West more focused than ever on bringing “liberal, progressive, socialist agenda, this left-wing, vile, vicious, despicable machine” to its knees
By Brittany Wallman and Juan Ortega
Days after accepting the top job for South Florida’s newest congressman, conservative radio host Joyce Kaufman gave the job back, blaming – and blistering – their “malevolent’’ political enemies in a radio tirade.
Sometimes caustic, often inflammatory and at all times conservative, Kaufman said she will not be chief of staff for incoming Republican U.S. Rep. Allen West, R-Plantation.
She said bitter election losers used her opinions and public speeches to attempt to “lynch’’ West. She said after being savaged online and on TV, becoming the target of death threats and receiving an e-mail that prompted a complete lockdown of Broward County schools, she changed her mind about taking the job in Washington.
His November election victory over Democrat Ron Klein of Boca Raton in Broward-Palm Beach’s District 22 is “too important’’ to allow it to be bogged down with a controversy over Kaufman, she said.
“People like me will do whatever we can to protect him, including walk away,’’ she said on her show on WFTL 850 AM on Thursday.
West, a retired lieutenant colonel in the Army, called in near the end of her three hour show Thursday, to tell listeners he is “absolutely committed’’ to her and the people of South Florida.
He said he wanted people, especially those “on the left,’’ to understand that Kaufman would continue “to fight on your battlefield’’ here, and he “will fight them on the battlefield in Washington, D.C., and we will meet in the middle after we soundly defeat them both.’’
The Congressman-elect said he’s now “even more focused that this liberal, progressive, socialist agenda, this left-wing, vile, vicious, despicable machine that’s out there is soundly brought to its knees. You don’t have to worry about me doing the right thing in Washington, D.C.’’
LETTER TO THE BRITISH LIBERAL DEMOCRATS
by Stuart Littlewood
Tzipi Livni, Israel’s former foreign minister, was largely responsible for the terror that brought mega-deaths and unimaginable destruction to Gaza's civilians nearly 2 years ago
Subject: Protecting war criminals – “just about the lowest thing anyone could do”
LibDem leaders know perfectly well that under ‘universal jurisdiction’ all states that are party to the Geneva Conventions are obliged to seek out and prosecute or extradite those suspected of grave breaches of the Conventions and bring them justice, regardless of nationality.
“Grave breaches” means willful killing, torture or inhuman treatment, causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health, and other serious violations of the laws of war… the sort of atrocities that have been (and still are) committed wholesale by Israelis against civilians in the Gaza Strip, the West Bank, East Jerusalem and on the high seas.
In other words, for these vilest of criminals there should be no hiding place.
The British Government shirks its solemn duty. Fortunately the law at present allows private applications for arrest warrants.
However, your Coalition partners the Conservatives, 80 percent of whom are claimed to be signed-up Friends of Israel, plan to interfere with our laws of arrest in order to protect those criminals they count among their friends. Apparently this will be done by ensuring that arrests for war crimes become strictly political decisions enabling the government of the day to pick’n’choose.
Foreign secretary William Hague, a Friend of Israel since his schooldays, recently told the pro-Israel lobby: “We have had good discussions with Israeli ministers on universal jurisdiction where the last government left us with an appalling situation where a politician like Mrs Livni could be threatened with arrest on coming to the UK… We have agreed in the coalition about putting it right, we will put it right through legislation that will be introduced… I phoned Mrs Livni amongst others to tell her about that and received a very warm welcome for our proposals.”
You, the Liberal Democrats, have already agreed to this???
Has everyone forgotten that Tzipi Livni, Israel’s former foreign minister, was largely responsible for the terror that brought mega-deaths and unimaginable destruction to Gaza’s civilians nearly 2 years ago?
Showing no remorse for the 1,400 dead (including 320 children and 109 women), the thousands horribly maimed and the hundreds of thousand made homeless, Livni’s office issued a statement saying she was proud of Operation Cast Lead, the murderous blitz she unleashed. Later at a conference in Tel Aviv she declared: “I would today take the same decisions.”
Many of you will recall how Israel violated the Egypt-brokered ceasefire to provoke a response that could then be used as an excuse to launch the onslaught Israel had been preparing for months.
You may also recall that in 2007 when Israel tightened the siege on Gaza, the prime minister’s adviser, Dov Weisglass, said “the idea is to put the Palestinians on a diet, but not to make them die of hunger”. Documents just released under a Freedom of Information petition by Gisha, an Israeli law centre, reveal that Israel operated “a policy of deliberate reduction” of basic goods in the Gaza Strip.
The papers confirm that the siege was not for security reasons but to keep Gazans at near-starvation level in order to bring down Hamas, the people’s choice. Since around half the population are growing children this inhuman act of collective punishment has meant that hundreds of thousands of youngsters are undernourished and permanently damaged.
Gisha’s director accuses Israel of “paralyzing normal life in Gaza”, and adds: “I am sorry to say that major elements of this policy are still in place.” http://www.gisha.org/index.php?intLanguage=2&intItemId=1904&intSiteSN=113.
Israel’s current foreign minister, ex-bouncer Avigdor Lieberman, is a convicted child-beater and has been variously described as “a virulent racist” and “a certified gangster”. He directly violates international law by living in one of Israel’s illegal settlements. “If you liked Mussolini, if you were missing Stalin, you’ll love Lieberman,” a member of Israel’s Meretz party observed.
All the same, Hague wants him freely walking the streets of London with Livni and the rest of the world’s psychopaths.
Whatever happened to the Liberal Democrats’ pledge to “reject all prejudice and discrimination based upon race, colour, religion, etc…” and to “fight poverty, oppression, hunger, ignorance, disease and aggression wherever they occur and to promote the free movement of ideas, people, goods and services”. These fine promises are incorporated into the party’s Constitution.
Only last year Nick Clegg, LibDem leader and now deputy prime minister in the Coalition, was telling the Jewish Chronicle: “The very suggestion that I might explicitly or tacitly give cover for racism, I find politically abhorrent and personally deeply offensive.”
Who would have believed that any senior Liberal Democrat would support a move to undermine our justice system in order to make the UK a safe haven for blood-soaked foreign leaders whose policies and unspeakable crimes are alien to LibDem principles, disgusting to the British public and condemned by international law?
If we allow the warmongers to come and go as they please, civilized people will never be able to take back their world.
We read that Hague was sent away from Tel Aviv with a slap in the face the other day when the Israelis without warning suspended dialogue with Britain. As if that wasn’t embarrassment enough for such an ardent admirer, Hague now intends to humiliate us all by groveling and tinkering with British law to appease them.
If Parliament passes measures to undermine the important principle enshrined in the Geneva Conventions and weaken the law to enable those wanted for crimes against humanity to evade arrest, wouldn’t that make the whole British nation an accessory to those crimes?
And please reflect on how nodding it through would be just about the lowest thing anyone could do.
Stuart Littlewood
10 November 2010
Stuart Littlewood is author of the book Radio Free Palestine, which tells the plight of the Palestinians under occupation. For further information please visit www.radiofreepalestine.co.uk
Students can forget about using recall ballots to oust Liberal Democrat MPs
Liberal CNN’s New Ad Spotlights Rivals’ Slant, Claims Lack of ‘Favorites’
CNN, a network known for its regular liberal bias, touted its supposed objectivity versus its competitors in a new ad which premiered on Tuesday evening. The ad graphically associated Fox News with the Republican elephant and MSNBC with the Democratic donkey, and claimed, "If you want to keep them all honest, without playing favorites, the choice is clear: CNN, the worldwide leader in news."
Yahoo! News's Michael Calderone, in his Wednesday article on the new ad, quoted from CNN political director Sam Feist, who claimed that their ad "simply states the obvious: We're the one cable news channel that doesn't advocate for one political party or the other." Calderone continued that "CNN's nonpartisan anchors have struggled against their more opinionated counterparts. Campbell Brown acknowledged her 8 p.m. show's low ratings against Fox News' Bill O'Reilly and MSNBC's Keith Olbermann in her May announcement that she was leaving the network."
[Video of the ad below the jump]
Liberal CNN’s New Ad Spotlights Rivals’ Slant, Claims Lack of ‘Favorites’
CNN, a network known for its regular liberal bias, touted its supposed objectivity versus its competitors in a new ad which premiered on Tuesday evening. The ad graphically associated Fox News with the Republican elephant and MSNBC with the Democratic donkey, and claimed, "If you want to keep them all honest, without playing favorites, the choice is clear: CNN, the worldwide leader in news."
Yahoo! News's Michael Calderone, in his Wednesday article on the new ad, quoted from CNN political director Sam Feist, who claimed that their ad "simply states the obvious: We're the one cable news channel that doesn't advocate for one political party or the other." Calderone continued that "CNN's nonpartisan anchors have struggled against their more opinionated counterparts. Campbell Brown acknowledged her 8 p.m. show's low ratings against Fox News' Bill O'Reilly and MSNBC's Keith Olbermann in her May announcement that she was leaving the network."
[Video of the ad below the jump]
NewsBusters.org – Exposing Liberal Media Bias
More Liberal MSM Bias … AP Refers tos GOP John Boehner as a “Weepy Speaker In Waiting”
The MSM just can’t help themself … the state run liberal MSM shows their true colors yet again …
The AP should be ashamed of themself as they refer to Republican US Rep. John Boehner as a “Weepy Speaker In Waiting”. Boehner has not even been given the gavel and become the Speaker of the House and the Democrat bias liberal MSM is already mocking him. UNREAL. Does any one ever remember them using mocking adjectives to describe Nancy Pelosi when she was the Speaker, let olone before she gained the position?
Got hankies? The next speaker is a weeper.
If soon-to-be-ousted House Speaker Nancy Pelosi is known for her steely smile and composure, her replacement, John Boehner, has a reputation for tearing up.
It starts with a quaver in the Ohio Republican’s voice. Then there’s a pregnant pause as he tries — usually unsuccessfully — to keep his feelings in check. Soon, he’s choking out words in a rush of emotion, shaking his head and waving his hands as he tries to pull himself together.
It happened most recently when Boehner took his first turn on stage after Republicans seized control of the House in the midterm elections.
Boehner held it together until he got to the spot in his speech when he spoke of his humble origins as one of 12 children in a working-class family.
Then he started to lose it as he told the election-night rally, “I’ve spent my whole life chasing the American dream.”
Politico’s Smear Of Allen West: Only liberal minorities are off-limits
One would think that progressives, whose favorite pastime is patting each other on the backs for how “post-racial” they are, would be gratified to see African-Americans of all political stripes gaining a voice throughout the political spectrum.
Certainly, the election of two Black Republicans to Congress should be a welcome sign of advancement to the self-described chaperones of minority interests, especially since Allen West and Tim Scott were elected in the Deep South (Florida and South Carolina respectively). But as they continue to demonstrate again and again, the far left’s pining for “diversity” ends where political thought begins. Consider Politico’s recent attempt to smear West, a retired Army Colonel, as a right-wing version of the despicable and shameless Alan Grayson.
As Warner Todd Houston so thoroughly demonstrated, when we lay side-by-side each man’s story, style and substance, that nexus is utterly preposterous. So what’s Politico’s real beef with the representative-elect then? West has committed the cardinal sin in the eyes of the “tolerant” elite. He dares to be an African-American and a conservative who, heaven forbid, even finds kindred spirits in the Tea Party movement!
For well over a year, Tea Partiers had to endure countless unfounded accusations of racism hurled at them from the left-wing media because of their opposition to intrusive government as personified in the policy shifts initiated forcefully against the will of the majority of Americans by President Obama…who happens to be Black. As I wrote recently on this page, the far left is so enamored with its own brilliance that they cannot conceive of anyone opposing their agenda on a rational, intellectual basis and thus do they search for more baser motivations behind the opposition to the White House’s policies which seem so reasonable to them. As no one manages to see etnnicity behind every issue more than does a “color-blind” liberal, the only explanation they can possibly accept for opposition to their beloved messiah Barack Obama is antipathy towards his race.
But what are they to do when an African-American politician defies their definition of who is a “true” Black man and actually sides with those despised Tea Party neanderthals on the issues of the day?
Do they “celebrate diversity” as I see in those oh-so-happy signs posted all over my kids’ schools? Do they laud the progress of minorities about whom they care so much? Gosh no! You see, Allen West is dangerous to them because he belies the mythical narrative they have carefully constructed since the 1960s that one’s bona fide “Blackness” is not found in the color of their skin, but rather in their level of allegiance to the Democratic party. And so they attack, they smear, they try to marginalize.
And fear not, for none of the so-called Black community leaders, be they the NAACP, Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson, or even the Congressional Black Caucus (which as of this writing has yet to congratulate West on his win) will call the liberal attackers out as racists because, well, Allen West isn’t a real Black man so it’s ok. The crucifixion of Clarence Thomas set the unstated rule that only minorities who harbor liberal sentiments are sacrosanct. But should a conservative site call, say, Maxine Waters to task, guess who whips out the race card faster than a Vegas dealer at a hot black jack table!
Honestly people. Isn’t it time the left just finally admit what most Americans (of whom twice as many now describe themselves as conservative over liberal) already figured out a long time ago? That so-called progressives are driven solely by an allegiance to a discredited ideology that gets rebuked time and again, either at the ballot box or in the course of global events, and thus should they stop even pretending to care about the advancement of any race or ethnicity unless it coincides with their own selfish aims.
On being liberal
Matt Yglesias argues that the modern left is the proper heir to Locke and Hume.
There’s a commonly held view that modern day American liberals aren’t “really” liberals and that the “real” heirs of the classical liberal tradition of Hume, Smith, and Mill are conservatives or libertarians. I think that’s honestly nonsense. There’s just nothing in the liberal tradition to suggest that there’s anything wrong with the welfare state, social insurance, redistributive taxation, or environmental regulation.
There is much truth to this. I do wonder whether either the people touting “The Road to Serfdom” or dismissing it have actually read it. One my favorite outtakes:
That the ideal of justice of most socialists would be satisfied if merely private income from property were abolished and the differences between the earned incomes of different people remained what they are now, is true. What these people forget is that in transferring all property in the means of production to the state they put the state in a position whereby its action must in effect decide all other incomes.
That is, as Hayek goes on to explain, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with communal ownership of the means of production. The mistake is to think that the government could facilitate such ownership because then the government is effectively a monopolist and that would give the government almost unlimited power.
The idea that in principle it would be okay to completely redistribute all capital wealth is far to the left of anything proposed in modern America.
On the other hand it is not correct to suggest that modern American liberalism does not have a stronger regulatory bent than either conservatism or libertarianism. It’s also hard to argue that the goal of government-run health insurance — very popular among progressives — could be defended on classical liberal grounds. Though huge transfers to the poor, which they could use to buy health care if they so choose, could be.
At the same time, obviously conservatism is very supportive of the permanent military state that classical liberals truly feared, and modern libertarianism often makes a fetish of taxation that is not supported by the original arguments.
Karl Smith is an assistant professor of economics and government at the University of North Carolina and a blogger at ModeledBehavior.com.
Examination of NPR Board Finds Overwhelming Liberal Dominance
An examination of both the board of NPR's non-profit foundation and its national board of directors recently found that their members are overwhelmingly – almost uniformly – adherents to various left-wing ideologies.
National Review's Matthew Shaffer conducted the examination. He found that "nearly all have demonstrably liberal political sympathies, with heavy support for the Democratic party, pro-abortion-rights groups, and environmental activism in particular."
NewsBusters.org – Exposing Liberal Media Bias
