So, you want to be a part of the RedState community?

Here’s how.

Getting Started:

You have probably already been browsing the site, or “lurking”.  You’ll note that Redstate.com is a “community blogging” site, which means that community members can write their own blog entries and interact/comment on the “diaries” created by both front-page contributors and by site members.  Now you would like to participate.

Register and join RedState.com

1. Click the “Sign Up” link on the home page and you’ll be presented with a page where you can enter your new username and an email address where we can send you your site password.  Also you will be given the option to sign up for the various mailing lists that we at RedState use to pass along information about the site and about various key issues that arise periodically.  Note:  when chosing a user name, don’t use a name of a famous person - we don’t allow impersonations…
2. Once you click the “Next” link on the first page of the registration process, you’ll get a message verifying your new user name and will be sent a “verification” email that contains a web link for activating your ID.
3. Open your email, click the link, and your new RedState account will be activated.  You’ll also be given a new password.  Make a note of this password!
4. Click the “Log In” link and log in using your new username and password.
5. Once you’ve logged in, click the “My Profile” link, and then “Edit” to update your profile information.  On the Profile page, you can update your password to one that’s more to your liking (unless, of course, you like the one we assigned to you!
6. Also, under “My Profile”, you can enter information about yourself, such as your email address, personal web site, general info (”Biographical info”), and a “Signature” that will appear at the end of your comments.

You’re now a member of the community!

(Important note: You will not be able to enter any comments or diaries for 24 hours after signing up.  This is to discourage “trolling” by those who sign up merely to cause trouble.)

Participate in RedState.com

Of course you’ve already been able to read the content on the RedState site.  But how do you get involved in conversations and post your own contributions?

Commenting:

• To comment on a diary, simply navigate to the diary and click on the “Leave a comment” link at the end of the diary entry, or go to the bottom of the page and enter your comment in the “Leave a Comment” box.  Be sure to enter a title to your comment.
• To respond to someone else’s comment, navigate to the comment you’re responding to, and (this is important!) click the “Reply to This” button.  If you don’t do this, your comment is “orphaned” and doesn’t appear in the threaded comment string.  It still appears, but the rest of the commenters won’t know who you’re replying to.
• Sometimes you may just want to enter a brief comment that is just title, with no text in the body.  Enter your title text, and then append the characters “(NT)” (or [NT] or -NT-) to the end of the title.  That tells the RedState software that there’s “No Text” in your comment, and it won’t bug you to enter a comment body.
• To add a signature to your comments, you can update your member Profile and enter information in the Signature field.   This field can contain HTML or plain text.  Once you’ve updated the Signature field in your profile, that signature text will be automatically added to all of your comments.  Don’t get carried away here - excessively long signatures are distracting and are frowned upon by The Management.
• To follow comments on the site, many members use the “Tracker”.  You can get there by clicking the “Recent Posts” link that appears near the top of every RedState page.
• Suggestion: Spend some time viewing diaries and comments on RedState before you begin commenting.  You’ll get a feel for the behavior of the various site members and the generally acceptable behavior and “manners” that we use.  The official site posting rules can be found here.  Commenters who jump in and behave inappropriately are generally not received in a friendly manner (an unfortunate truth in Internet-based forums…)

Now that you’re interacting with the community, how do you publish your own diaries?

Diaries

Diaries are blog entries that are available to all RedState members.  They are generally intended to share the thoughts and views of the diarist/member.  As a general rule, a diary should be non-trivial (more than a couple of sentences) and reflect the opinions of the writer.  In other words, don’t use diaries to just post a one- or two-sentence comment, or to just post a “standalone” excerpt to an article or a YouTube video.  Add your own two-cents-worth!  We are interested in what you think.

A while back, one of the RedState contributors wrote a diary documenting some tips and suggestions on writing diaries on Redstate.  You may want to review it for hints on how to write a diary.

To get started:

• Click the “Create New Diary Entry” link near the top of the page.  You’ll be presented with a page that says “<your username>’s Diary” at the top, with a red-box-surrounded disclaimer stating the basic guidelines for an appropriate diary, as stated above.
• Enter the title of your diary under “Title” and the body of your diary in the “Post” field.  You can use either the WYSIWYG “Visual” editor, or the HTML editor.  You can switch between the two by clicking the Visual or HTML tabs in the Post field.
• The Visual Editor contains a number of buttons that can be used to format the appearance of your diary so you don’t have to know HTML.  For example, there are buttons for bold or italics text, buttons to add and remove links, and to create lists or blockquotes.  If you click the right-most button on the button bar, additional formatting buttons (the “Kitchen Sink”) will appear, and you’ll have additional formatting options.
• Enter your diary text.  Format it using either HTML in the HTML Editor or with the formatting buttons in the Visual Editor.
• One useful feature of diaries is the use of tags to help with classification and searching for diaries.  To add tags to your diary, scroll down to the “Tags” field and enter keywords that describe your diary.  Separate these tags with commas.  Once you’re done entering them, click “Add”
• Don’t worry about the categories at the bottom.  They’re not used.
• Don’t mess with the Advanced Options.
• When you’re done, or if you’d like to save your diary as a draft, click the “Save” button.
  • If you want to go back and edit a previous draft, you have to use a somewhat non-intuitive process.  Click on “Create a New Diary” and then click “Manage” at the top of the page.  Then click the title of the diary you’d like to update.
  • From here you can then either save the new version of the draft, publish your diary, or delete your post.  Use the options to the right of the post title to do this.
• Once you’ve saved your diary, you can preview it by using the “Preview this Post” button.
• When you’re ready for your diary to get published for the rest of the Redstate community to see, click the “Publish” button.  Once you’ve done this, your diary will appear in your “My Diary” page (http://www.redstate.com/<your username>/  and it will appear on the Redstate front page in the list of “MEMBER DIARIES”  You will also see it appear in the Tracker.

A couple of notes about content:

• RedState.com is very aggressive about enforcing copyright.  We ensure that “fair use” is followed.  Don’t include entire articles or other works from other sites or publications unless YOU are the writer or you have explicit permission to reproduce the work.
• It’s OK to crosspost from your own personal blog.  Be sure to indicate that you’ve done this at the end of your diary entry.
• If you want to include a picture, do NOT “hot-link” to someone else’s site without their permission.  If you want to use a picture, host it on your own web site or in a photo sharing site like Flickr, Photobucket, etc.  Hot-linking eats other folks’ bandwidth and opens you to the possibility that the other user might change the picture out from under you.
• To include an embedded video from sites such as YouTube:
  • Find the “embed code” from the video site.  On YouTube, this is found in the grey box on the right side of the YouTube video page in the box marked “Embed”
  • Highlight the text in the Embed box and click “Edit-Copy” in your browser
  • Go to the diary you are editing and click the HTML tab
  • Scroll to the point in your diary where you’d like to place your video, place your cursor there, and click “Edit-Paste” in your browser.
  • Save your diary and view it with “Preview this Post” to ensure that the video works properly.

So how does a diary go anywhere beyond the RedState “Member Diaries” list?

• If Redstate members read your diary and like it, they have the ability to Recommend it. There is a “Recommend This” button that appears at the top of each member diary.  Once a member clicks this button, the member’s user name will appear beneath the button, along with the names of other users who have also recommended it.  Note that once you recommend a diary, the button turns into an “Unrecommend” button.  If you click “Unrecommend”, your name will disappear from the list.  Once you’ve Unrecommended a diary, you cannot “re-recommend” it.
• If enough members recommend a diary, it will appear in the “RECOMMENDED DIARIES” list on the front page.  That’s a good thing!  The visibility of a recommended diary is much greater than that of the diaries in the Member Diaries list.  Diaries can stay on the Recommended list for several days, but generally disappear from the Member Diaries list within 24 hours.  The algorithm for the RECOMMENDED DIARIES list appears to be something of a national secret, known only to those with a sufficient Redstate security clearance.
• The Redstate editors/contributors will occasionally promote diaries that stand out.  We try to promote one or two member-written diaries each day.  Those that appear on the front page tend to get a lot of attention, especially if they make it to the “Morning Update” email that Erick sends out each day.  Promoted user diaries often make the top-10 hit list for the day, which means that hundreds or thousands of Redstate readers are reading them.

Note: Most of the diaries that appear on the front page of RedState.com are written by RedState’s group of front-page contributors.  There are 20+ regular contributors - we write stories for RedState in our spare time and are not paid for this.  We do it out of our passion for politics, writing, and a desire to make a difference in the political realm.  Some of the contributors use their real names, and others (for various reasons) write using pseudonyms.  The contributors (and site administrators) can be found on the RedState.com About page.  On occasion, front page diaries have been contributed by special guests, such as U.S. Senators, Representatives, and/or other notables.

Some “Frequently Asked Questions”

What is “NT”?

“NT” at the end of a comment title means “my entire comment is in the comment title and I don’t need to put anything in the comment body (”Your Thoughts”). If you don’t put [NT] or (NT) or -NT- (or some other combination that I don’t remember), you’ll get a prompt saying “Error: please type a comment.” when you try to save your comment.

What is “5??
When someone uses “5? as a posting title, or some other derivative, such as “55555? or “5!” or “5**5?, they are ranking the comment/diary as a “5 out of 5?. In the olden days of RedState, it was possible to rank comments and/or diaries, but that capability was removed due to (as I understand it) some abuses that occurred. When someone ranks your diary or comment as a “5?, it’s a compliment.

What does “Blam!” or “G’bye” mean?
These are “catch-phrases” used by some of the RedState moderators to indicate that they’ve banned a user. Why are users banned? For many reasons, but primarily because they’ve used excessive foul language, they’ve re-registered after being banned previously, or have been particularly obnoxious or objectionable in how they’ve commented or written diaries.  Consult the RedState Posting Rules for more information.  Please note that RedState.com is not necessarily a “free speech zone”.  We don’t particularly like leftists trying to cause trouble, so if you’re a Democrat/liberal/lefty who’s trying to come to RedState for “healthy debate”, chances are you won’t be around too long.

What is PULLING A KOWALSKI? (this one’s from kowalski himself…)
“Pulling a Kowalski” is an eponymous term and a euphamism for replying to one’s own comment with another comment. I (kowalski) do it because my blogging brain works in a strange, asynchronous manner — thoughts I would rather have placed in their proper order during execution are mysteriously delayed “in flight” while my brain parses them, and arrive out-of-order in the output stream. It is left to you, Dear Reader, to read re-parse all the comments and reassemble them into a coherent thought, if possible. I have to do this myself a lot of the time, alas.

I also do it sometimes because I am of different minds on a given subject, or because part of the subject is tangential to the rest, but that is rarer. Everyone knows I was a leftist before I became a Republican and the resulting schizophrenia is diminishing, but I fear will never be completely dormant. I don’t do it to take up space deliberately or to annoy people, and I’m glad that most around here have found it to be endearing enough to name the practice after me.

What is a “moby”?
The word “moby,” as used here, refers to the musician, who in 2004 encouraged the pathetic, tone-deaf trolls who listen to his work to go on conservative boards and be so over-the-top that it would serve to discredit conservatives and Republicans. We now use it for anyone pretending (badly) to be a Republican or conservative, who is instead trolling for no reason we know or care. Once identified, they get tossed.

What is a “troll”?
A “troll” is described on the following sites:

• http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/troll.htm
• http://www.teamtechnology.co.uk/troll-tactics.html
• http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_troll
• http://www.firelily.com/support/depression/trolls.html

Trolls can be rather annoying, but most of them are easy to spot and are usually banned within short order. RedStaters often pay attention to the membership history of posters and commenters…long established members are less likely to be trolls. This is why occasionally a new registrant will be treated somewhat harshly…there is natural suspicion that they’ve registered simply to “troll.”  (A member’s longevity can be found by clicking on a user’s name and viewing their profile)

The “concern troll” is a special kind of troll who writes comments or diaries that show “grave concern” about a candidate or policy position on the conservative/GOP. They seldom are truly concerned, but are simply masquerading as “one of us” and are trying to stir things up. (On rare occasion, the poster is TRULY concerned and trying to have an honest discussion, so RedState members should be a little graceful in how they handle potential concern trolls)

What is REDHOT?
Redhot entries are created by RedState moderators, contributors, Directors and selected members who have brief postings to share, and just wish to throw out little tidbits. They usually cannot be commented upon, although on occasion a moderator will open comments on a particular entry. If the general populace wishes to comment on a Redhot entry, they should start a diary/blog entry and point back to the Redhot entry.

Who are the Contributors, Directors and/or site Founders?
There are about 20 or so individuals who are regular front-page contributors to RedState.com.  In addition, several folks act as “Directors”.  See the About document for an up-to-date list of who they are.

I have a question or a beef with RedState - where do I go?
Click on the “Contact” link at the top of the page. You can send Redstate an email, and someone will (may) contact you via email.

Enjoy your time at RedState.com!

Back in January, when PPP first surveyed Missouri voters about a potential Blunt/Carnahan race, the numbers came out 45/44 Carnahan over Blunt.  Now?  The latest shows Carnahan up 43/42 over Blunt.  Of course this is well within the MOE of 3.6%.  But consider the environment that exists today in Missouri.  The “League of Conservation Voters” has been conducting an extensive ad campaign criticizing Rep. Blunt’s stand against  “cap-and-trade” legislation.  Blunt has made his opposition to cap-and-trade well-known, pointing out the huge utility bill increases that such a bill would foist upon Missourians and the rest of the country.  But despite this effort by the Carnahan-supporting group, Blunt’s numbers have barely budged.

It appears that the negative opinion of Barack Obama’s policies, the Democrat-controlled Congress and the general economic conditions have also impacted the polling data.  According to the PPP numbers, Blunt leads Carnahan 44-32% with independent voters.  As PPP points out, this is a very similar situation to what occurred in the Virginia and New Jersey gubernatorial elections.  PPP’s numbers also show strong disapproval for Barack Obama’s performance (-9 pts) and a 21-point disapproval gap for PelosiObamaReidCare.

One other positive in this survey for Blunt:  the results sampled more Democrats than Republicans by four points, 36-32.  As expected, the vast majority of Republicans chose Blunt (82%), and Democrats chose Carnahan (83%).  There appears to be no practical reason for PPP to oversample Democrats, as Missouri was a dead-even state in the 2008 election, and there is no reason that should have changed in the past year.  So even with the Democrat numbers advantage in the survey, Blunt still remained within a point of Carnahan.

Combine these factors, and this is a positive poll for the Blunt campaign.  Robin Carnahan is still AWOL on the issues - we still don’t know Where in the World she is.  She continues to evade questions on real issues, such as health care socialization and cap and trade.  We can be fairly certain that she’s a card-check supporter, since she received the endorsement of Jimmy Hoffa and the Teamsters. And given the negative opinion Missourians have of Obama’s policies, which Carnahan is bound to support, she has a serious problem.

Once Carnahan comes out of her fetal position and begins engaging on issues, Missouri will discover that she is ever bit as much of a leftist as Barack Obama, and the polling data should begin to swing decisively in Roy Blunt’s direction.

Arrests of illegal immigrant workers have dropped precipitously under President Obama, according to figures released Wednesday.

Criminal arrests, administrative arrests, indictments and convictions of illegal immigrants at work sites all fell by more than 50 percent from fiscal 2008 to fiscal 2009.

The figures show that Mr. Obama has made good on his pledge to shift enforcement away from going after illegal immigrant workers themselves - but at the expense of Americans’ jobs, said Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the Republican who compiled the numbers from the Department of Homeland Security’s U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency (ICE).

Yet the government seems to have the time to conduct raids on guitar manufacturer Gibson over their alleged use of “endangered woods”

An international crackdown on the use of endangered woods from the world’s rain forests to make musical instruments bubbled over to Music City on Tuesday with a federal raid on Gibson Guitar ’s manufacturing plant, but no arrests.

Agents of the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service made a midday appearance and served a search warrant on company officials at Gibson’s Massman Drive manufacturing plant, where it makes acoustic and electric guitars.

What does this say about the strategy of this administration:  drop the enforcement of immigration laws - enforcement that can preserve American jobs - and pick on companies like Gibson who still maintain manufacturing in the United States?  This same “strategy” is demonstrated in their love for cap-and-trade - pursue policies that are damaging to American business and jobs in order to save trees.  Environmentalism over jobs.  The priorities of Barack Obama are crystal clear.

Oh wait - is that Barack in the background?

This past week, Gallup published a rather astonishing survey that blows holes in the theory that “because Americans want health care reform, the Government should provide it”.  The Gallup survey found that for the first time in almost ten years, Americans now say that health care is not the government’s responsibility.

It’s tempting to blame this shift on the Obama push for health care rationing, death panels and the general socialization of health care in America, but the trend started well before Obama’s coronation.  But the free-fall did begin in earnest during the campaign season of 2008, and continued to where we are now.

Why has this happened?  Gallup doesn’t offer much help:

The reason behind this shift is unknown. Certainly the federal government’s role in the nation’s healthcare system has been widely and vigorously debated over the last several months, including much focus on the “public option.” These data suggest that one result of the debate has been a net decrease in Americans’ agreement that ensuring all Americans have healthcare coverage is an appropriate role for the federal government.

It appears that much of the current opposition to government-run health care may have originated from opposition to the so-called “public option” being pushed by the Democrats.  Why would we be opposed to publicly-funded health care?  Many of us simply object to the government encroaching further on the private sector.  And why would we have any trust that the government can manage one-sixth of our economy when they can’t even pull off Cash for Clunkers or a swine flu vaccine program?  Distrust is undoubtedly a key factor.

But one of the biggest reasons for this shift in attitude of Americans may be that there is not a perception of a compelling problem.  Despite the rampant dubious claims of “46 million uninsured” and concerns about cost, Americans don’t seem to think there’s that big of a problem with their health care.  Back in March, 2009, CNN found that almost 80% of Americans are happy with the quality of their health care and almost 75% were happy with their health care coverage.  But 75% were dissatisfied with the cost of health care - not surprising…of course we want something for nothing!  Given this high satisfaction level with existing private sector health care, why would America support socialized medicine, especially when almost 60% of Americans believe that government health care would increase the cost, rather than decrease it?

The Gallup findings reflect a profound shift in the attitude of Americans about the role of government in health care.  If nothing else, this health care debate has forced Americans to think about the implications of the government’s intrusion in our lives and what it costs us, in money and freedom.  Let’s hope that similar attitude shifts occur with respect to other aspects of the public versus private sector so we can put a stop to the creeping intrusion of government on American life.

The Left, unable to summon an intelligent response to the tea party movement, and caught off guard by the ferocity of the reaction of conservatives to the creeping socialism of the Obama administration, followed their typical strategy - childish crudeness.  In reaction to the movement, Leftist “personalities” introduced the use of a borderline pornographic phrase to describe the participants in the movement as “teabaggers”.  So why is this a problem?  I’ll leave the details for below the fold…

For those who are not familiar with the term, “teabagging” is a crude sex act involving oral stimulation of male genitalia.  I would quote the definition here, but it is beyond good taste, so I will simply point you to this Wikipedia definition, which adequately describes the act.

As one might expect, several of the guilty parties haunt the airwaves of MSNBC.   Lest you think that they employed this derogatory term accidentally, without understanding its origin, you can read their comments and judge for yourself.  This, from leftist gal Rachel Maddow:

“All across America on Tax Day, Republican members of Congress are lining up to speak at teabag tea party events. Even Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina is getting in on the hot teabagging action,” Maddow joked. “Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana, previously most famous for his self-admitted very serious sin with prostitution services - he wants to give teabagging the Senate seal of approval. He has asked the Senate to commemorate the day of anti-Obama protests in law.’

Not to be outdone, Maddow’s fellow adolescent, David Shuster, also gets in on the game:

For most Americans, Wednesday, April 15^th will be Tax Day.  But in our fourth story tonight: It‘s going to be teabagging day for the right-wing and they‘re going nuts for it.  Thousands of them whipped out the festivities early this past weekend, and while the parties are officially toothless, the teabaggers are full-throated about their goals.

They want to give President Obama a strong tongue-lashing and lick government spending—spending they did not oppose when they were under presidents Bush and Reagan.  They oppose Mr. Obama‘s tax rates—which will be lower for most of them—and they oppose the tax increases Mr.  Obama is imposing on the rich, whose taxes will skyrocket to a rate about 10 percent less than it was under Reagan.  That‘s teabagging in a nut shell.

And from CNN, we hear the brilliance of the childish Anderson Cooper:

“It’s hard to talk when you’re tea-bagging.”

Cooper eventually made a half-hearted “sorry if you were offended” apology for his remarks.

No one really expects any more class from this crew; grade-school humor is about their speed.  In some settings, double entendre humor can be funny.  But this phrase has now been adopted by many in the mainstream media and is used regularly in settings beyond political commentary.  Apparently, double entendre references to oral sex are now acceptable for political discourse.

And now this behavior extends to the Oval Office. One would think that such obscenity would be above the office of the President of the United States.  But this is the Obama administration, where no behavior is too low.  I suppose when you hire a pedophile as “safe schools czar”, oral sex talk is not out bounds.  Or so our President appears to believe.  According to the NYT, Obama asked:

“Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit” Democratic voters “and it will encourage the extremists.”

Mr. President, there is nothing more extreme than using a pornographic term to describe the citizens of your country.

I am tempted to propose that we adopt a similarly crude description of the Democrats and they way they are screwing the country and flushing us down the toilet.  There are numerous scatological references to sexual behavior that could be employed, but a) I will not stoop to the sub-human level of the Left, and b) I don’t encourage anyone else to do so.  I simply ask the members of the media, politicians, and the President to act their age and stop the pornification of political discourse.

The business of politics is dirty.  Name-calling is a fairly normal thing.  So the introduction of pornographic phraseology isn’t terribly surprising, given the environs.  But the term has been adopted beyond the sleaze world of MSNBC and has spread to the “mainstream” media and all the way to the White House.  Those who are being slimed by the press and politicians are normal, non-political citizens.  They are hard-working mothers, fathers, grandparents and children who are stepping up and objecting to the takeover of the country by socialism.  They do not deserve to be painted with the language of an X-rated porn site.

It needs to stop.  Sexual innuendo is inappropriate in political discourse…as wrong today as it was when the children of the United States received their first introduction to the term “oral sex” courtesy of the behavior of President Bill Clinton.  That level of conversation was wrong then, and it is wrong now.

The Left and their media tools need a soap bar sandwich to clean up their act.

]]> In early 2009, angered at the rapid growth of governmental interference through its “housing bailout” plan, CNBC commentator Rick Santelli stated on the air that it was time for a “Chicago Tea Party” to voice outrage against the socialization of the American capitalist system.  The subsequent nation-wide, grass-roots movement of protests has been dubbed the “Tea Party” movement, and its participants as “tea partiers”.

The Left, unable to summon an intelligent response to the tea party movement, and caught off guard by the ferocity of the reaction of conservatives to the creeping socialism of the Obama administration, followed their typical strategy - childish crudeness.  In reaction to the movement, Leftist “personalities” introduced the use of a borderline pornographic phrase to describe the participants in the movement as “teabaggers”.  So why is this a problem?  I’ll leave the details for below the fold…

For those who are not familiar with the term, “teabagging” is a crude sex act involving oral stimulation of male genitalia.  I would quote the definition here, but it is beyond good taste, so I will simply point you to this Wikipedia definition, which adequately describes the act.

As one might expect, several of the guilty parties haunt the airwaves of MSNBC.   Lest you think that they employed this derogatory term accidentally, without understanding its origin, you can read their comments and judge for yourself.  This, from leftist gal Rachel Maddow:

“All across America on Tax Day, Republican members of Congress are lining up to speak at teabag tea party events. Even Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina is getting in on the hot teabagging action,” Maddow joked. “Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana, previously most famous for his self-admitted very serious sin with prostitution services - he wants to give teabagging the Senate seal of approval. He has asked the Senate to commemorate the day of anti-Obama protests in law.’

Not to be outdone, Maddow’s fellow adolescent, David Shuster, also gets in on the game:

For most Americans, Wednesday, April 15^th will be Tax Day.  But in our fourth story tonight: It‘s going to be teabagging day for the right-wing and they‘re going nuts for it.  Thousands of them whipped out the festivities early this past weekend, and while the parties are officially toothless, the teabaggers are full-throated about their goals.

They want to give President Obama a strong tongue-lashing and lick government spending—spending they did not oppose when they were under presidents Bush and Reagan.  They oppose Mr. Obama‘s tax rates—which will be lower for most of them—and they oppose the tax increases Mr.  Obama is imposing on the rich, whose taxes will skyrocket to a rate about 10 percent less than it was under Reagan.  That‘s teabagging in a nut shell.

And from CNN, we hear the brilliance of the childish Anderson Cooper:

“It’s hard to talk when you’re tea-bagging.”

Cooper eventually made a half-hearted “sorry if you were offended” apology for his remarks.

No one really expects any more class from this crew; grade-school humor is about their speed.  In some settings, double entendre humor can be funny.  But this phrase has now been adopted by many in the mainstream media and is used regularly in settings beyond political commentary.  Apparently, double entendre references to oral sex are now acceptable for political discourse.

And now this behavior extends to the Oval Office. One would think that such obscenity would be above the office of the President of the United States.  But this is the Obama administration, where no behavior is too low.  I suppose when you hire a pedophile as “safe schools czar”, oral sex talk is not out bounds.  Or so our President appears to believe.  According to the NYT, Obama asked:

“Does anybody think that the teabag, anti-government people are going to support them if they bring down health care? All it will do is confuse and dispirit” Democratic voters “and it will encourage the extremists.”

Mr. President, there is nothing more extreme than using a pornographic term to describe the citizens of your country.

I am tempted to propose that we adopt a similarly crude description of the Democrats and they way they are screwing the country and flushing us down the toilet.  There are numerous scatological references to sexual behavior that could be employed, but a) I will not stoop to the sub-human level of the Left, and b) I don’t encourage anyone else to do so.  I simply ask the members of the media, politicians, and the President to act their age and stop the pornification of political discourse.

The business of politics is dirty.  Name-calling is a fairly normal thing.  So the introduction of pornographic phraseology isn’t terribly surprising, given the environs.  But the term has been adopted beyond the sleaze world of MSNBC and has spread to the “mainstream” media and all the way to the White House.  Those who are being slimed by the press and politicians are normal, non-political citizens.  They are hard-working mothers, fathers, grandparents and children who are stepping up and objecting to the takeover of the country by socialism.  They do not deserve to be painted with the language of an X-rated porn site.

It needs to stop.  Sexual innuendo is inappropriate in political discourse…as wrong today as it was when the children of the United States received their first introduction to the term “oral sex” courtesy of the behavior of President Bill Clinton.  That level of conversation was wrong then, and it is wrong now.

The Left and their media tools need a soap bar sandwich to clean up their act.

]]> http://www.redstate.com/bs/2009/11/10/the-left-needs-its-mouth-washed-out-with-soap/feed/ http://www.redstate.com/bs/2009/11/06/stop-pushing-out-the-partys-moderates/ http://www.redstate.com/bs/2009/11/06/stop-pushing-out-the-partys-moderates/#comments Fri, 06 Nov 2009 12:20:16 +0000 bs (Profile) http://www.redstate.com/bs/?p=733 The extremists are taking over the party!

A few days ago, the left-wing activist group MoveOn.org began sending out emails seeking contributions to fund primary challenges against any Democratic senator who does not fully support “health care reform with a public option.” Now there’s an update: MoveOn executive director Justin Ruben says the group has raised $3,578,117 for the project and is thinking of new ways to punish errant Democratic lawmakers.

Haven’t we heard this somewhere before?  Oh yeah, from Obama lackey Valerie Jarrett:

White House adviser Valerie Jarrett said Scozzafava’s pullout under pressure “tells a lot about where the Republican leadership is right now.” They are “more and more extreme and more and more marginalized,” she said on ABC’s “This Week.”

Hey, Val, you might want to give George Soros a ring and let him know he’s going to be marginalized.

Of the 3.5% gain, over 2% of the gain was due to durable goods - and most of that was automobile sales, buoyed primarily by the now-ended “Cash for Clunkers” program. Without this gain, the GDP would have increased at a much lower rate of around 1.9%. What about future auto sales? In September, sales plummeted as the C4C program sucked away sales that would have occurred later.  Also, Edmunds.com reported that the overwhelming majority of these car sales would have occurred anyway, so the actual cost of the 125,000 additional vehicles that can be credited to C4C was closer to $24,000 per vehicle, rather than the $4000 average rebate. Of course the Obama administration didn’t appreciate Edmunds calling their baby ugly, so they became an official member of the White House Enemies List.

Now if the durable goods numbers were a bit inflated by governmental kickbacks, surely the housing numbers were positive. After all, spending on housing-related products jumped over 22%. But - most of the housing gains appear to be caused by homebuilders who were in a hurry to finish homes before the end of the government’s $8000 first-time homebuyer rebate. What happens to new home construction and sales after the rebate expires? Without money in consumers’ pockets, most likely the same thing that happened to car sales after the end of C4C - plummet.

The vast majority of economists responded to this week’s news with skepticism and questions about how such gains can be sustained without programs like C4C and the homebuyer rebates. One economist stated:

…we don’t think that rate of growth is sustainable because it is distorted by all the government stimulus.

“The challenge here is to get organic growth - growth that isn’t helped by fiscal steroids.”

Fiscal steroids, indeed. The organic growth is precisely what is missing from this GDP report. Other than a healthy increase in exports, the non-steroidal numbers are decidedly anemic.

This week Rush Limbaugh described the relationship between the “stimulus” program and the GDP this way (apologies to Rush for my paraphrase) - it’s like having someone go to the bank and get a $10,000 loan, and then go home and tell their wife “Hey, look! I just got a $10,000 raise!!”. Most of the gains shown in the GDP are not real gains - they are government spending that is passing in one end of the economy and out the other. It’s the economic equivalent of check kiting - we’re writing a check out of one account to pay off another account. Problem: that money will have to be paid back some day. It is not generated wealth - it is debt, and the Chicomms will eventually come knocking to get their money back, along with interest.

And speaking of interest - it is another problem knocking at the door. The CBO projects that, due to the debt being piled up by the Obama deficits, interest payments will be the largest portion of the federal budget by 2075

Incredible. And that doesn’t even include Obamacare.

It was fairly obvious all along that the Keynesian approach to “stimulus” being pursued by the Obama administration would result in such numbers, as you don’t inject tens of billions into an economy without it showing up somewhere. But the GDP growth is not showing organic growth being driven by the economic engine of the USA - consumer spending and private sector business growth.  In fact, the market response to the GDP report on Thursday was quickly reversed when the spending reports emerged on Friday.

So, despite a rosy-looking 3Q GDP, the situation boils down to low-quality results.  One analyst reports:

John Williams notes that one-time stimulus or inventory items represented 92% of the reported quarterly growth. The nature of the stimulus-related gains was that they tended to steal business activity from the future. The months ahead are the future. Accordingly, fourth-quarter quarterly GDP change will likely turn negative, again. (The King Report)

And the WSJ summarizes it well:

Fully 2.2 percentage points of the third quarter’s 3.5% growth figure related to vehicle purchases and residential construction, both juiced by government support. Federal spending added 0.6%.

If these GDP data were company earnings, they would be what analysts euphemistically call “low quality.”

That low-quality growth is growth in government. It is economic “empty calories”.

Oh, and remember leftists - you designated > 3% growth under George W. Bush as a recession. Wanna reconsider that?

That’s all we need in Missouri - a Barry wannabe who turns her nose up at her constituents. Just like her mentor.

(Consider this an open thread…)

Rasmussen breaks down the numbers:

Nearly all the numbers in this early survey show an uncommonly close match between two members of well-known Missouri political families. Blunt, for example, leads by 17 points among men, but Carnahan has a 13-point lead among female voters.

Carnahan captures 84% of the state’s Democratic vote, while Blunt nets 85% of the GOP vote. Voters not affiliated with either party prefer Blunt by eight points.

Fifty-seven percent (57%) of Missouri voters have a favorable view of Blunt, with 18% whose opinion of him is very favorable. Thirty-three percent (33%) view him unfavorably, including 15% with a very unfavorable view. Only 10% have no opinion of the Republican hopeful.

Carnahan has 52% favorables and 42% unfavorables. Twenty-three percent (23%) regard her very favorably and 22% very unfavorably. Just six percent (6%) aren’t sure what they think of Carnahan.

The one number that seemed to stand out, as indicated in bold, was the unaffiliated number, which showed an 8-point lead for Blunt.  This may be a “coal mine canary” indicator of the public’s dissatisfaction with the Dems.

The survey looked at other key influences as well.  Missouri tends to be a relatively conservative state (MO voted for John McCain in 2008 by a razor-thin margin, with the heavy Republican rural vote barely overcoming the Dem influence in the STL and KC metro areas), so some of the survey results are not surprising.  Rasmussen’s latest numbers show that Missourians have a very pessimistic view of the economy:

Only nine percent (9%) of Missouri voters say the U.S. economy is in good shape, while 47% view it as poor. Thirty-two percent (32%) say the economy is getting better, but 44% say it’s getting worse.

This attitude is likely driving a negative view of Barack Obama - 44% of Missourians approve of the POTUS’s job performance, while 56% disapprove.

Blunt has been traveling the state in early campaign mode, making appearances statewide while still keeping pace with his Congressional duties, particularly in his work on the GOP health care strategy.  He has been able to maintain his poll standing with Carnahan despite the sliming he has taken from the leftist  ”League of Conservation Voters” and “ProVote” (which has been tied to ACORN in some reports).  The ACORNites can’t be too thrilled with Blunt’s weathering of the attacks, as he was one of the early voices calling for ACORN to be investigated for their fraudulent voter registration practices, and he again raised his voice in opposition to the organizations sleazy practices after the recent damning videos emerged.

Roy Blunt continues to show Missourians why a conservative GOP approach to government is the way to go, while all we hear from Robin Carnahan is …. nothing.  In August, Rep. Blunt was endorsed by the Redstate.com directors, but… Robin Carnahan’s name is still on the milk carton, and she refuses to engage on the issues.

(If you would like to contribute to Rep. Blunt’s Senate campaign, please do so at his campaign web site.)

Conservative loudmouths are crowing that they are driving Barack Obama’s popularity ratings below 50 percent. They are very proud of themselves. They shouldn’t be. Destroying what is best about our country is not something to brag to your children about. And the other shoe is dropping.

…

Getting rid of Van Jones, the co-founder of one of the groups now organizing the boycotts, is not going to slow the movement. Quite the contrary. It may strengthen the cause.

“Other shoe”?  What other shoe might that be, Susan?  The one that’s kicking your party’s butt? And “strengthen the cause?” Which one? The GOP?

As EPU stated in his email, what Estrich is saying is “Ouch! Ouch!  Stop it!”  Ladies and gentlemen, there is no question that we are winning.  Barack Obama is flinching.  He took a massive beating with Van Jones.  His MSM cronies are not helping any longer - we are getting the word out without them, and the Van Jones affair is proof positive of this.  We are whipping their butts on healthcare socialization - the odds of a public option in ANY healthcare proposal from the left are somewhere between zero and none.  We are beating them on cap and trade - see today’s incredible story on cbsnews.com regarding the Obama administration’s admission that cap and trade is a huge tax increase.  We are making progress on the czars. We are about to bring down the ObamaCorps ACORN. And it just keeps getting better.

The incredible part of this?  We are doing this while at a massive disadvantage.  They own the White House.  They have a huge advantage in the House of Representatives.  They have (for all practical purposes) a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate.  And even with that, it appears they will have to employ reconciliation to get a healthcare bill through the Senate.  Unbelievable.

The Israelites went up against the Egyptians with a massive disadvantage in manpower, yet led by Moses they defeated the Egyptians and made their way out of Egypt.  They did have to wander for 40 years while they were at it.  Perhaps our wandering is at an end…it appears we have found our way.  I won’t speculate on who our Moses is … perhaps we have several.  It does appear that the latest is Joe Wilson, who single-handedly stole the thunder from Barack Obama’s healthcare speech.  Virtually no one remembers a word that Obama said in that speech.  All that the American people remember is:  ”YOU LIE.”  And while there may be debate about whether he was justified in that act, the fact is a) he was correct, and b) it worked.  Moses defeated the Pharoah.

To Susan Estrich’s dismay, there have been several plagues rained on Barack Obama and the Left since January - Van Jones, the public option healthcare battle, death panels, a failed “recovery” plan, an increasing mess in Afghanistan. The rank amateur is showing his stripes, as expected.  There are more plagues to come.

Estrich finishes her article with

May God protect this president, not only for his sake, but for all of ours.

Sure, protect him. But deliver this country from him at the same time. As the Pharoah failed, so must Barack Obama.

LET OUR PEOPLE GO!

On September 19, 2001, a story ran in the Hyde Park Herald containing then-State-Senator Barack Obama’s response to the 9/11 tragedy. In this piece (quoted in this article from the New Yorker, under the heading “The Speech”), Obama expresses empathy for the murderers! Not anger, not disdain, not a word of sympathy for the victims. His concern was for the murderers

From Obama’s article:

We must also engage, however, in the more difficult task of understanding the sources of such madness. The essence of this tragedy, it seems to me, derives from a fundamental absence of empathy on the part of the attackers: an inability to imagine, or connect with, the humanity and suffering of others. Such a failure of empathy, such numbness to the pain of a child or the desperation of a parent, is not innate; nor, history tells us, is it unique to a particular culture, religion, or ethnicity. It may find expression in a particular brand of violence, and may be channeled by particular demagogues or fanatics. Most often, though, it grows out of a climate of poverty and ignorance, helplessness and despair.

So are we to feel sorry for these people, Mr. President?  It’s not like it was a mystery that there were terrorists out there in the world like this back in 2001.  We knew they weren’t poor & uneducated, as Obama seems to believe here.  Ponder the fact that it is just this kind of leftist “thinking” that is driving the Marxist/fascist policies emanating from the White House today.

Tomorrow, please pray for the families and friends of the victims, and pray for our country, that it not adopt the kind of thinking that Barack Obama expressed in 2001.

(h/t to Michelle Malkin for originally posting on this last September 11)

UPDATE:  Contrast Barack Obama’s response with Tony Blair’s:

So what do we do? Don’t overreact some say. We aren’t. We haven’t lashed out. No missiles on the first night just for effect. Don’t kill innocent people. We are not the ones who waged war on the innocent. We seek the guilty. Look for a diplomatic solution. There is no diplomacy with Bin Laden or the Taliban regime. State an ultimatum and get their response. We stated the ultimatum; they haven’t responded. Understand the causes of terror. Yes, we should try, but let there be no moral ambiguity about this: nothing could ever justify the events of 11 September, and it is to turn justice on its head to pretend it could. The action we take will be proportionate; targeted; we will do all we humanly can to avoid civilian casualties.

But understand what we are dealing with. Listen to the calls of those passengers on the planes. Think of the children on them, told they were going to die. Think of the cruelty beyond our comprehension as amongst the screams and the anguish of the innocent, those hijackers drove at full throttle planes laden with fuel into buildings where tens of thousands worked. They have no moral inhibition on the slaughter of the innocent. If they could have murdered not 7,000 but 70,000 does anyone doubt they would have done so and rejoiced in it? There is no compromise possible with such people, no meeting of minds, no point of understanding with such terror. Just a choice: defeat it or be defeated by it. And defeat it we must. Any action taken will be against the terrorist network of Bin Laden.

That is the response of a leader.  Obama’s response was that of a coward.

Yes, I am angry.  Again.

(a big H/T to @streetwise_IT for posting the link via Twitter)

Aapparently Carnahan has spent some time traveling across Missouri and visiting with Missourians. But she has restricted her travels to the more rural areas that (coincidentally?) don’t receive a lot of press coverage. She did appear at the Missour State Fair at the end of August and attended the traditionally political “Ham Breakfast” at the Fair, but apparently said little or nothing about any issues - she stayed in character. At the breakfast, Congressman Roy Blunt, the favorite for the GOP nomination, spoke out about “cap and trade” legislation and pointed out how it could negatively impact Missouri farmers and consumers. Carnahan’s take on cap and trade? Crickets.

Carnahan declined in an interview to say whether she would have voted for the House-passed legislation, but she added that it should probably be changed by the Senate.

Earlier in the month, Blunt invited Carnahan to join him in a joint news conference to discuss health care issues. Carnahan’s response? More crickets.

This pattern of disinterest is one in which Robin Carnahan has engaged since she announced for the Senate nomination, and it has continued. In an article published Tuesday on Politico.com. Dave Catanese, reporter for KY3 in Springfield, MO, discusses how Carnahan has “stay(ed) above the fray”. The implication of that phrase is far more positive than I believe Carnahan’s behavior warrants.

So, beyond staying “above the fray,” another possibility, as Blunt spokesman Rich Chrismer stated back in February, is that Ms. Carnahan is afraid that Missourians will discover that she is a leftist whose views are “far too liberal for Missouri.” Her pro-abortion positions surely will not play well in rural Missouri, where Carnahan has spent much of her time of late. Within days of Carnahan’s declaration of her candidacy, pro-abortion group Emily’s List immediately gave Carnahan a ringing endorsement. And in April, Carnahan (not surprisingly) gained the endorsement of another left-wing group, the Teamsters.

The Politico article asserts that Carnahan’s evasiveness is actually good strategy.

“Right now, Robin Carnahan doesn’t have to take positions. The election is a long way away.

says George Connor, a political science professor at Missouri State University. Could be. But Robin Carnahan can only avoid discussing real issues for so long. Eventually Missourians will realize what she really represents. In fact, Catanese & Connor acknowledge this:

“I think Democrats in Missouri and in Washington are comfortable with Robin Carnahan. She will take the correct positions on cap and trade; she will take the correct positions on health care,” Connor said. “I don’t think at this point in the campaign she has to be too far out in front with specifics on those policies.”

I assume the interpretation of “correct” is “those positions that are endorsed by the Obama Socialism wing of the Democrat Party”…as that is precisely where she seems to lean.

Robin Carnahan cannot ignore the Senate race forever. Until now, Carnahan has not even held a press conference related to the Senate race or even answered many (any?) questions about her positions on policy. Eventually she will have to crawl out of the protective cocoon of Jefferson City and speak to Missourians about what she believes…and then the party will come to a screeching halt. As a (former) bellweather that voted for John McCain in 2008, Missouri (especially the rural areas) is a state that does not have a fondness for leftists. Considering Barack Obama’s current popularity free-fall, Robin Carnahan should be seriously considering changes to her strategy of holding to the “correct positions”

Until then, we will keep Robin’s picture on milk cartons to see if we can track her down.

]]> Missouri’s current Secretary of State, Robin Carnahan, is currently the only Democrat who has declared candidacy for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by current Senator Christopher “Kit” Bond. But since Ms. Carnahan declared her candidacy, she has been strangely silent about pretty much anything pertaining to national issues or the MO Senate race. So …. Where In The World Is Robin Carnahan?

Aapparently Carnahan has spent some time traveling across Missouri and visiting with Missourians. But she has restricted her travels to the more rural areas that (coincidentally?) don’t receive a lot of press coverage. She did appear at the Missour State Fair at the end of August and attended the traditionally political “Ham Breakfast” at the Fair, but apparently said little or nothing about any issues - she stayed in character. At the breakfast, Congressman Roy Blunt, the favorite for the GOP nomination, spoke out about “cap and trade” legislation and pointed out how it could negatively impact Missouri farmers and consumers. Carnahan’s take on cap and trade? Crickets.

Carnahan declined in an interview to say whether she would have voted for the House-passed legislation, but she added that it should probably be changed by the Senate.

Earlier in the month, Blunt invited Carnahan to join him in a joint news conference to discuss health care issues. Carnahan’s response? More crickets.

This pattern of disinterest is one in which Robin Carnahan has engaged since she announced for the Senate nomination, and it has continued. In an article published Tuesday on Politico.com. Dave Catanese, reporter for KY3 in Springfield, MO, discusses how Carnahan has “stay(ed) above the fray”. The implication of that phrase is far more positive than I believe Carnahan’s behavior warrants.

So, beyond staying “above the fray,” another possibility, as Blunt spokesman Rich Chrismer stated back in February, is that Ms. Carnahan is afraid that Missourians will discover that she is a leftist whose views are “far too liberal for Missouri.” Her pro-abortion positions surely will not play well in rural Missouri, where Carnahan has spent much of her time of late. Within days of Carnahan’s declaration of her candidacy, pro-abortion group Emily’s List immediately gave Carnahan a ringing endorsement. And in April, Carnahan (not surprisingly) gained the endorsement of another left-wing group, the Teamsters.

The Politico article asserts that Carnahan’s evasiveness is actually good strategy.

“Right now, Robin Carnahan doesn’t have to take positions. The election is a long way away.

says George Connor, a political science professor at Missouri State University. Could be. But Robin Carnahan can only avoid discussing real issues for so long. Eventually Missourians will realize what she really represents. In fact, Catanese & Connor acknowledge this:

“I think Democrats in Missouri and in Washington are comfortable with Robin Carnahan. She will take the correct positions on cap and trade; she will take the correct positions on health care,” Connor said. “I don’t think at this point in the campaign she has to be too far out in front with specifics on those policies.”

I assume the interpretation of “correct” is “those positions that are endorsed by the Obama Socialism wing of the Democrat Party”…as that is precisely where she seems to lean.

Robin Carnahan cannot ignore the Senate race forever. Until now, Carnahan has not even held a press conference related to the Senate race or even answered many (any?) questions about her positions on policy. Eventually she will have to crawl out of the protective cocoon of Jefferson City and speak to Missourians about what she believes…and then the party will come to a screeching halt. As a (former) bellweather that voted for John McCain in 2008, Missouri (especially the rural areas) is a state that does not have a fondness for leftists. Considering Barack Obama’s current popularity free-fall, Robin Carnahan should be seriously considering changes to her strategy of holding to the “correct positions”

Until then, we will keep Robin’s picture on milk cartons to see if we can track her down.

]]> http://www.redstate.com/bs/2009/09/09/where-in-the-world-is-robin-carnahan/feed/ http://www.redstate.com/bs/2009/09/07/on-vetting-and-the-czars/ http://www.redstate.com/bs/2009/09/07/on-vetting-and-the-czars/#comments Mon, 07 Sep 2009 16:15:40 +0000 bs (Profile) http://www.redstate.com/bs/?p=611 If you were to search Google News this morning for the word “vetting”, you’d find well over 1500 hits in relation to that word and the Van Jones story.  The current meme is that Jones was not sufficiently vetted by the Obama administration - that his shortcomings and controversial positions were not exposed, primarily because he was an appointed “czar” with no Congressional approval or oversight.

Earlier today, Erick asked “Who created this special job for Van Jones and what vetting of any sort did he get?”  The implication, of course, is that Jones was not vetted.  But is that true?

Over at The Corner at NRO, Andy McCarthy has a different take - one that I believe is quite accurate.  McCarthy asserts that Jones was chosen precisely because of his controversial background.  He says:

The point, of course, is that Obama vetted Jones just fine. President Obama is not Mr. Magoo — haplessly gravitating to Truther Van and Ayers and Dohrn and Klonsky and Davis and Wright and the Chicago New Party and ACORN, etc. Jones is a kindred spirit. Obama knows exactly who he is. Jones was given a non-confirmation job precisely because that circumvented the vetting process. This isn’t one of those things that just happen. This is Barack “Transparency” Obama gaming the system.

A “kindred spirit”.  The two have the same kinds of backgrounds.  They were both community organizers of some ilk.  It only makes sense that Obama would seek someone with the same background to pursue one of his pet policies - “green jobs.”

McCarthy also points out that the White House had to be familiar with Jones’ background, or he wouldn’t have been given access to the WH in the first place.

As former Reagan staffer Jeffrey Lord explains at the Spectator, the Secret Service carefully scrutinizes the background of everyone who works at the White House. With his background, Van Jones couldn’t possibly have gotten into the White House, much less had physical access to the president, unless the top echelon of the administration (I’d wager, the very top) overrode any objections.

There is some possibility that the Secret Service simply fell down on the job and neglected to check out Jones sufficiently.  There’s a chance that the Secret Service is in dire need of LMGTFY.  But the higher likelihood is that the Obama staff simply told them to give him a pass.

In the aftermath of the Jones story, conservatives are no doubt emboldened to go after more of Obama’s czars, with the expectation that they, too, are “under-vetted.”  Indeed, there are several who appear to have questionable backgrounds - from our perspective.  But do they from Obama’s perspective?

In a wonderfully biting article on the UK Telegraph web site, James Delingpole points out that Jones’ mistake was trying to hide his agenda.  He notes that appointing guys like Van Jones is “what socialist regimes do.”

Simple. Because this is what socialist regimes do, as I tried to explain earlier this year in my book Welcome To Obamaland: I’ve Seen Your Future And It Doesn’t Work.

In it, I warned the US of the “smorgasbord of scuzzballs, incompetents, time servers, Communists, class warriors, eco-loons, single-issue rabble-rousers, malcontents and losers who always rise to the surface during a left-liberal administration.”

It’s a pattern.  Delingpole describes how the same kind of whack-job appointments occurred under the Blair administration:

Making these predictions was a no-brainer because it’s exactly the same process as we’ve witnessed in Britain these last twelve years under New Labour. Rather than having all his cronies go through the tedious and unedifying process of having to stand for parliamentary election, Tony Blair simply handed them their political jobs on a plate by appointing them Health Czar, or Race Czar, or Climate Change Czar or whatever. In this way, he could stuff his new governing class with politically-sympathetic placemen - with the added advantage that they were completely unaccountable to the democratic process.

Sound familiar?

This was not a mistake by Obama.  The appointments of Jones, Mark Lloyd, and other “Czars of the Obama Underworld” were quite intentional.  While some will simply write off these extremists as mistakes, they underestimate Obama.  As McCarthy says, “he is not Mr. Magoo.”  Rather, he is a socialist ideologue who has a mission to transform America into a weath-redistributing, big-government nanny state - and has built the team (without oversight that would expose their backgrounds and ideology) that he believes can help him accomplish that objective.

From page 2 of the Politico story, published late Sunday:

Some progressives said they saw racial overtones in Jones’ departure – which came as critics began to step up their scrutiny of Jones’ past words of support for Abu-Jamal, a former Black Panther on death row whose murder conviction in the death of a police officer is a cause célèbre for some on the left.

“It struck me, why go after this guy? He is a minor player, he has no power, no budget, why take him? It’s because he looks like Obama and he has all those same attributes of being well-educated and he’s an electrifying speaker with an elite education,” said John Anner, a good friend of Jones and former chair of the Ella Baker Center for Human Rights, an organization Jones founded in Oakland. “It seems to me that he is symbolic of what the Obama administration is and could be and that’s inspiring for me, but for some people on the right, it’s terrifying and threatening.”

No one should be surprised at this at all, for apparently it is impossible for conservatives and/or Republicans to oppose anyone who isn’t white without spawning accusations of racism.  As so many have written already in recent months, Obama’s so-called “post-racial” America is…not.  And folks, it isn’t the conservatives and the GOP who brought this on - it is the leftists who cry “RACISTS!” every time something doesn’t go their way.

Here’s a clue, race-baiters:  sometimes a person is just wrong, no matter what their melanin level, and that was clearly the case with Van Jones.  Furthermore, on the czar-hunting front, I personally believe the next one we need to expose is John Holdren, Obama’s “science czar.”  And guess what:  he’s white.

a creation of the labor movement and is dedicated to the social and economic achievements of American workers. It constitutes a yearly national tribute to the contributions workers have made to the strength, prosperity, and well-being of our country.

Now there’s no harm in honoring those who labor - hard-working Americans are the backbone of the greatest free-market economy in the world…and we hope it stays that way, Obama’s socialism fetish notwithstanding.

But on this Labor Day weekend, isn’t it interesting that Gallup has just published the results of a poll showing that for the first time since the mid-1930s, less than 50% of Americans approve of labor unions?

Note that this sharp drop in union approval is occuring shortly after the implosion of the American auto industry.  Gallup noted in a poll earlier this year that 43% of Americans placed “a great deal of blame” on auto unions as a cause of the problems with the Big 3.  Another intriguing statistic is that union membership was up sharply in 2008 - yet their popularity is tanking.

In the latest Gallup poll, it was noted that more Americans believe that unions hurt the companies where workers are unionized than help.

Ouch!

While there is no discernible correlation between these results and other events beyond the auto industry woes, one must wonder whether there is also some latent concern about the effects of the still-simmering “Employee Free Choice Act” legislation, also known as “Card Check.”  While it appears that the EFCA bill is dormant for the remainder of this year, labor leaders such as Jimmy Hoffa are seeing the writing on the wall for big Dem losses in 2010 and are now pushing for action sooner rather than later.

There is a time and a season for everything…but the season for organized labor has come and gone, and Americans have recognized this. So, to the labor unions, on this 127th Labor Day, I say “Happy Labor Day!”  And while you eat your burgers and chips, just remember that we Americans are just not all that into you.

Interesting time to be turning in one’s resignation - midnight Saturday night, on a holiday weekend. I guess this gives the MSM a chance to not report it again…

UPDATE #1
Ironically, the first info to trickle out seems to be from the Washington Post, who ignored the entire story for quite some time before finally posting a story yesterday.

“On the eve of historic fights for health care and clean energy, opponents of reform have mounted a vicious smear campaign against me. They are using lies and distortions to distract and divide,” he said.

I am angry.

• I am angry at the so-called “leader of the free world” who cares more about kissing up to dictators and leaders of nations that are our enemies, rather than cooperating with and supporting our friends - a “man” who truly does “pal around with terrorists”…a man who would fly the flag of a Communist country on the front lawn of the freaking White House!
• I am angry at the liar-in-chief who has proposed the systematic socialization of the nation’s healthcare system and who has lied at every turn about the ramifications of the proposals on how this will happen, including lies about single-payer, lies about “death panels,” lies about keeping our existing insurance, lies about health care rationing. The man lies like a cheap hallway floor mat.
• I am angry about how the Constitution has been trampled by the appointment of legions of “czars” - more czars than the Romanov dynasty. Czars who are conspiracy theorists and race-baiters, czars who are eugenicists, czars for tearing apart the healthcare system, czars who are charged with ensuring the breakdown of the free enterprise system….all of these so-called “czars” that have had no Congressional oversight or confirmation and who are not elected by the citizens of the United States.

• I am angry about the attempted indoctrination of my children by the Socialist-in-Chief and the efforts to brainwash them into following their Dear Leader and becoming co-conspirators in his attempts to break down the values of the nation.
• I am angry that this “community organizer” has decided that it is necessary to decimate the economy by spending us into oblivion on a “recovery” plan that was/is nothing more than a liberal ideological wish list.
• I am angry that the citizens of the United States do not receive an unbiased view of the destruction of the free enterprise system; rather, they are witnesses to a massively leftist biased media populated by Obama administration sycophants who have no interest in anything but supporting their man-god.
• I am angry that Obama (remember, he’s not a Muslim!!!!11!!!1!) would ignore the National Day of Prayer yet spend our hard-earned tax money to deliver a special message to Muslims for Ramadan.
• I am angry that the Leftists in DC are in the process of instituting the largest tax increase in history under the guise of preventing “climate change”…that they are willing to play chicken with the economic future of the nation.
• I am angry that this spineless coward who is unwilling to take ownership of the problems that have been brought on by his incompetent policies would have the audacity to claim that he is interested in reducing the federal deficit after single-handedly quadrupling the deficits of the previous administrations.
• I am angry that the voters who elected this abomination of a “President” refuse to note his hypocrisy in opposing the war in Iraq, yet promoting precisely the same scenario in Afghanistan.
• I am angry at the borderline criminal behavior of this man who conspired to remove the Inspector General of Americorps so he could promote his own socialist policies via that organization with no oversight.
• I am angry that my nation would turn citizen against citizen in an attempt to “rat out” dissenters who dare to question the policies of The One.
• I am angry at the liberal Democrats and their cronies who pull the race card at every turn in a feeble attempt to cover up for Obama’s failures and inadequacies. It is inconceivable to them that anyone would dare question their Messiah without racial overtones.

But most of all, I am angry that this nation would be so hoodwinked as to elect this Marxist/Fascist/Socialist nightmare in the first place. How an entire nation could be so misled and fooled by a man such as Barack Obama is an indictment on the intelligence - or at least the attention span - of 53% of the United States electorate.

I am hoping for some catharsis here.  But something tells me that tomorrow will bring nothing more than another Obama abomination and in another nine months I’ll have another litany of offenses to list. Or perhaps in 2010, there will be a “revolt of the masses,” as described by Daniel Henninger in today’s WSJ and my anger will be quelled.

In short…I am mad. But, I also want YOU to get mad! I want everyone to respond as activists who will do everything within their power to help Barack Obama fail. I want to see him out of office, and the sooner the better. I want you to be as mad as hell!

DO IT. NOW.

Don’t be afraid to click on it and listen - this is the sweetest thing you’ll hear all night. It’s amazing that he has come to the point of antagonizing his own party and supporters just as much as he does us.

At this rate, Obama’s approval rating will be in single digits by Christmas. In the words of Brother Crank: “How’s that hopenchange workin’ out for ya?”

However, Mr. Obama has apparently decided to go all-in on the God thing.  It began to emerge at his briefing with Jewish rabbis earlier this week.  Obama stated:

“We are God’s partners in matters of life and death”

Really?  Now socialized healthcare is the work of the Almighty?  So, Mr. President, I suppose you figured the death panels were best left to the real God, so he’d partner up with Him to make those decisions.  Oh, or maybe you were mistaken and thought YOU were the Almighty, Mr. Obama.  A little identity crisis, perhaps?

And yesterday, the faux Messiah decided to wax Biblical before a group of Christian leftists and demonstrate his stunning grasp of his God’s word.

“There has been a lot misinformation in this debate and there are some folks out there who are frankly bearing false witness,”

In the same meeting, he continued his God delusion:

He paraphrased Genesis, saying that reform would address “what I consider to be a core ethical and moral obligation that we look out for one another, that I am my brother’s keeper and I am my sister’s keeper.”

Is there any limit to the depths which this man will stoop to try to get what he wants?  The degree of hubris in his behavior is simply stunning.

Perhaps he should simply try prayer.  However, he may discover that sometimes God doesn’t answer prayers in the way we’d like.

NOTE:  Erick and I must have had the Vulcan mind-meld going remotely.  He posted on this at almost precisely the same time as I did.