CURL: Time for a new Republican Party – Washington Times

CURL: Time for a new Republican Party – Washington Times.

By Joseph Curl


The Republican Party did not lose last Tuesday’s election. It was obliterated, crushed, slaughtered, massacred, squashed, annihilated — and, let’s hope, extinguished.

For the party of Lincoln, it’s been a week of sifting through the carnage: What went wrong? How could a party that just a decade ago controlled all of government have been so completely nullified that an incumbent Democrat who was quite possibly the worst president in a century handily defeated the Republican nominee?

The soul searching followed the standard stages of grief: There was denial. (Former electoral wizard Karl Rove made a fool of himself on Election Night by declaring Ohio still alive long after the state was lost.) Anger raged — Rush Limbaugh blamed it on the ignorant entitlement society. Some began bargaining: Next time we’ll reject a moderate candidate, and if we can just talk Sarah Palin into . Depression followed; one Fox News host gave viewers directions for the fastest route to Canada.

But so far, there has been little of Stage 5: acceptance. To reach that stage, Republicans are going to have to know the full, brutal truth, so here it is: The Grand Old Party is an antiquated throwback to another time and place, so pathetically out of touch with America that it has become a parody of itself. And if it doesn’t change — fast — it will go the way of the Free Soil Party (buried).

Consider just one fact: Mitt Romney lost blacks by 94 percent, voters younger than 30 by 63 percent, Hispanics by 54 percent, Asians by 53 percent and Jews by 39 percent.

In “The American President,” commander in chief Andrew Shepherd, a die-hard liberal who by movie’s end will seek to overturn the Second Amendment, takes aim at his conservative challenger, Bob Rumson. He cuts to the core of the GOP’s problem today: “I’ve been operating under the assumption that the reason Bob devotes so much time and energy to shouting at the rain was that he simply didn’t get it. Well, I was wrong. Bob’s problem isn’t that he doesn’t get it. Bob’s problem is that he can’t sell it!”

He can’t sell it: The Republican Party’s problem in a nutshell.

How on Earth not? The party stands for smaller government, far less federal spending, individual freedom, less intrusion, a strong national defense, lower taxes and supply-side, business-friendly economics. Far more than half of America believes in just the same tenets: Make no mistake, the nation is still solidly center-right.

But the GOP as it exists today almost completely prevents like-minded Americans from considering the party because it puts front and center ideologies that many categorically reject. While it espouses an ideology of individual freedom, it rejects that tenet for anyone not a white heterosexual male — women, blacks, Hispanics, gays, young people.

Take abortion. Who in 21st-century America really thinks abortion will be outlawed? Only hard-core, right-wing Republicans. And they actually put forward as members of their party two men who think such things as “legitimate rape” exist or that pregnancy from rape just may be “God’s will.” Mitt Romney tried to scrub those absurd views off him, to no avail. And for good reason: They are real beliefs of some in the Republican Party. (Um, the guys who pronounced them were party nominees.)

The Republican Party — which, by the way lost women to President Obama by 12 points — needs to run away from its archaic stance. Yes, object to abortion. Yes, work to make it rare. But move on: Abortion is here to stay. (And while you’re at it, GOP, it might just be time also to abandon that vaunted “abstinence-only” policy that has been such a dismal failure.)

Second, gay marriage. On this, simply — who cares? America 2012 has enormous problems. Is this really an issue that matters to — anyone? Christians, two men getting married doesn’t affect your marriage in any way. Get over it. The Republicans are on the wrong side of history on this issue, and Mr. Obama swept in millions of young voters by his tolerance. It’s time to walk away.

On both issues, the GOP can make a clean break: As the party of individual freedom, the GOP can simply say it now sees that Americans — especially women — do have the right to choose their own path. In fact, the party espouses the freedoms enshrined in the Constitution, always has, so the turnabout won’t even raise an eyebrow.

Such a recalibration would allow the millions of Americans who believe in the core Republican tenets to give the party a real evaluation at election time. Gone would be the hypocritical stances that invalidate the party for many voters before they can even weigh its differences with the Democratic Party.

If the Republican Party continues to press the notion that its biggest difference with Democrats is that it will fight to outlaw abortion and gay marriage, the GOP is done for good. Simple as that.

Joseph Curl covered the White House and politics for a decade for The Washington Times. He can be reached at

A Fluke? – Tea Party Nation

A Fluke? – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

Some stories are simply too good.  And this is one of those.

 Sandra Fluke went to Nevada.   You remember her.   She is the 30 year old unemployed woman who wants America to pay for her birth control pills. 

 For some reason the Obama campaign thinks American can’t get enough of her.

 Yes, actually we have had too much of her.


 Sandra Fluke, the woman at the center of a media firestorm earlier this year after Rush Limbaugh called her a “slut,” spoke Saturday in front of about 10 people at the Sak ‘N Save in north Reno.

The speech was part of a daylong effort by Democrats to get Northern Nevadans to the polls on the first day of early voting.

“I’m trying to do everything I can for an election that I feel is very important. I have a unique opportunity for how I get to do that,” said Fluke, who is coming off recent campaign trips to Colorado, Iowa, New Hampshire and Florida as a surrogate for Democratic President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign.

Fluke emerged on the national spotlight in February when she was denied to speak before the U.S. House committee on Oversight and Government Reform on whether insurance plans should have a mandate to cover contraceptives. She eventually spoke to House Democrats.

Rush Limbaugh called her a “slut” and “prostitute” on his show based on her comments on contraception for women. He later apologized, saying it was an “attempt to be humorous.”

Fluke doesn’t take the jabs too seriously. When asked about her previous year and how people have treated her in the press, Fluke smiled and laughed.

“It’s been not quite the 2012 that I’ve expected,” she said.

Fluke has embraced the spotlight, though. She spoke at the Democratic National Convention in North Carolina and has enjoyed talks with people on the campaign trail — especially those concerning women’s issues.

 That is a magnificent crowd.  10 whole people. 

 The stunning truth that the Obama Regime cannot grasp is that women (and for that matter men) are not worried about the government paying for birth control pills.

 Women (and men) are worried about the Great Obama Depression.   In the almost six years since the Democrats took control of Congress, and especially since Obama was elected, the economy has collapsed.  We have lost jobs and not made them up.  Food stamp usage is up 64% since Obama took over.   Welfare spending is up 32%. 

 The economy is a wreck.

 No one cares about a 30 year old woman who wants America to pay for her birth control.

 We are all worried about having jobs to pay our bills.

News Versus Propaganda – Thomas Sowell –


News Versus Propaganda – Thomas Sowell –

Since so many in the media cannot resist turning every tragedy into a political talking point, it was perhaps inevitable that (1) someone would try to link the shooting rampage at the Batman movie in Colorado to the Tea Party, and that (2) some would try to make it a reason to impose more gun control laws.

Too many people in the media cannot seem to tell the difference between reporting the news and creating propaganda.

NBC News apparently could not resist doctoring the transcript of the conversation between George Zimmerman and the police after the Trayvon Martin shooting. Now ABC News took the fact that the man arrested for the shooting in Colorado was named James Holmes to broadcast to the world the fact that there is a James Holmes who is a member of the Tea Party in Colorado.

The fact has since come out that these are two different men, one in his 20s and the other in his 50s. But corrections never catch up with irresponsible news broadcasts. The James Holmes who belongs to the Tea Party has been deluged with phone calls. I hope he sues ABC News for every dime they have.

This is not the first time that the mainstream media have tried to create a link between conservatives and violence. Years ago, the Oklahoma City bombing was blamed on Rush Limbaugh, despite the absence of any evidence that the bomber was inspired by Rush Limbaugh.

Similar things have happened repeatedly, going all the way back to the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, which was blamed on a hostile right-wing atmosphere in Dallas, even though the assassin had a long history of being on the far left fringe.

But, where the shoe is on the other foot — as when the Unabomber had a much marked-up copy of an environmentalist book by Al Gore — the media heard no evil, saw no evil and spoke no evil. If people in the media cannot decide whether they are in the business of reporting news or manufacturing propaganda, it is all the more important that the public understand that difference, and choose their news sources accordingly.

As for gun control advocates, I have no hope whatever that any facts whatever will make the slightest dent in their thinking — or lack of thinking. New York‘s Mayor Bloomberg and CNN’s Piers Morgan were on the air within hours of the shooting, pushing the case for gun control laws.

You might never know, from what they and other gun control advocates have said, that there is a mountain of evidence that gun control laws not only fail to control guns but are often counterproductive. However, for those other people who still think facts matter, it is worth presenting some of those facts.

Do countries with strong gun control laws have lower murder rates? Only if you cherry-pick the data.

Britain is a country with stronger gun control laws than the United States, and lower murder rates. But Mexico, Russia and Brazil are also countries with stronger gun control laws than the United States — and their murder rates are much higher than ours. Israel and Switzerland have even higher rates of gun ownership than the United States, and much lower murder rates than ours.

Even the British example does not stand up very well under scrutiny. The murder rate in New York has been several times that in London for more than two centuries — and, for most of that time, neither place had strong gun control laws. New York had strong gun control laws years before London did, but New York still had several times the murder rate of London.

It was in the later decades of the 20th century that the British government clamped down with severe gun control laws, disarming virtually the entire law-abiding citizenry. Gun crimes, including murder, rose as the public was disarmed.

Meanwhile, murder rates in the United States declined during the same years when murder rates in Britain were rising, which were also years when Americans were buying millions more guns per year.

The real problem, both in discussions of mass shootings and in discussions of gun control, is that too many people are too committed to a vision to allow mere facts to interfere with their beliefs, and the sense of superiority that those beliefs give them.

Any discussion of facts is futile when directed at such people. All anyone can do is warn others about the propaganda.


Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Left? – American Thinker

Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Left? – American Thinker.

By Bruce Walker

The left feeds on fear.  It does not try to persuade, but rather to excite or to terrify.  But over the last couple of decades, conservatives have learned that the left is a toothless predator which relies upon its snarls and roars more than any real power to punish.  The maledictions of leftism are familiar and suggest racial prejudice, misogyny, religious fanaticism, anti-social greed, indifference to pollution, etc.   

Rush Limbaugh was subject to innumerable boycotts and outraged calls of leftists for his summary gagging.  Rush, though, had done his homework.  The tens of millions of true conservatives who had no national media outlet but his show and Rush’s willingness to expose the utter hypocrisy of the leftist establishment media (putting them on the defensive) worked: attempts to frighten sponsors from his program failed spectacularly, and the more times that leftists tried to drive him away, with no success at all, the more we loved him.

About the same time Rush began a national hit, Clarence Thomas, having seen what happened to the estimable jurist Robert Bork, decided that he would fight against the sliming of Anita Hill.  Judge Thomas, who had never been accused of sexual harassment when he was appointed to the federal bench or later to the federal appellate bench, wound up defending himself not only against Hill, but also against vile journalists who hoped that he would get a heart-attack and die soon.  Thomas fought back against his “high-tech lynching,” and Democrats began to retreat.

In the two decades since then, conservatives have increasingly fought back directly against those institutions of leftism which are used to shut us up or compel us to say and to do things we do not believe.  It is high time that we see leftism as a toothless tiger which is slow, self-centered, and silly.  The last Gallup Poll, this February, showed that  conservatives outnumber liberals in every state except Massachusetts. 

The left tried to keep Fox News out of cable markets, even though it was wildly popular with viewers, and then tried to blame Fox News for being biased.  (The profound absurdity of three or four notional “competitors” all accusing in unison a single other competitor of being unfair honestly seems to have missed leftists.)  Now the dwindling pool of committed leftists who still watch establishment media news or read its shrinking body of magazines and newspapers are increasingly ignored by ordinary Americans. 

In the last few years, this resistance to leftist bullying has extended directly into the political arena.  When Sarah Palin was our vice presidential nominee, the left spewed all the noxious venom it could on her, including creating lewd fake photos of her, and tried to savage her family as well.  But Sarah, to her great credit, shrugged these pests off and proceeded with her message.  As an attractive, happily married, devout Christian, Palin has much stronger foundations than the left can undermine. 

Chris Christie ran a campaign for governor of New Jersey which shrugged off the angry attacks of public employees’ unions, and then Christie proceeded to do what he promised to do.  These unions were used to politicians kowtowing to them, but when Christie withstood their hits and the attacks by the media, he showed everyone how puny these leftist groups really were, even in New Jersey.

Scott Walker, of course, has taken these unions on every more directly, taking away the automatic deduction of union dues by public employees’ unions and so likely ending their power forever in Wisconsin.  He persuaded Republicans to hang tough through three series of elections and several other efforts to intimidate them.  Everything the left tried, even in Wisconsin, failed utterly.

The salient fact is that we need fear the left no more.  We don’t need to listen to their media to get our news.  We can even run media exposés of the left, as Planned Parenthood and ACORN have learned when the left egregiously misbehaves, even if the leftist media tries to spike the stories.  We don’t need to have our kids mortgage their future for the dubious value of a B.A. in sociology.  As states pass laws to end voter fraud, we have forced leftist into solemnly warning that requiring a photo I.D. to vote is racist (while our countrymen, in private, must ask themselves: are they really serious?

No.  Leftists have not been serious for a long time.  We must, of course, undo the damage of eighty years of leftism run amok: we must stop the momentum of collectivist statism, restore the Judeo-Christian values which form our national culture, restore power to state governments, reduce the mountain of government debt, and fix the other myriad disasters of leftism.  But we should not view leftists today as a wolf which makes us afraid — but rather as parrot which make us laugh.

Where’s Sharpton’s Apology for Accusing a White Man of Raping a Black Teen? – Larry Elder – Townhall Conservative Columnists

Tawana Brawley at a press conference in 1987. ...

Image via Wikipedia

Where’s Sharpton’s Apology for Accusing a White Man of Raping a Black Teen? – Larry Elder – Townhall Conservative Columnists.

“Meet the Press” host David Gregory asked his panel “where civility has gone in our public discourse.” Incredibly, one panelist urged people to be more “mature” and not “poison the atmosphere.”

I say “incredibly” because this panelist was none other than the race-hustling, anti-Semitic “civil rights activist” and MSNBC talk show host, Al Sharpton. For some reason, Sharpton’s own struggles with civility never came up. Nor did any panelist behave so rudely as to bring up Sharpton’s role in one of the most hideous, disgusting and cynical uses of the race card this side of the O.J. Simpson case. And Sharpton, unlike Rush Limbaugh, refuses to apologize.

While this raises little or no concern to MSNBC or its advertisers, Sharpton became famous by falsely accusing a white man of raping a black teenage girl. Tawana Brawley, then 15, told authorities that white racists abducted, raped and sodomized her — scrawling the initials “KKK” on her in human feces.

A grand jury later found the entire incident a complete hoax. This did not stop the Rev. Al Sharpton, who had accused Steven Pagones, then an assistant district attorney in Duchess County, N.Y., of the crime. After Sharpton’s accusation, Pagones received death threats, and his young daughter was later threatened.

“We stated openly that Steven Pagones did it,” said Sharpton. “If we’re lying, sue us, so we can go into court with you and prove you did it. Sue us — sue us right now.”

Pagones did sue.

A jury unanimously concluded that Sharpton defamed Pagones, ordering Sharpton to pay him $65,000. The Reverend promptly and publicly said he did not intend to pay. Later, when Sharpton decided to run for president, the outstanding defamation debt became a political problem. So Sharpton’s one-percenter buddies passed the hat and paid off his debt, which by then totaled $87,000 with interest and penalties.

Civility, Rev. Al? In 1989, a young white woman, dubbed the “Central Park jogger,” was monstrously raped and nearly beaten to death. Sharpton insisted — despite the defendants’ confessions — that her black attacker-suspects were innocent, modern-day Scottsboro Boys trapped in “a fit of racial hysteria.” Sharpton charged that the jogger’s boyfriend did it and organized protests outside the courthouse, chanting, “The boyfriend did it!” and denouncing the victim as a “whore!”

Sharpton appealed for a psychiatrist to examine the victim, generously saying: “It doesn’t even have to be a black psychiatrist. … We’re not endorsing the damage to the girl — if there was this damage.” (The convictions of the accused were eventually vacated, despite their taped confessions, after another man — whose DNA matched — confessed to the rape in 2002.)

Civility, Rev. Al? Sharpton once called former Marine, magna cum laude graduate, lawyer, professor and then-Mayor David Dinkins — New York City’s first and only black mayor — a “n–ger whore turning tricks in City Hall.”

Civility, Rev. Al? In 1991, when a 7-year-old black child was accidentally killed in Crown Heights after a car driven by a Hasidic Jew went out of control, Sharpton led 400 protesters through the Jewish neighborhood. There were four nights of rock and bottle throwing. A young Talmudic scholar was surrounded by a mob shouting, “Kill the Jew,” and stabbed to death. After deriding Jews as “diamond merchants,” Sharpton said, “If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkes back and come over to my house.”

Civility, Rev. Al? The Jewish owner of Freddy’s Fashion Mart in Harlem raised the rent on a black sub-tenant. At one of the many rallies designed to frighten the owner, Sharpton called him a “white interloper.” Following a demonstration three months later, one of the protestors, a black man, stormed Freddy’s Fashion Mart with a pistol, screaming: “It’s on now! All blacks out!” In addition to shooting, he set fire to the building, eventually killing himself and seven others.

Initially, Sharpton denied having spoken at any rallies and refused to accept any responsibility for poisoning the atmosphere. When tapes surfaced showing Sharpton speaking, he said, “What’s wrong with denouncing white interlopers?” Eventually, he apologized — for saying “white,” but not for saying “interloper.”

Sharpton refuses to apologize for Tawana Brawley. He assumes liberal bias will prevent the media from asking him about Brawley. Or, he will accuse them of racism if they do: “I did what I believed. … They are asking me to grovel. They want black children to say they forced a black man coming out of the hardcore ghetto to his knees. … Once you begin bending, it’s, ‘Did you bend today?’ or: ‘I missed the apology. Say it again.’ Once you start compromising, you lose respect for yourself.”

In other words, falsely and unapologetically accusing a white man of raping a black teenage girl is no barrier to hosting a talk show on MSNBC or lecturing the nation on civility.

Rush Limbaugh twice apologized to the Georgetown law student for calling her a slut. Sharpton has never apologized for calling Steven Pagones a rapist.

An open letter to Gloria Allred – Tea Party Nation

English: Attorney Gloria Allred (standing), wi...

Image via Wikipedia

An open letter to Gloria Allred – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

Dear Gloria,

 Shut the hell up!

 As someone who is a huge believer in the idea of free speech I actually find it painful to say that.  On the other hand, you are clueless and dangerous to freedom so on second thought maybe it is not that painful.

 You sent a letter on March 8 demanding that Rush Limbaugh be prosecuted in criminal court for his comments about professional feminazi Sandra Fluke.

 Allegedly you are a lawyer but it is painfully obvious you slept through law school.   Since you slept through law school, let me give you a clue.  There is something called the First Amendment

 Since you missed it, it reads:

 Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

 I realize you are one of those people who wants the Constitution repealed and think that conservatives should be prosecuted and imprisoned.  But this is America.  The First Amendment protects us.  Rush is free to make his comments about Sandra Fluke and I am free to point out that you are an idiot.

 Why don’t you relocate to Cuba or Venezuela, since the governments there share your view of freedom and liberty.

 Real Americans are tired of socialists like you who want to tear down the greatest nation in the world.  We are tired of you trying to criminalize conservatism.   We are tired of your Botoxed brain damaged blathering.

 You are not an advocate.   You are a joke.  As Kristin Powers pointed out, liberals scream bloody murder when someone says something about a liberal woman but are absolutely silent when conservative women have much worse things said about them.  Michelle Malkin has had attacks made on her that make the comments about Sandra Fluke sound like they came straight from Sunday School.  Where were you when she and other conservative women were being called every name in the book?  Out scheduling your next face lift?

 Rush Limbaugh has the First Amendment to protect him and so do I.

 And when I point out you are an absolute raging moron and proof of life after Botox brain death, well truth is an absolute defense.

The War on Conservative Women – Michelle Malkin – Townhall Conservative Columnists

The War on Conservative Women – Michelle Malkin – Townhall Conservative Columnists.

I’m sorry Rush Limbaugh called 30-year-old Georgetown law student Sandra Fluke a “slut.” She’s really just another professional femme-a-gogue helping to manufacture a false narrative about the GOP “war on women.” I’m sorry the civility police now have an opening to demonize the entire right based on one radio comment — because it’s the progressive left in this country that has viciously and systematically slimed female conservatives for their beliefs.

We have the well-worn battle scars to prove it. And no, we don’t need coddling phone calls from the pandering president of the United States to convince us to stand up and fight.

At his first press conference of the year on Tuesday, the Nation’s Concern Troll explained that he phoned Fluke to send a message to his daughters and all women that they shouldn’t be “attacked or called horrible names because they are being good citizens.” After inserting himself into the fray and dragging Sasha and Malia into the debate, Obama then told a reporter he “didn’t want to get into the business of arbitrating” language and civility. Too late, pal.

The fact is, “slut” is one of the nicer things I’ve been called over 20 years of public life. In college during the late 1980s, it was “race traitor,” “coconut” (brown on the outside white on the inside) and “white man’s puppet.” After my first book, “Invasion,” came out in 2001, it was “immigrant-hater,” the “Radical Right’s Asian Pitbull,” “Tokyo Rose” and “Aunt Tomasina.” In my third book, 2005’s “Unhinged,” I published entire chapters of hate mail rife with degrading, unprintable sexual epithets and mockery of my Filipino heritage.

If I had a dollar for every time libs have called me a “Manila whore” and “Subic Bay bar girl,” I’d be able to pay for a ticket to a Hollywood-for-Obama fundraiser.

Self-serving opponents argue that such attacks do not represent “respectable,” “mainstream” liberal opinion about their conservative female counterparts. But it was feminist godmother Gloria Steinem who called Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison a “female impersonator.” It was NOW leader Patricia Ireland who commanded her flock to only vote for “authentic” female political candidates. It was Al Gore consultant Naomi Wolf who accused the late Jeane Kirkpatrick of being “uninflected by the experiences of the female body.”

It was Matt Taibbi, now of Rolling Stone magazine, who mocked my early championing of the tea party movement by jibing: “Now when I read her stuff, I imagine her narrating her text, book-on-tape style, with a big, hairy set of (redacted) in her mouth. It vastly improves her prose.”

It was Keith Olbermann, then at MSNBC and now at Al Gore’s Current TV, who wrote on Twitter that columnist S.E. Cupp was “a perfect demonstration of the necessity of the work Planned Parenthood does” and who called me a “mashed up bag of meat with lipstick on it.” He stands by those remarks. Olbermann has been a special guest at the White House.

Some of us have not forgotten when liberal Wisconsin radio host John “Sly” Sylvester outrageously accused GOP Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch of performing “fellatio on all the talk-show hosts in Milwaukee” and sneered that she had “pulled a train” (a crude phrase for gang sex). (Earlier, he called former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice a “black trophy” and “Aunt Jemima.”)

Or when MSNBC misogynist Ed Schultz called talk show host Laura Ingraham a “talk slut” for criticizing Obama’s petty beer summit. Or when Playboy published a list of the top 10 conservative women who deserved to be “hate-f**ked.” The article, which was promoted by Anne Schroeder Mullins at, included Ingraham, “The View’s” Elisabeth Hasselbeck, former Bush spokeswoman Dana Perino, GOP Rep. Michele Bachmann and others. Yours truly topped the list with the following description: a “highly f**kable Filipina” and “a regular on Fox News, where her tight body and get-off-my-lawn stare just scream, ‘Do me!'”

And then there’s the left’s war on Sarah Palin, which would require an entire national forest of trees to publish.

A reporter asked Obama to comment on examples of liberal hate speech at Tuesday’s press conference. He whiffed, of course. This is, after all, the brave leader who sat on his hands while his street thugs attacked tea party mothers and grandmothers as “Koch whores” during the fight over union reform in Wisconsin. (As I reported last week, his re-election campaign is now targeting the Koch brothers’ private foundation donors in a parallel effort to chill conservative speech and activism.) He’s leading by example.

So no, we won’t get any phone calls from Mr. Civility. Acknowledging the war on conservative women would obliterate The Narrative. Enjoy the silence.

Useful idiots, Republican Pets and Alinsky – Tea Party Nation

Cover of "Rules for Radicals"

Cover of Rules for Radicals

Useful idiots, Republican Pets and Alinsky – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

George Will is one of those useless Washington Republicans who believes conservatives should be a minority, too polite to make problems for the liberals.  Rush Limbaugh has his finger on the pulse of real America.

 What is wrong with Will, right with Rush and how does Alinsky fit into all of this?

 Yesterday I referred to George Will in a video blog as “the pet republican for the liberal media establishment.”  George Will went onto ABC News and as usual, made a fool of himself.

 From the Daily Caller:

 “This Week” host George Stephanopoulos speculated that conservative talker Rush Limbaugh had been under enormous pressure to apologize for his remarks about Fluke, which included calling her a “slut.” But Will hinted that he was actually underwhelmed by the reaction of some Republicans.

“Well, it would have been nice if [GOP leaders] shared that with the larger public,” Will said. “Instead, Mr. Boehner said that Rush’s language was inappropriate. Using a salad fork for your entree — that is inappropriate. Rick Santorum says, ‘Well, what he said was absurd and an entertainer is allowed to absurd.’ No, it is the responsibilities of conservatives to police the right excesses on their side just as the liberals unfailingly fail on their own side.”

 “It was depressing because what it indicates is, the Republican leaders are afraid of Rush Limbaugh

 Of course George Will is underwhelmed.  Wait, we are talking about his intelligence, not his response. Will is just one of those beltway Republicans who believes the natural order of life is they are subservient to liberals.  He believes he should show up, articulate the moderate Republican talking points that conservatives are the focus of all evil in the world and then sit back and nod like a bobble head as the liberals slander conservative Republicans. 

 What Will and most liberals do not get is that people do not follow Rush Limbaugh.  Rush Limbaugh follows real America.   If Rush Limbaugh simply had millions of mind numbed robots that followed his every word, the liberals would have long ago created their version of Rush Limbaugh.  They have not because none of the liberals can touch America’s pulse

 If a liberal were going to be able to touch the pulse of America, they would first have to stop hating America and real Americans.   They are singularly incapable of doing that.

 That is why Rush has millions of followers. That is why Hanity and Beck have millions of followers.   That is why liberal talk radio cannot succeed. 

 Some on the far left understand that Rush is not just a hot shot talk show host but he represents the thoughts and opinions of millions of real Americans.  Which is why Rush must be destroyed.

 The Sandra Fluke “Slut-gate” fight has been nothing but a pure Alinsky attack on Rush.   Saul Alinsky promulgated his “Rules for Radicals.”  It is the far left playbook and the attack on Rush.

 Rule 12 of Alinsky’s rules is Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.  Call it divide and conquer. 

 Rush, whose political instincts are extraordinary, did step into this one.  He has always been a top target of the left for years.  Because of his comments, they have frozen him or made him deal with the issue.  They made the issue personal, poor little Sandra Fluke versus the big, rich, bad Rush Limbaugh.  Then they tried to polarize him.  They have tried to make Rush so unacceptable that he would be forced out.

 They attacked his advertisers and had 7 of them drop advertising.  Even the Republican Presidential candidates acted as if Rush was toxic.  Then pet Republican George Will jumped in parroting the liberal talking lines. 

 If the Twitter response is any indication, most of those advertisers will regret their decisions.  Meanwhile Rush continues to be the top rated radio talk show host in history.

 George Will just continues to be the pet Republican of the liberal media establishment.

 Good dog.

Never Apologize – Tea Party Nation

Never Apologize – Tea Party Nation.

Posted by Judson Phillips

“Never apologize.  It is a sign of weakness.”  Captain Nathan Bittle spoke those famous words.  Bittle was actually John Wayne in the 1949 movie “She wore a yellow ribbon.”

 Someone else today might be thinking about John Wayne’s wisdom today.

 Who might that be?

 It would be Rush Limbaugh

 Yesterday he apologized over the faux Sandra Fluke controversy.   The left is now looking at it as a sign of weakness, even to the point of one leftist trying to get the FCC to force Limbaugh off the air. 

 The Constitutional prohibition against cruel and unusual punishments only stops the government from doing those things.  If there were a complete ban, there would never be another Maureen Dowd column.

 I misread a tweet earlier today and thought that she had come to Rush Limbaugh’s defense, so I read her column.  We are all attracted to freaks of nature, which explains why anyone reads her column.   Her column was not a defense of Rush, but more of her typical rantings.

 The difference between Maureen Dowd and someone in a persistent vegetative state is that the person in the persistent vegetative state has some glimmer of hope for future brain activity.

 Dowd whines about what Limbaugh has said about her, yet with the same breath calls him variations of the same thing that Limbaugh called Sandra Flake. 

 Flake’s ‘testimony’ was the most bizarre exercise in left wing feminist victimization creative writing that we have seen in a long time.  Flake is allegedly a law student whose testimony was full of unattributed hearsay.  The Rules of Evidence for court exist to limit testimony to evidence that can be considered reliable.    Congress has no rule like that because if they did, Democrats would never be able to offer another witness to testify.  The good news is we would never have to endure another brain-dead celebrity prattling on about some subject they obviously know nothing about.

 Most congressional testimony is under oath.  Fortunately for most Democrat witnesses, the only people who get prosecuted for perjury to Congress now are former major league baseball stars. 

 Fluke’s ‘testimony’ was better suited for a creative writing contest.  Her tome included a veritable cast of characters, all from the mind of a politically correct feminazi.  She had a lesbian, a rape victim and a poor heterosexual married woman.  Her diversity character generator was working overtime.  The only one she seems to have missed would have been a quadriplegic Hispanic transvestite who was a victim of domestic abuse. 

 The left is going nuts with Limbaugh’s apology.   They believe they can now force him from the air.   Ultimately this is the truth of liberalism.  They cannot stand a dissenting voice.  No one may dare disagree with them.

 Rush Limbaugh succeeded because he offered ideas and people wanted to hear him.  Maureen Dowd succeeded by…. well actually she has not succeeded.  Who in the hell cares what she has to say?

 No one. 

 If Twitter is any guide to go by, the sponsors who dropped Rush Limbaugh are going to regret it because his supporters are already making notes and planning to no longer use those services.  Carbonite may be the first and most prominent advertiser to lose for dumping Rush Limbaugh.

 Meanwhile, I’m calling a lawyer friend of mine to see if I can sue the New York Times for violating my rights against cruel and unusual punishments by inflicting Maureen Dowd on the nation.

Republicans! Stop Looking for a Messiah! – Tea Party Nation

Republicans! Stop Looking for a Messiah! – Tea Party Nation.

By Alan Caruba

In 2008 the voters gave the Oval Office to a man who Rush Limbaugh and others mockingly called “the messiah” for his grandiose rhetoric and promises of change. If the first two primaries are any indication, Republican Party voters seem to be looking for their own messiah, a perfect candidate, and no such person exists.

Republicans have to stop seeking their own “messiah” in 2012. Most importantly, the six percent that Rasmussen Reports says are ready to vote for a third party candidate, if one emerges, have got to get their heads screwed on tighter because that’s a margin that could keep Obama in office for four more years. Additionally, Rasmussen reports that 53% believe Mitt Romney is the GOP candidate to defeat Obama.

In recent Wall Street Journal commentary, “Romney Wins but Takes a Beating”, columnist Peggy Noonan wrote “The Iowa results almost perfectly reflect the Republican Party, which, roughly speaking, is split into three parts—libertarians, social conservatives and moderate conservatives,” adding, “there’s no denying the Republicans are in a brawl, and it is becoming ferocious.”

I put the ugly tone of the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries squarely at the feet of Newt Gingrich. Angry, resentful, and eager for revenge over his loss in Iowa, Gingrich was still smarting from the attack ads aimed at him. He revealed an aspect of his personality well known from his days as Speaker of the House in the 1990s.

Rick Santorum did well in Iowa, but he brings a holier-than-thou approach to the campaign with his religion-based approach to various social issues. It’s not so much that I disagree with his positions, but there are a lot of independents who do not necessary go to church every Sunday.

Michele Bachmann’s strident tone didn’t help her much and Rick Perry’s punch-drunk approach to campaigning didn’t either. I worry that Ron Paul will try the third party route. At present, he will never get the nomination and his base is a bunch of boys and girls barely out of their adolescence. No Republican grownup takes Paul’s views seriously, nor should they. Jon Huntsman is a spoiled rich kid, a fellow Mormon, who seems to have a personal grudge against Romney.

Talking about Mormons, I am old enough to recall all the talk about John F. Kennedy having been a Catholic and how that would hurt him. It didn’t. What’s really amazing is that Barack Obama’s long association with Rev. Jeremiah Wright, a black liberation preacher and one who outspokenly condemned the U.S.A., barely put a dent in his run for the presidency.

As for Mormons, many have served honorably in high office since the days of President Eisenhower. It’s time to get off that hobby horse. If anything, I am greatly relieved that for all the talk of flip-flopping, there has not been a whisper of personal scandal regarding Romney. Compare that, please, to Bill Clinton.

At some point, likely after the South Carolina and Florida primaries, Republicans of all descriptions are going to conclude they have a good candidate in Mitt Romney. The party which has generally been run by white shoe, East Coast elites and a healthy mixture of Texas oilmen, has got to get serious about tearing Barack Obama to bits.

This election is not about finding “another” messiah to lead the nation. It’s about electing—frankly—anyone other than Obama and, hopefully, someone who has demonstrated real executive competence in public office and private enterprise.

In Congress the Republican leadership is elaborately polite in their discourse, but the election will not be won in the Capitol Building. It will be won in 50 States whose population has been taking a beating in a terrible economy made worse by the profligate spending and borrowing of the worst President this nation has ever known. By the time November rolls around, I want them to be mad as hell and it will be the party’s job to make sure that happens.

© Alan Caruba 2012