National Empty Chair Day

Put an empty chair on your front lawn. Decorate it if you wish. And consider leaving it out until election day.

Note to GOP candidates: Have an empty chair on stage with you at every appearance from now on. You don't need to say a word about it. You might just, when referring to the current Administration's policies, allow your eyes to flick to the empty chair for just a moment. Have fun with it.

Saul Alinsky wrote in Rules for Radicals that ridicule is a very potent weapon, because it can't be refuted. I say it's past time for us to use it against the radicals.

Lunching with Leftists

The Bride of Monster suggested we eat at a Vietnamese restaurant for lunch today. We settled into our booth, perused the menu, and each ordered chicken phở. Directly behind me were a couple of leftists reassuring each other how smart they are and how stupid the TEA Party types are. TBoM could see I wasn't taking this well, and via various gestures and code words dissuaded me from responding to them directly. She wisely suggested that I could "blog about it" (she knows I have one of these blog thingies but probably doesn't even know the URL).

I was a good boy while listening to one of them talking about how bad standardized testing for school teachers is. I just smiled and thought about how standardized testing for drivers, florists, hair braiders, and countless other occupations is exactly the sort of regulation they elect people to impose on the market to protect consumers against shady operators. Why should school teachers be exempt from the apparatchiks?

They dismissed the fact that "the words 'separation of church and state' do not appear in the First Amendment" by also saying "neither do 'assault weapons' appear in the Second". Well, that's a fascinating observation there, but the language is hardly similar:

1. In the First Amendment, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion" is very specific, and the Supreme Court first used the '' wording in 1947's Everson v. Board of Education. Somehow, the First Amendment was on the books a century and a half before this phrase was found written in invisible ink between its lines.
2. By contrast "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" is very broadly worded. It doesn't have to say "assault weapons", because they are a subset of "Arms". The Supreme Court has ruled that certain arms are not protected by the Second Amendment because they are not "ordinary military equipment" (United States v. Miller). So-called "assault weapons" are demonized precisely because they are (or at least appear to be) "military".

They continued by discussing how the Constitution provided for slavery (although the word itself didn't appear in the text until the 13th Amendment abolishing it) and that it counted slaves as "40%" (corrected by the other one to 3/5ths) of a person as evidence of how racist the Framers must have been. I bit my tongue and didn't say anything to them about how the 3/5 compromise was cleverly designed by the anti-slavery side to reduce the power of the slave states in the House and Presidential elections, and to keep them inside the union rather than split into two, three, or even more separate confederations of states that would have easily been reconquered by Great Britain. The abolitionists were playing the long game; they knew that slavery was an economic dead end, and the free North would build a powerful industrial base with free men while the South stagnated. Time was on their side.

After a while, their conversation turned to non-political matters, and my blood pressure settled down. Then the one closest to me stated as if it were an established fact that the TEA Party is motivated by racism. I turned around and said "I consider myself part of the TEA Party movement, and I am not motivated by racism." He tried to play it off like I was the @$$#013 by pointing out that he was talking to his friend, not to me, but I wasn't having any of it. Imagine Mel Gibson "talking to a friend" spouting negative stereotypes about Jews, with a Jew sitting back to back with him. Would anyone excuse such speech simply because Gibson wasn't talking to the Jew directly? I sure hope not.

Then he played the canard about how we didn't complain when Bush was POTUS, and since we were complaining now with a black POTUS... Raaacism! I told him that the people I know in the TEA Party movement did indeed complain when we felt Bush was betraying the principles he campaigned on. We opposed national health care when Hillary Clinton was pushing it.

That set off his friend, who said that ObamaCare isn't national health care, but a corporatist's dream. I tried to explain that the TP'ers I know don't really care that much for the big corporations buying favors from the government to shut down their competitors, and that ObamaCare would eventually lead to the nationalized health care he wants as it destroys the private health care industry, but he was too busy spitting out his hatred for me and anyone else who wants him or his sick relatives to die Die DIE! because we oppose national health care. And then he stormed out.

I didn't get to ask the guy who called us racists what he thought of the fact that most of us have spent the last few days defending a black liberal, that we're looking forward to seeing several new black faces in Congress next year.

At least TBoM didn't get upset that I reacted to that provocation. It's one thing to disagree on issues, but the charge of racism is so powerful that it must be confronted whenever it is raised. I won't sit idly by and let that charge be casually tossed out as if it were a proven fact. To let the charge go unanswered is to assent to its truth.[Click on the title above, or date stamp below, to see the full article.]

Threely for this post http://3.ly/LunchWLeft

She's a Witch!

This is supposed to be the end of Christine O'Donnell's political career:


Her opponent was once "a bearded Marxist", but he's lost the beard. She "dabbled in 'witchcraft'" and decided it wasn't for her once she saw it up close. Frankly, I'm confused about why anyone thinks this reflects badly on her at all. Wasn't she supposed to be an uptight sexually-repressed über-Christian who thinks that even masturbation is sinful?

Dr. Alveda King had an abortion and now is passionately anti-abortion. How many others do we know of who have "dabbled" in strange practices, been shocked by what they found was being done, and left those communities, to become the most outspoken critics of their former friends?

Christianity itself was considered an apostasy of Judaism. One particular person who participated in persecution of those apostates (up to and including killing them), was Saul of Tarsus. His conversion into Paul, the prolific Apostle whose letters to various churches comprise a large part of the New Testament, is so well known that we can speak of such an experience by the shorthand "Road to Damascus".

And haven't we been told ad nauseam that one of the things that makes President Obama so great is that his father and stepfather were Muslims, and he spent a few years in Indonesia, studying in Muslim schools, before his own conversion to Christianity? Isn't a reasonable description of that experience "dabbling in Islam"? The Left loves berating stereotypical hicks who never travel out of their little backwoods holler, and have no personal experience with The Other. O'Donnell has had that experience, and somehow that's supposed to make her unfit to serve in the US Senate?

Open letter to the RNSC

Many of the big boys have already signed this open letter to the RNSC. I'm signing it as well. You can sign by commenting to that effect.

Dear Senator Cornyn,

We the undersigned believe that the National Republican Senatorial Committee should be committed to serving ALL the members of the Republican Party.

Additionally, the NRSC should be focused on defeating Democrats, not Republicans. Towards that end, we believe it was completely inappropriate for the NRSC to endorse a candidate in the Florida primary race.

Therefore, we request that both you and the NRSC alter your position on the Florida Senate race, maintain neutrality, and promise to spend no money directly or indirectly in that race.

Sincerely yours,

The Monster

Arlen Specter admits to what we've long known...

Specter To Switch Parties

Pennsylvania Sen. Arlen Specter will switch his party affiliation from Republican to Democrat and announced today that he will run in 2010 as a Democrat, according to a statement he released this morning.

Switch? Oh, right – he still *technically* has an “R” following his name

Specter's decision would give Democrats a 60 seat filibuster proof majority in the Senate assuming Democrat Al Franken is eventually sworn in as the next Senator from Minnesota. (Former Sen. Norm Coleman is appealing Franken's victory in the state Supreme Court.)

Obviously he sees that, having betrayed the trust of his base and (perhaps permanently) damaged the Conservative movement in Government to the fullest extend he would be allowed from his current position – this is the only he would be able to continue pounding nails into America’s coffin – Well played, Sir.

"I have decided to run for re-election in 2010 in the Democratic primary," said Specter in a statement. "I am ready, willing and anxious to take on all comers and have my candidacy for re-election determined in a general election."

Nope...Leaving the low-hanging-fruit for Anderson Cooper…
(aw dang, there’s a phrase and a name we’ll never be able to use together again..eww)

He added: "Since my election in 1980, as part of the Reagan Big Tent, the Republican Party has moved far to the right. Last year, more than 200,000 Republicans in Pennsylvania changed their registration to become Democrats. I now find my political philosophy more in line with Democrats than Republicans."

“…the Republican Party has moved far to the right”?

Apparently, Obama’s not the only one who has been “unaware” of the over half-million citizens protesting at Tea Parties around the country.

NewsFlash, Sparky:
The reason you’d have the proverbial “snowball’s chance” if you ran as a Republican in 2010 is because (following your stellar example) your party has become almost indistinguishable from the Opposition.

If you think that constitutes a shift to ‘the right’, then clearly it’s time for your handlers to up-the-voltage.

Specter as a Democrat would also fundamentally alter the 2010 calculus in Pennsylvania as he was expected to face a difficult primary challenge next year from former Rep. Pat Toomey. The only announced Democrat in the race is former National Constitution Center head Joe Torsella although several other candidates are looking at the race.

I can just envision how that conversation went…

“So, Arlen – here’s the thing: This Toomey-guy ain’t much, but he also didn’t tank his credibility by crossing-the-aisle to vote for the Great Generational Theft Act the way you did either.

“You an’ me been friends for a long time so I’m gonna tell you straight:
You’re Done. Screwed. Fini - Drop-the-curtain, stick-a-fork-in-you, It's Over."

I mean really, at this point you’d have a better chance running as a Demo… hheeeeyyyy….”

The precariousness of Specter's political position -- a Republican in a Democratic-leaning state -- was on display earlier this year when he was one of three GOP Senators to back President Barack Obama's $787 billion economic stimulus plan. That vote was strongly condemned by conservative Republicans and Toomey used that vote as the launching pad for his candidacy.

Nnnoooo… what was on display was his complete lack of spine, conservative-chops or ability to look ahead farther than 6 months into long-term repercussions.

Because of the shrinking Republican vote in the state, Specter was seen as a dead man walking politically in the primary with polling showing him trailing Toomey by ten or more points.

That statement is just nonsensical – “Fewer-Republicans-Voting” is the reason “More-Republicans-Would-Vote-For-Toomey”?

Someone needs to check his math… then work on that ability to find his own nose.

The bar for Specter to run as an independent was also extremely high due to the rules governing such a third party candidacy.

Because an independent candidacy would make all of the requisite palm-greasing much more difficult.

That left a Democratic candidacy as Specter's best option if he wanted to remain in the Senate beyond 2010.

Being the only way for a person without any firm personal positions to get elected – clearly, it’s the best way for him to go.

The "MD-Take" ?

ANYONE who changes their political affiliation while in office should be immediately recalled.

Period.

- MuscleDaddy

"Stimulus" includes medical-procedure "Star Chamber"

Remind me - what part of this represents "Stimulus"?

Betsy McCaughey @ Bloomberg dredged this up out of the Generational Theft Act of 2009 - Basically straight from the mind of Tom Daschle, it's the groundwork for every Socialist "Healthcare Program" that you ever, never wanted to see come to pass...

"Ruin Your Health With The Obama Stimulus Plan"


For those following along @ home: Here is the link to the Bill as she cites it.

And here are the appropriate Money-Quotes - that ought to scare the HELL out of you...

"The bill’s health rules will affect “every individual in the United States” (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system."

But the bill goes further. One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective.

Hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new system will face penalties. “Meaningful user” isn’t defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose “more stringent measures of meaningful use over time” (511, 518, 540-541)

Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).


The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.

The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid. The bill allocates more funding for this bureaucracy than for the Army, Navy, Marines, and Air Force combined (90-92, 174-177, 181).

By creating a new government office, this piece of insurmountable shite sidesteps any hope of impermanence - unless you believe that an entire agency, with the level of investment that this monstrosity would need, would be likely to be dissolved after the "Stimulus" money ran out.

...yeah - me neither.

The government - dictating to Doctors and Hospitals what treatment you can & cannot receive.
... according to a matrix-chart & based on your likely 'productiveness'.

Which will be terribly efficient for their purposes...

Now, if they decide that 'Old Boxer' just isn't going to be productive anymore, they won't even have to go to the expense & trouble of euthanising him - just check the chart, stamp the file and deny treatment.

Whatever's wrong with him will handle the rest.

If the American people lie down for this - we deserve what we get.

- MuscleDaddy

Too Little, Too Late?

The British people would like their guns back, please...
(h/t- "Public Secrets")

Apparently, the 40% post-handgun-ban, cause-and-effect crime increase has finally become too much for the British law-abiding populace to bear.


Watch the whole thing and listen to some of those people:

"It's not safe."

"We can't count of the police to protect us."

"The ban was a failure."

"Things have changed."

...and even aside from the usual travelling packs of layabouts that socialism historically breeds, do you suppose they could also be referring to the annexation of whole sections of Britain and their transformation into places where the laws of the land simply do not apply?

Or maybe the continuing increase of homicides committed by indistinct "youths"?

Even the police (as @ 2:55 in the video) know what no one will openly admit - Gun Bans only work to disarm the law-abiding populace - and allow Goblins to commit their crimes unimpeded.

The police, after all, haven't stopped carrying or wearing body armor since the ban that was to "make everything safer".

So here is the mature case-study in disarming a country's general populace, while simultaneously pushing them ever farther down the slope of socialism: England.

There, in the light of day, for anyone with the desire & honesty to see it.

The people of once-"Great" Britain now see what they've lost - what they've given away - and, as you can see in the video, they want it back.

Unfortunately it is far, far more difficult to regain Rights & Liberties, once lost, than it is to defend them in the first place.

...just ask Tony Martin.


- MuscleDaddy

The PUMAs Have it...

The Message?

Don't. You. Believe. It.

(...someone needs to go tell that @%$#&*@'in Allahpundit)

Update:
They're-Not-Even-Real-Trolls...