Who Created the Tea Party?

February 28, 2011

Sorry folks! My daytime life has kept me from blogging for a little while. So to quote an infamous Jack Nicholson character, “I’ve been away, but now I’m back!” Now on with the show!  

The liberal news media—CNN in particular—have been talking quite a bit lately about the supposed second anniversary of the Tea Party.  Which I find very amusing.  It’s as if in their minds the Tea Party movement came into being one dark day by some formal pronouncement or decree. 

So who did create the Tea Party?

TO BE CONTINUED …

Gem of the Year: Gray Lady Gone Senile

December 31, 2010

What used to be a newspaper called the New York Times recently proclaimed that Comedy Central’s Jon Stewart is arguably today’s Edward R. Murrow, the renowned broadcast journalist.

While this may seem remarkable, in related stories the New York Times has made similar comparisons as follows: Rachel Maddow is today’s Walter Cronkite; Adam Sandler is today’s Clark Gable; Rosie O’Donnell is today’s Marilyn Monroe; Nancy Pelosi is today’s Thomas Jefferson; and Paris Hilton is today’s Joan of Arc. Oh, and of course, Barack Hussein Obama is today’s Jesus Christ.

I would add one more to their list: the New York Times is today’s Mad Magazine.

Decision Time

November 2, 2010

Today is the day.  Election day.  Finally.  If you have not already voted early, today is the day for you to do so.  To vote.  It is a rare and wonderful right that we possess as citizens of a magnificent and exceptional country.  But in this election it is especially so.  Certainly each individual candidate has his or her own distinctive strengths and weaknesses, his or her own policies they seek to support or oppose.  And while those considerations should be given their due weight, try to put those aside for a moment and think about something much larger.  No matter the personal peculiarities of the contestants, and their specific policy views, the decisions we make about those whom we choose to send to Washington will have far-reaching consequences for the greater future of this country, and for your own future as well.   For this is a time to decide what kind of nation we want America to be. 

The Democrats, and their leader President Obama, have made the choice a very clear one from the start.  They believe that a large and expanding central government offers the best solutions to the problems we face as a nation.  Obama, himself, has repeatedly said that government—and only government—can adequately address the challenges we have before us.  On the other hand most Republicans—at least those who are truly conservative—see things the other way.  That individuals, living and acting for themselves and interacting with one another through free exchange, are best able to make their own decisions about their own lives.  Indeed, government, they argue, has proven itself capable of only getting in the way; and the larger and more intrusive government becomes, the more it gets in the way, or worse.  It is an age-old struggle: the freedom of the individual against the ever-encroaching power of the government. 

The “Progressive” ideology advanced by Obama, and his followers in Congress, maintains that America must always be moving forward—changing, transforming, progressing ever-closer toward becoming something, and that the power and machinery of government are to be fully utilized in that endeavor.   But becoming what?  Becoming what they see as their idea of the ultimate society.  It is a grand vision they have.  One in which the individual, and the choices allowed to the individual about his employment, his compensation, his finances, his health, where he lives, how he moves about, what he eats, what he drinks, the air he breathes, and even the very speech he utters, are all in one way or another, monitored, measured, influenced, controlled or compelled by government.  It is a vision of a nation and society where everyone pulls together in a common purpose and towards a common goal, a goal that is predetermined by government, or specifically by a small elite within government. 

And this goes to the prime difference between the ideology of Liberal-Progressivism, as embraced by the Democrats, and the conservative philosophy of Republicans and the Tea Party groups that are having such an influential role within the Republican Party and in this election.  And that difference is this: Progressives start with a vision—their vision—of what society should be and they seek, through government, to compel individuals to comply with that which is needed to bring about that utopian vision.  Conservatives, on the other hand, start with an understanding of individual human nature—its strengths and its weaknesses, its aspirations and its limitations—and upon that foundational understanding, they craft the rules upon which to build a successful government and society.

The Progressive belief in a common, top-driven, overriding principle of society has been tried before, in many nations and at many times throughout human history.  It has come forward in many guises, under many banners, called many different names, but it is always the same and it has always failed.  Indeed, it has done much worse than fail, it has destroyed; destroyed economies, destroyed societies, destroyed cultures, destroyed families and destroyed lives. 

History has shown us that great civilizations will rise and they will fall.  But to the extent that they have succeeded, it has always been because they have stayed true to their founding principles.  If they have failed, it is because they have strayed from them.  If our founding fathers were alive today, being the men they were, as champions of a limited, judicious and ethical government, knowledgeable as they were about human nature and the tragedies of human history, how do you think they would vote in this election?  How would they decide the question: what kind of nation do we want to be?

Related Posts:

http://culturecrusader.wordpress.com/2010/10/30/a-republic-if-you-can-keep-it/

http://culturecrusader.wordpress.com/2010/07/04/to-be-american/

http://culturecrusader.wordpress.com/2010/06/11/coming-undone/

http://culturecrusader.wordpress.com/2010/03/20/why-you-don%e2%80%99t-have-a-right-to-healthcare/

 

Gem of the Week: Scientists Report Discovery Of “Liberal” Gene

October 30, 2010

Scientists have reportedly discovered the existence of a “liberal” gene in human beings. 1   It apparently controls a very small but—in liberals—highly active area of the brain known as the hippo-liberalis-jak-assis which is responsible for naïveté, gullibility, impulsiveness, stubbornness, irrational behavior, wasteful spending, the predisposition to be misled by charismatic people, and just all around stupidity.

So finally, we have an explanation for this disease that seems to afflict so many Americans.  And the really good news is that scientists are now working on a cure which they expect to have widely available in all fifty states this November 2nd

________________

Notes:

Fn. 1:

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/10/28/researchers-liberal-gene-genetics-politics/

A Republic, If You Can Keep It

October 30, 2010

 

“Now more than ever before, the people are responsible for the character of their Congress. If that body be ignorant, reckless and corrupt, it is because the people tolerate ignorance, recklessness and corruption. If it be intelligent, brave and pure, it is because the people demand these high qualities to represent them in the national legislature … If the next centennial does not find us a great nation … it will be because those who represent the enterprise, the culture, and the morality of the nation do not aid in controlling the political forces.”

–James Garfield, the twentieth president of the United States, 1877

James Garfield

James Garfield was not one of our more distinguished presidents.  But then he didn’t have time to be: he was assassinated by a deranged individual in 1881, after serving only 200 days in office.  It would seem, however, that Garfield at least had a clear understanding of what was required of the nation if it were to continue to exist as a constitutional republic.

With that in mind, and with this all important mid-term election finally upon us, I thought it might be worth looking at some of the devious (not to say illegal) things our opponents have been up to lately.  And for those of you who might be first time readers to this blog, our opponents are the Democrats, the Liberals, the Progressives, or whatever the hell they choose to call themselves these days.  Let’s take a look at some key races.

In Nevada’s hotly contested Senate race, where Republican challenger Sharron Angle currently holds onto a slim lead over Democratic incumbent Harry Reid, otherwise known as the Progressive Prig of the Senate, the following chicanery has occurred:

  • Reid’s supporters have propped up a fake Tea Party candidate, Scott Ashjian, to siphon off votes that would otherwise go to Angle.  Of course Harry Reid himself denies all knowledge of any such thing. 1
  • Reid’s union thugs and other supporters are giving away free food and gift cards at early voting rallies, despite the fact that Nevada law expressly forbids such bribery.
  • The polls of at least one county in Nevada are controlled by Reid’s union supporters—the SEIU (Service Employees International Union)—and, not surprisingly, voters there have discovered that Reid’s name was automatically checked off on their ballots when they went to vote.  3

In Pennsylvania, where Republican Pat Toomey and Democrat Joe Sestak are locked in a close Senate race, Democratic officials in the City of Philadelphia are literally handing out cash, otherwise known as “walking around money” or “street money” in order to buy votes.  Oh but don’t worry, it is a time-honored practice with roots in the corrupt politics of the nation’s inner-cities and involves campaigns actually making cash payouts to local political hacks and “community organizers” who then spread that money around to anyone who is willing to knock on doors and ratchet up voter turnout for Democratic candidates. 4

Turning to Arizona, the left-wing Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has just ruled against the state, striking down its law requiring proof of citizenship identification when residents are registering to vote thus making it much easier for illegal aliens, felons and others to fraudulently register and vote as though they were Arizona citizens. 5

Finally in Maryland, a state currently run by some of the most disgusting politicians in the country, Democratic officials are actually considering appealing a federal judge’s ruling that would extend the deadline for allowing absentee ballots for military personnel, currently serving on active duty in Iraq and Afghanistan, to be counted—a situation that was created by that state’s failure to timely comply with the law in the first place. 6

Now call me a rube, but it would seem to me that safeguarding the right to vote should be among the most basic, if not sacred, of duties for any who would involve themselves in the politics of this nation.  Without the integrity of that process—one so fundamental to any political system that purports to abide by democratic principles—the entire foundation upon which government rests must ultimately fragment and fall apart.

This country’s founders, like President James Garfield after them, understood that the nation they had formed would last only if its people were morally good and decent, and if those same qualities were reflected in the individuals the people chose to represent them.  As John Adams, considering the fragility of the newly created government, once wrote: “Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other.”  Perhaps even more to the point was Benjamin Franklin.  Upon leaving the Constitutional Convention, a woman asked him what kind of government they had given the country.  Without hesitation, Franklin replied, “A republic, if you can keep it.”

Can we indeed.

_________________________

Notes:

Fn. 1: http://gatewaypundit.firstthings.com/2010/10/sharron-angle-builds-lead-on-harry-reid-in-nevada-race/

Fn. 2: http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=7539

Fn. 3: http://biggovernment.com/publius/2010/10/26/the-seiu-harry-reid-and-voting-problems/

Fn. 4: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10/28/walking-money-alive-election/

Fn. 5: http://www.examiner.com/county-political-buzz-in-san-diego/arizona-looses-9th-circuit-court-voter-identification-requirement

Fn. 6: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/10/29/maryland-weighs-appeal-military-voters-win-extension-absentee-ballots/

_____________________

Related Posts:

http://culturecrusader.wordpress.com/2010/11/02/decision-time/

http://culturecrusader.wordpress.com/2010/07/04/to-be-american/

http://culturecrusader.wordpress.com/2010/06/11/coming-undone/

http://culturecrusader.wordpress.com/2010/03/20/why-you-don%e2%80%99t-have-a-right-to-healthcare/

Gem of the Week: Thank You, Gloria.

October 6, 2010

Thanks to attorney Gloria Allred we now have exposed the deceitful, nefarious, illegal dealings of one very dishonest woman.  And now this woman will have to face the repercussions of her actions.  Through her good works and contacts, Gloria has put the public spotlight on those who would deceive the government about the status of an illegal alien in order to create pecuniary gain for themselves.

Who am I talking about?  California gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman?  No, not at all.  She did nothing wrong, other than let herself be duped by her own housekeeper.  I am talking about the housekeeper herself, Nicky Diaz Santillan, who happens also to be Gloria Allred’s client.  This woman entered the country as an illegal alien.  She obtained false employment documents including a fake social security card and California drivers license.  She deceived an employment agency by presenting this false documentation in order to obtain employment. And she lied to her employer, Meg Whitman, about her status for nine years all the while collecting a $23 hourly wage.

And now Gloria Allred has brought all of this to the attention of the public, including the immigration authorities.  Thank you Gloria for your invaluable service to the nation!  But, I have to admit, placing your own client in legal jeopardy and at risk of deportation sure is a funny way to go about it.  Oh well, I’m sure you know what you’re doing.  After all you are a “super-lawyer.”  By the way, good luck with the California Bar Association!

______________________________________________

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO YOU BY OUR PROUD SPONSOR:

www.enforceazlaw.com

Riddle: How Many CNN Reporters Does It Take to Write a One-Page Article On Morality? Answer: Two.

September 17, 2010

Yesterday, two children who go by the strange and possibly made up names of Yaron Brook and Onkar Ghate spent their whole summer vacation coming up with a one-page article entitled: “Our Moral Code is Out of Date.”  They submitted it to their fourth grade teacher who immediately emailed it to CNN and it was of course summarily published on the CNN website.  By the way, for any of you public high school teachers who would like to use this CNN primer as a short-cut to actually doing your job, you may find the article here:

 //edition.cnn.com/2010/OPINION/09/16/brook.moral.code.outdated/index.html

(Just do me a favor and don’t tell anyone I sent ya.)

Anyway, I, for one, was very interested and excited to learn just how our morality–being around for two thousand years or so–had suddenly gotten out of date and was in need of an extreme makeover.  I mean, since CNN has been a premier (tee-hee) news agency for about two or three decades, you would have thought they might have jumped on this story earlier.

Anyway, if I understand what these two kids are saying, our morality is out of date because Christianity (there ya go, blame those damn Christians again!) screwed up.  By failing to predict the advent of the industrial revolution and the benevolent greed of the robber barons and their modern-day P.C. equivalent (e.g. Bill Gates), the Bible and other similar undisclosed texts have basically become obsolete, and hence let us down. Until, in the words of the authors, “science, freedom and the pursuit of personal profit” are embraced, our morals cannot truly be caught up with the morality of September, 2010. Now, what the shifting standards of moral relativism will be like in October, 2010 is anyone’s guess, so I suppose we’ll just have to wait for CNN to find two more smart fourth graders to explain it to us.

Oh, by the way, there is just one little thing in the article written by these kids that should be pointed out: They assume that “giving money away to strangers” is not a morally significant act inasmuch as morality is only about pursuing one’s own happiness.  Assuming, for the moment, that their definition of individual morality  is the correct one, since when does the personal decision to give one’s own money away fail to meet the definition of the pursuit of happiness?

Mosque Mania!

September 14, 2010

Yesterday, the Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf called on “moderate” Muslims (and others of the moderate persuasion) to take control of the debate swirling around the controversial proposed Ground Zero mosque, known as Cordoba House.  1

Speaking before the Council on Foreign Relations 2 —a self-described research center that dedicates itself to understanding the world “by better comprehending global trends,” Imam Rauf said that America has let “extremists hijack the agenda.” 3

The Iman (who for some reason reminds me of a Bond villain) had some other things to say.  First, that he is a devout Muslim and that he prays at least five times a day as required by Muslim law.  But that he’s also just a regular American, that he pays his taxes, pledges allegiance to the flag, and that he’s even a Giants fan don’t-cha know!  (Personally, I would rather he’d said he was a Jets fan, but that’s just me.)

In light of all the controversy surrounding the Cordoba project, when asked about whether it was necessary to build a mosque at Ground Zero, this regular, reasonable American said that his answer is still “a categorical yes.”

Now, I actually agree with the silver-tongued Imam that the voices of reason should attempt to regain control of the discourse regarding the mosque, but for those of you who are just joining the story now, let’s examine some items of recent history:

Item One:

When asked last month by the Governor of New York, David Paterson, to meet in order to discuss the possibility of moving the mosque to another location, the Imam and the developer behind the project categorically refused to meet and rejected any offer on the part of the Governor to help them find a different site.

Item Two:

When Donald Trump, in an attempt to end the controversy, made an offer to purchase the proposed mosque site for 25 percent over and above the value of the property, the lawyer representing the Imam and the project developer rejected the offer calling it a cheap publicity stunt.

Item Three:

Last week, the Imam appeared on CNN and said that if the mosque is moved at this stage it would mean violent attacks against the United States and that “if we don’t handle this crisis correctly it could become something which could really become very, very, very dangerous indeed.” 4  (Now, I’m no expert on criminal law, but that sounds a lot like extortion to me.)

Item Four:

During the same CNN interview, wherein he fielded a battery of tough, investigative questions by fourteen-year-old Soledad Obrien, he said that he would provide complete information that would make transparent all the murky details behind the syndicate of backers on the mosque project, including whether any of them are affiliated with terrorist organizations. (We are still waiting on that, by the way.)

Item Five:

The Imam has made statements in the past about: America being an accessory to 9-11, about America having more blood on its hands than Al Qaeda, about having America become compliant to Islamic Sharia law, and about how Hamas is not really what he would call a terrorist organization. But let’s not dwell on the past.

So where was I?  Ah, yes – moderate Muslims.  Well, as I said, I agree with the smooth-talking Imam that moderate Muslims should control the discourse. But what I am wondering about now is whether the Imam actually knows of any.

___________

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO YOU BY OUR PROUD SPONSOR:

www.mosquebusters.com

___________

Notes:

Fn. 1:  The proposed name for the planned Ground Zero mosque—Cordoba House—refers to Cordoba, Spain where Muslims built a great mosque as a symbol of their conquest of Spain during the Islamic invasion of the 8th century.  The building of mosques on conquered ground is standard practice in the Muslim world: a kind of triumphalism or a planting of a flag of victory. 

Fn. 2: This august body is apparently populated by great world thinkers such as movie actress Angelina Jolie and T.V. anchorman Brian Williams.  See: http://www.cfr.org/about/

Fn. 3:

http://edition.cnn.com/2010/US/09/13/new.york.imam/index.html?hpt=T2

Fn. 4:

 http://archives.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1009/08/lkl.01.html

Al Gore: Extremist in Chief

September 2, 2010

 

Extremist

A few months ago, in a posting on this blog, I had dubbed Bill Clinton an extremist. Indeed, I anointed him “Extremist in Chief.”  You can read that entire posting by clicking here:

 http://culturecrusader.wordpress.com/2010/04/21/bill-clinton-extremist-in-chief/

Well, perhaps I went a little overboard with those remarks and I was wrong for that.  Bill Clinton is not the Extremist in Chief; his former Vice-President, Al Gore, is.  And to back that up, I draw your attention to the words of Bill Clinton himself: 

“Before the bombing occurred, there was a sort of fever in America… the fabric of American life had been unraveling. More and more people who had a hard time figuring out where they fit in, it is true that we see some of that today… Criticism is part of the lifeblood of democracy. No one is right all the time. But we should remember that there is a big difference between criticizing a policy or a politician and demonizing the government that guarantees our freedoms and the public servants who enforce our laws… We are again dealing with difficulties in a contentious, partisan time…. Fifteen years ago, the line was crossed in Oklahoma City. In the current climate, with so many threats against the president, members of Congress and other public servants, we owe it to the victims of Oklahoma City, and those who survived and responded so bravely, not to cross it again.”

At the time, Bill Clinton was criticizing the Tea Parties and trying to tie them in with nuts like Timothy McVeigh—saying, essentially, that the Tea Partiers should shut up and go home before they encourage some lunatic to do something nasty.  This of course was, and still is, all part of a concerted effort to marginalize and identify ordinary Americans as extremists simply because they object to the liberal, big government policies of the Democrats.

So what does this have to do with Al Gore?  Nothing really, until yesterday.  Yesterday, a crazed eco-terrorist, James Lee, was shot dead during a hostage standoff at the Discovery Channel Building in Silver Spring, Maryland after they “ignored his ideas for a TV show.”  Luckily, no one else was hurt.

James Lee

Among other wild ramblings found in posts by Lee on the Internet, he stated that humans are ruining the planet and that the Discovery Channel and its parent company Discovery Communications should develop programs to sound the alarm.  Well, I don’t know about you, but I’d say “Kate Plus Eight” makes a very compelling argument for birth control (and I’m not even talking about her kids.)  But I digress.  Lee’s alleged manifesto adds: “Nothing is more important than saving … the Lions, Tigers, Giraffes, Elephants, Froggies, Turtles, Apes, Raccoons, Beetles, Ants, Sharks, Bears, and, of course, the Squirrels. The humans?  The planet does not need humans.”  1

First of all, I don’t think I would’ve given such primacy to the Squirrels.  And, excuse me but, “Froggies?”  But I digress again.  Also among statements made by Lee, he claims to have experienced an “awakening” when he watched Al Gore’s environmental documentary “An Inconvenient Truth!” 

Well, there you have it Ladies and Gentlemen!  An admission: Al Gore made him do it.  By selling his alarmist, extremist view of the world to an America that is in a “sort of fever” Al Gore was just asking for trouble.  So I say we commence investigating this Gore character immediately.  Let’s look into him, his family, his friends, his finances, his supporters and all their families and friends and finances.  Who knows, they’re probably all crazed eco-nuts just like James Lee!

And I am sure, taking him at his own words, that no one other than Bill Clinton himself would agree.

Notes

Fn. 1:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/38957020/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/

Restoring Honor, Reclaiming Independence

August 27, 2010

Your friendly neighborhood Crusader plans to be at the Glenn Beck “Restoring Honor” rally this weekend, handing out the document below to be signed, sealed and delivered to our illustrious leader in the White House.  Hope to see you there.

~    RECLAMATION OF INDEPENDENCE    ~

 WHEN in the course of human events, it becomes necessary for the People of a Nation conceived in Liberty to Reclaim and Restore that Liberty which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, it is only fitting and proper that they set forth the causes which impel them to such a Reclamation.

WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.  That to secure these Rights, the People of a Free society have instituted a form of Government which derives its just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, and that when such Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right and Duty of the People to alter or abolish it and to reestablish those Liberties that have been wrongly seized or destroyed by Government.

WE the People seek no new Rights from Government, but merely to Reclaim those Rights and Liberties that all Men in a Free society naturally possess, and which cannot lawfully be taken away, excepting where that society has ceased to be Free.  Just as the ordered farmland of our Founding Forefathers was, from time to time, needed by them to be Reclaimed from an ever-encroaching wilderness, so too must we today Reclaim our ordered Liberty from the Despotic menace of an ever-encroaching Government.

WE have neither asked for, nor do we now relish a Confrontation with Government that has been foisted upon us by Government.  But neither do we shrink nor shy away from any just and necessary Struggle to Reclaim and Restore that Liberty which, through a long Train of Abuses and Usurpations, Government has evidenced a Design to diminish, and thereby subject us to the whims of Despotism.  If in our speech we seem immoderate and in our argument defiant, then so be it!  We shall moderate our speech and mitigate our argument only when such Abuses and Usurpations as have been visited upon us by Government surcease, and not before!

WE, therefore, and in support of this Reclamation, with a firm Reliance on the Protection of Divine Providence, mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Signed this 28th day of August, 2010:

____________________        ____________________                 

 ____________________        ____________________       

 ____________________        ____________________       

 

PLEASE PRINT, SIGN AND MAIL TO:

The White House

1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

 Washington, DC 20500

 To open as a PDF file: 

  Reclamation of Independence- PDF version

 

Related Posts:

http://culturecrusader.wordpress.com/2010/02/27/glenn-beck%e2%80%99s-cpac-speech-tiger-woods-and-toilet-bowls-a-blackboard-and-brilliance/


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.