz blog recently attended a local Democratic meeting (1) and noticed there were already an abundance of “Obama 2012” signs and bumper stickers. That made him think our side needed a reply, so he asked the audience for help.

This is the latest result:

(Click the image for a larger, clearer version.)

I like it and I hope they get it made into stickers and window cards; I’ll put one up.

Earlier versions here.

via Moe Lane

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)

Footnote:
(1) How did he accomplish that? Must’ve been the Groucho nose and glasses…


To be Black and a Tea Partier…

April 17, 2011

Makes one doubleplusungood, apparently:

It seems these exemplars of Our Betters on the Left (all bow) didn’t get the memo about the new, more civil tone their leaders demanded of us all* in the wake of the Giffords shooting. I’m sure they’re sorry and won’t ever let it happen again.†

via Legal Insurrection

LINKS: My blog-buddy ST has further examples of New Tone Patriotism in action.

*Actually, no they didn’t. Those sanctimonious hypocrites such as Pelosi, Dean, and Matthews really only demanded conservatives shut up. Because that’s the only argument they have left.

†And if you believe that one…


Loretta Sanchez (D-CA) shows again she is a bigoted dimwit

April 14, 2011

And this time she has company, in the form of two liberal (I assume) radio hosts who join her in mocking people who identify with the Tea Party, and Southerners in general. I’ll let them speak for themselves:

Moe Lane absolutely destroys Sanchez on the factual errors she commits in this interview, such as where most of the new representatives come from, but I want to point out something else: Note the cavalier contempt for conservatives’ concern over the constitutionality of Congress’ actions*. Instead of her showing respect for others’ respect for the document they and she are sworn to defend, Sanchez (and her interlocutors) mock them — and their funny names and accents.

Stupid red necks. Why can’t all y’all be like Loretta and just go along to get along and stop fussin’ yourselves over a silly old piece of parchment?

On the other hand, Loretta fits in perfectly fine with her caucus, the leader of which thinks elections really shouldn’t matter.

This isn’t the first time Congresswoman Sanchez (D-Race Card) has shown herself to be more than willing to play on race and ethnicity to gain an edge: when Arizona passed SB 1070, its bill to enforce federal immigration law that the Fed refused to enforce, Sanchez equated supporters of the bill with White supremacists. (Be sure to see the comments for a full discussion.) And during the 2010 election campaign, Sanchez, a member of the enlightened Democratic Party, went on Spanish-language channel Univision to tell her Hispanic viewers that the Vietnamese community in the district were trying to “steal our seat.” Sadly, she won.

Abraham Lincoln once famously said:

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.

I’d suggest to the congresswoman that she take Mr. Lincoln’s words to heart, but she passed the point of no return long ago and the secret is out.

PS: Sanchez is a louse, too. She tried to get Representative Gabrielle Giffords kicked off a committee while Giffords was lying in a hospital fighting for her life after being shot in the head.

PPS: And let’s not forget she likely cheated her way into the House, too, on the strength of illegal votes in her 1996 election.

PPPS: Must be a family thing; her sister, Congresswoman Linda Sanchez (D-No Free Speech), sponsored legislation to restrict free speech on the Internet.

*Absolutely accidental alliteration. I swear.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


That sound you hear is NPR’s funding being flushed

March 8, 2011

During the 2008 campaign, it came out that then-Senator Obama held the average American in a sort of patronizing contempt:

And it’s not surprising then [small-town Americans] get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations.

Now we have an example (as if we really needed it) of just how widespread this bigotry is among our progressive elites. Conservative filmmaker James O’Keefe (he of the ACORN exposés) has captured two National Public Radio executives trashing conservatives and Tea Party members, and not at all demurring at antisemitic statements, in order to impress what they thought were two donors from a Muslim Brotherhood front group that wants to spread sharia law. Watch and be enlightened:

And this is only part one. I can’t what to see what part two brings.

From the Daily Caller article:

“The current Republican Party, particularly the Tea Party, is fanatically involved in people’s personal lives and very fundamental Christian – I wouldn’t even call it Christian. It’s this weird evangelical kind of move,” declared [Ron] Schiller, the head of NPR’s nonprofit foundation, who last week announced his departure for the Aspen Institute.

In a new video released Tuesday morning by conservative filmmaker James O’Keefe, Schiller and Betsy Liley, NPR’s director of institutional giving, are seen meeting with two men who, unbeknownst to the NPR executives, are posing as members of a Muslim Brotherhood front group. The men, who identified themselves as Ibrahim Kasaam and Amir Malik from the fictitious Muslim Education Action Center (MEAC) Trust, met with Schiller and Liley at Café Milano, a well-known Georgetown restaurant, and explained their desire to give up to $5 million to NPR because, “the Zionist coverage is quite substantial elsewhere.”

On the tapes, Schiller wastes little time before attacking conservatives. The Republican Party, Schiller says, has been “hijacked by this group.” The man posing as Malik finishes the sentence by adding, “the radical, racist, Islamaphobic, Tea Party people.” Schiller agrees and intensifies the criticism, saying that the Tea Party people aren’t “just Islamaphobic, but really xenophobic, I mean basically they are, they believe in sort of white, middle-America gun-toting. I mean, it’s scary. They’re seriously racist, racist people.”

Schiller goes on to describe liberals as more intelligent and informed than conservatives. “In my personal opinion, liberals today might be more educated, fair and balanced than conservatives,” he said.

If you’re done gagging, you might want to read the rest.

It’s rather disquieting (to say the least) that media executives would be so anxious to solicit funds from self-proclaimed religious fascists whose stated goal is the destruction of the very system of constitutional liberty that makes a free press possible — while taking the money of taxpayers who would rightly object to seeing those same liberties replaced by sharia law.

But then, I’m just an uneducated, unfair, and unbalanced rube.

Ed Morrissey has some good analysis of this, including the suggestion that we help Schiller discover whether NPR will, as he believes, do better without federal funding. After this, I think a lot of congressmen and senators will be even more willing to assist.

One last thought: After listening to the bile spewed by Schiller and Liley, they have the nerve to call us bigots? Maybe someone should hand them a mirror — and then tell them to pass it along to all their “more educated” friends.

RELATED: If you want a good laugh, check out this article on NPR chief Vivian Schiller* at Big Government.

When asked “Do you believe there is an imbalance at NPR in terms of liberals and conservatives in the newsroom? If the answer is ‘yes’ what do you propose to do about it?”

Schiller responded by saying they get a “tremendous amount of criticism for being too conservative as well” and wishes those people could be in their editorial meetings so they could see what goes on. She then states NPR’s journalism reflects “no particular bias.”

After, she says there’s no question it’s a “perception issue” that some believe NPR is liberal in nature.

Now, I wonder why folks would get that perception? Follow the link for video.

*No relation to Ron Schiller that I know of.

UPDATE: Roger L. Simon calls this The Protocols of the Elders of NPR.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Steny Hoyer, family psychologist

January 6, 2011

I’m getting so confused. You see, I thought I and others like me opposed ObamaCare and other liberal-fascist Democratic programs because we believe strongly in limited government that operates within the bounds of the Constitution and that those same programs were actually harmful to the nation. In other words, we were acting in good faith and on principle.

Silly me.

Since the (Social) Democratic Party was given free reign with the election of President Obama, we’ve been variously told that we’re Nazi sympathizers, racists, and an angry mob that makes a fetish of the Constitution.

Now we know the root causes of our irrational rage. It’s not our fault — we’re victims!

According to Steny Hoyer (D-MD), former House Majority Leader and apparently a specialist in Family Psychology, our opposition to all the wonderful things the Democrats have done for us is rooted in our dysfunctional families:

There are a whole lot of people in the Tea Party that I see in these polls who don’t want any compromise. My presumption is they have unhappy families. All of you have been in families: single-parent, two-parents, whatever. Multiple parent and a stepfather. The fact is life is about trying to reach accommodation with one another so we can move forward. That is certainly what democracy is about. So if we are going to move forward compromise is necessary.

Representative Hoyer said that two days ago. Contrast his arrogance with the humility shown by John Boehner as he was sworn in yesterday as Speaker. Isn’t it usually the loser who’s humble and the winner who crows?

Hoyer’s “diagnosis” is yet another example of the stunning arrogance and patronizing contempt for their fellow citizens that permeates the progressive wing of the Democratic Party, which is to say the majority of what’s left of their caucus on the Hill. It is the attitude of an arrogant oligarchy that cannot come to terms with having some of their power taken away and facing the prospect of losing the rest of it in two years. They’re like an employee fired for incompetence who refuses to own up to the truth and instead whines that his boss was out to get him.

Steny, I think you’re the one who needs the psychologist. Not us.

RELATED: I wonder if Hoyer has read Max Blumenthal’s book? They sure think along the same lines…

via Jim Geraghty’s Morning Jolt

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)