I couldn’t have said it better myself.
For two years now, I have been called ignorant, racist, angry and violent by the left. The very foul-mouthed protesters of Bush dare to now label my words as “hate speech.”
Last week, the left quickly blamed the right for the national tragedy of a shooting spree by a madman who never watched Fox News, never listened to Rush Limbaugh and likely did not know who Sarah Palin is.
Fortunately, the American public rejected out of hand that idiotic notion that the right was responsible.
Rather than apologize, the left wants to change the tone of the political debate.
The left suddenly wants civil discourse.
The left wants to play games of semantics.
The left wants us to be civil — after being so uncivil for a decade.
Read it all and be prepared for spontaneous fist-pumping.
Uber liberal NYT columnist, Charles M. Blow, “congratulates” the left for their ghoulish attempts to link the right to the Tuscon massacre.
Immediately after the news broke, the air became thick with conjecture, speculation and innuendo. There was a giddy, almost punch-drunk excitement on the left. The prophecy had been fulfilled: “words have consequences.” And now, the right’s rhetorical chickens had finally come home to roost.
The dots were too close and the temptation to connect them too strong. The target was a Democratic congresswoman. There was the map of her district in the cross hairs. There were her own prescient worries about overheated rhetoric.
Within hours of the shooting, there was a full-fledged witch hunt to link the shooter to the right.
“I saw Goody Proctor with the devil! Oh, I mean Jared Lee Loughner! Yes him. With the devil!”
The only problem is that there was no evidence then, and even now, that overheated rhetoric from the right had anything to do with the shooting. (In fact, a couple of people who said they knew him have described him as either apolitical or “quite liberal.”) The picture emerging is of a sad and lonely soul slowly, and publicly, slipping into insanity.
Great. So the left overreacts and overreaches and it only accomplishes two things: fostering sympathy for its opponents and nurturing a false equivalence within the body politic. Well done, Democrats.
Now we’ve settled into the by-any-means-necessary argument: anything that gets us to focus on the rhetoric and tamp it down is a good thing. But a wrong in the service of righteousness is no less wrong, no less corrosive, no less a menace to the very righteousness it’s meant to support.
You can’t claim the higher ground in a pit of quicksand.
Paul Krugman, last seen flailing for air in said pit, could not be reached for comment.
The day of reckoning has finally arrived. Nationally, today is our day to send a very clear message to Obama and his Democrat pals in Washington. Locally, today is our day to send a very clear message to Cadillac Deval and his corrupt, hack Democrat pals on Beacon Hill.
In case you had forgotten (as if) here are a few reasons to get out vote, courtesy of Moe Lane:
Now, some of you (more of you, I suspect, than are willing to admit it) read the paragraph above, read the article that it links to, and then started to feel… pity. Or empathy, because it happened to you in 2006 and 2008. Or merely a natural desire to not kick someone when they are down. And those are laudable impulses to have. But before you act on those impulses with regard to these professional Democrats, please remember this:
- These people told their clients to say that you hate African-Americans.
- These people told their clients to say that you hate Latinos.
- These people told their clients to say that you hate gays.
- These people told their clients to say that you hate women.
- These people told their clients to say that you hate Jews.
- These people told their clients to say that you hate Muslims.
- These people told their clients to say that you hate the poor.
- These people told their clients to say that you hate America.
Shall I continue?
- These people told their clients to say that you were fascists.
- These people told their clients to say that you were theocrats.
- These people told their clients to say that you were stupid.
- These people told their clients to say that you were uneducated.
- These people told their clients to say that you were hatemongers.
- These people told their clients to say that you were insane.
- These people told their clients to say that you were violent extremists.
I can keep this going for quite a while, you know.
- These people told their clients to call you unpatriotic.
- These people told their clients to call you cowards.
- These people told their clients to mock you at every opportunity.
- These people told their clients to deliberately use a sexual slur when referring to you.
- These people told their clients to trivialize and dismiss your concerns at every opportunity.
And now these professional Democrats are sad because they’re going to lose. Well, they deserve to lose. Because they’re bad people. And because the entire point of the United States of America is to make sure that bad people lose. So go vote on Tuesday, and make as many bad people as possible lose.
Locally, how can anyone forget Deval’s Cadillac, his $10,000 drapes, his wife’s social secretary, the doling out of six figure jobs to his Milton neighbors, the attempt to plant a hack pol pal into a six figure job which had been vacant for twelve years, his broken promise to lower your property taxes, his broken promise to hire 1000 new police officers, his dismantling of the program that allows State Troopers to work with ICE to enforce our nation’s immigration laws, his support of drivers’ licenses for illegals, his support of in-state tuition for illegals, the refusal to let the citizens of Massachusetts vote on marriage, the 25% increase on the sales tax to 6.25% – including already taxed alcohol – and all the while local aid has been cut and your taxes keep going up.
It’s finally November…it’s time to remember.
You know you’re in deep you-know-what when, as a Democrat, The Boston Globe demands that you come clean – and fast.
According to Representative Tierney, Patrice didn’t know the money was shady, and thought she was telling the truth when she filed Robert’s income tax forms claiming the money was from “commissions.’’ But that’s not what she asserted in court: A guilty plea is an admission to having knowingly committed a crime. John Tierney’s statement said that Patrice agreed only that she should have been more inquisitive about the true nature of her brother’s income. It was, in fact, a stunning lack of curiosity, since he previously had been charged with illegal gambling in the United States.
No one can account for absolutely everything a spouse does. But in most marriages, subjects like the management of a $7 million bank account tend to come up. John Tierney needs to explain precisely when he learned of this account, and whether he ever questioned its legality. The Tierneys made no reference to whether they themselves ever used or benefited from the money, though the congressman’s spokesman insisted that they did not. They should make it perfectly clear that they did not, and answer any and all questions on the matter.
With that information, voters should be able to make up their own minds about their congressman, who is on the ballot for an eighth term this November.
In handling issues like this, politicians usually follow a predictable script: There’s an expression of loyalty to one’s spouse, often followed at some point by an appeal to inquisitors to “lay off my family.’’ Inevitably, political allies pop up, chorus-like, to offer their support in such difficult times — as though someone got sick or died, rather than committed a serious felony.
Let’s hope the Tierneys and their supporters skip this drama and get quickly to the point: What did John Tierney know, and when did he know it?
Feel free to call his office and ask a helpful staffer.
Washington, DC: 202-225-8020
Fredo is on a roll. First he calls the Tea Party and Republicans “extremists” in his lame Delawow! fund raising email, then he turns around and implores the very same people he insulted to support the doomed Disclose Act. Now he’s blaming the uninformed rubes of the electorate for his party’s epic failures. Not exactly a winning strategy, but nobody ever called Fredo the sharpest knife in the drawer.
A testy U.S. Sen. John F. Kerry yesterday blamed clueless voters with short attention spans for the uphill battle beleaguered Democrats are facing against Republicans across the nation.
“We have an electorate that doesn’t always pay that much attention to what’s going on so people are influenced by a simple slogan rather than the facts or the truth or what’s happening,” Kerry told reporters after touring the Boston Medical Center yesterday.
Conservative political blogger William Jacobson, who writes Legal Insurrection, immediately pounced on Kerry’s comments, saying that attitude is why voters are looking to shake up Capitol Hill by electing upstart candidates such as U.S. Sen. Scott Brown.
“It just continues the Democrats’ theme that the reason people are upset is because they don’t understand. They’re not smart enough. That sort of rhetoric just gets people even more upset,” said Jacobson.
Kerry made the remarks on voters following questions about U.S. Rep Barney Frank’s re-election campaign and queries about securing federal funding for the Hub hospital.
“I think a lot of the anger today – while it’s appropriate because Washington is broken – is not directed at the right people,” said Kerry. “Barney is prepared, as others are, to explain what we’re doing. I think when people hear the facts and they see what we’re doing, it frankly makes sense.”
In the interview, Kerry added that voters should be mad at stonewalling Republicans and “big money” in politics instead, referring to a bill blocked by Republicans Thursday that would reveal corporate and union leaders who fund big-bucks political ads.
He went on to blame the legislative logjam in Washington, D.C., for fewer federal dollars sent to the state.
Keep talking, Fredo. Pretty please!
(Photo credit: AP)
Let’s get into the delicious details:
A year after President Barack Obama’s political honeymoon ended, his job approval rating has dropped to a negative 44 – 48 percent, his worst net score ever, and American voters say by a narrow 39 – 36 percent margin that they would vote for an unnamed Republican rather than President Obama in 2012, according to a Quinnipiac University poll released today.
Anti-incumbent sentiment slams both parties as voters disapprove 59 – 31 percent of the job Democrats are doing, and disapprove 59 – 29 percent of Republicans in Congress. But voters say 43 – 38 percent they would vote for a Republican in a generic Congressional race.
This compares to a 48 – 43 percent approval for Obama in a May 26 national poll by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University and a 57 – 33 percent approval last July, just before the political firestorm created by opposition to his health care plan galvanized political opponents and turned independent voters against him.
In this latest survey of more than 2,000 voters, independent voters disapprove of Obama 52 – 38 percent and say 37 – 27 percent they would vote for a Republican contender in 2012.
American voters also say 48 – 40 percent Obama does not deserve reelection in 2012.
|It’s all Bush’s fault.
I pass one of these signs during my daily commute and have to fight the desire to plow it over with the Mighty Outback.
The Bay State has blown nearly $500,000 in taxpayer dough on road signs promoting President Obama’s stimulus projects – nearly 10 percent of the total nationwide – in a campaign Republicans are ripping as wasteful partisan propaganda in tough election year, a Herald review shows.
U.S. Department of Transportation spokeswoman Nancy Singer said state officials across the country have spent a total of $5 million on the signs – meaning Massachusetts accounts for nearly 10 percent of the nation’s total stimulus sign spending.
“It kills me to see us spending that much money on a bunch of signs to tell people what they’re spending their money on,” huffed Republican Jon Golnik, who’s running against U.S. Rep. Niki Tsongas (D-Lowell) in the 5th congressional district. “It’s the definition of waste.”
The Obama-friendly signs – which cost some $443,000 to make and install – have popped up at construction sites everywhere from Danvers to Harvard. They remind motorists the president is “Putting America to Work,” even as local congressional Democrats fend off strong challengers riding a throw-the-bums out tide.
The review comes as U.S. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.) has called for an investigation into “overtly political guidance on stimulus advertising.”
“Americans expected that stimulus funds would be used for projects that have lasting value and not as political propaganda,” Issa told the Herald.
10 freaking percent. Way to go, Deval.
If Illinois has spent $1 million on its own, $5 million total seems low to me. Not the the Obama administration would fudge numbers or anything. Beacause they’ve never done that before, right?
Remember in November.
This is the third poll in less than two weeks which continues to show Obama’s numbers tanking. His approval rating – at just 43% – is at an all-time low in this poll.
UPDATE: This just-released CBS poll shows even more dismal numbers for Obama with just 40% having confidence in him as a leader.
Public confidence in President Obama has hit a new low, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll. Four months before midterm elections that will define the second half of his term, nearly six in 10 voters say they lack faith in the president to make the right decisions for the country, and a clear majority once again disapproves of how he is dealing with the economy.
Regard for Obama is still higher than it is for members of Congress, but the gap has narrowed. About seven in 10 registered voters say they lack confidence in Democratic lawmakers and a similar proportion say so of Republican lawmakers.
Overall, more than a third of voters polled — 36 percent — say they have no confidence or only some confidence in the president, congressional Democrats and congressional Republicans. Among independents, this disillusionment is higher still. About two-thirds of all voters say they are dissatisfied with or angry about the way the federal government is working.
But you keep on golfing and flying around the country to ‘help’ Democrats running for reelection, Barry.
You heard it ad nauseum from Barry & Co.: Under Obamacare, for the first time in the history of the universe, the eeevil health insurance companies will no longer be able to deny coverage to Americans with pre-existing medical conditions.
As it turns out, it was just another Obama-ism (that would be a lie).
The Obama administration has not ruled out turning sick people away from an insurance program created by the new healthcare law to provide coverage for the uninsured.
Critics of the $5 billion high-risk pool program insist it will run out of money before Jan. 1, 2014. That’s when the program sunsets and health plans can no longer discriminate against people with pre-existing conditions.
Administration officials insist they can make changes to the program to ensure it lasts until 2014, and that it may not have to turn away sick people. Officials said the administration could also consider reducing benefits under the program, or redistributing funds between state pools. But they acknowledged turning some people away was also a possibility.
Remember in November.
Karma’s a bitch, Lurch.
US Senator Scott Brown, who only months ago was a little-known figure even within the tiny band of Republicans in the state Senate, not only catapulted to national stature with his upset US Senate victory, but is today the most popular officeholder in Massachusetts, according to a Boston Globe poll.
After less than five months in Washington, Brown outpolls such Democratic stalwarts as President Obama and US Senator John F. Kerry in popularity, the poll indicates. He gets high marks not only from Republicans, but even a plurality of Democrats views him favorably.
The support for Brown, whose victory became a symbol of voter anger, is consistent with widespread sentiment that incumbents in Massachusetts and Washington “need to be replaced with a new crop of leaders.’’ That statement was supported by 50 percent of those polled, while 28 percent said they trust the incumbents.
Kerry = Fredo.