It’s sad and troubling that the points about Obama that Jeff Goldstein felt compelled to make again yesterday has to be made at all, but there are still so many Americans out there who, after five-plus years of watching and reading about this community organizer, still refuse to acknowledge just who and what he is.

So here goes again…Jeff wrote:

That so many people were fooled by him not once but twice means only that they aren’t particularly bright, not that he isn’t who I’ve been saying he is since he first broke onto the national scene: a Marxist who was polished for public office by a former domestic terrorist so as to act as a Trojan Horse virus that unleashes all of the poison progressives have spent years insinuating into law and the larger culture and its institutions. He is the protege of Frank Marshall Davis, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and Ayers and Dohrne. He was taught by Piven and Alinsky and Said, among others (including critical race theorists), and did his graduate work as a street organizer and Cooper Union socialist activist. He has been conditioned to believe the US is the world’s most offensive bully, that it was born in genocide, expanded through colonialism, enriched through slavery, and entrenched as a superpower by wars of aggression — its citizens held captive by an economic system that is at once coarse and systemically “unfair.” He is a transnational progressive who deplores state sovereignty, hates wealth not born of “public service,” and wishes to re-set not only relations with Russia, but the whole of the global RISK board.

Honestly: what did you fucking expect would happen? That, because he won a national election, he must necessarily love his country and at heart be a “good man”?

Yeah. How’s that working out for you?

Let me take it further…

How can you sit there, with the mountains of evidence at your command, and still ascribe any — any — positive motives to what this man-child does? How do you sleep?

Obama and his comrades are set upon the destruction of The American Republic and, more importantly, the dissipation of The American Spirit into the foul air of banal enslavement.

They despise everything — every damn thing — you stand for. They want to destroy your representative government, deny you a voice in your own destiny, destroy your family, destroy your relationships, destroy your property, obliterate your belief in the self-evident Truths handed to us by Nature’s God. And they don’t want you to simply agree to be ruled by them — no, no — they want you to betray your own soul and embrace them — they want you to love Big Brother.

This is insidious. This is pure, unadulterated Evil at work here.

Unlike Authoritarians, these Totalitarians demand that you totally surrender every aspect of yourself to them. And, make no mistake, as History has shown over and over and over again: those who refuse to do so will be eliminated.

To paraphrase Jeff: this is what Leftists do; this is who they are.

And, if you don’t admit it, if you don’t accept the Truth of the situation, you are condemning yourself and those you love and respect to enslavement or death — the stakes are that high.

Wake up and smell the Evil.

Saddle-up and become an Outlaw.

You can’t be the victim
Of your own bloody hand
It’s Treason Within
Treason Within

—Treason Within, Shadowplay, lyrics by Bob Belvedere

RECOMMENDATION: Whenever you start to feel like you should take anything Barack Hussein Obama says as worthy of legitimate consideration, please read this post again, so that you will not find yourself giving into that foul temptation.

…personal and corporate taxes.

UPDATE at 0054 on 06APR2013: There will be no Rule 5 News this week.

S A R A H   N I C O L A   R A N D A L L . . .

FYI: Miss Randall is all natural.

From The London Daily Mail, Martin Robinson reporting, we learn [tip of the fedora for the news to the Drudge Report]:

Former Conservative Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher has died of a stroke today aged 87.

Her spokesman Lord Bell revealed the news that the former politician had passed away after a long battle with poor health.

Lord Bell said: ‘It is with great sadness that Mark and Carol Thatcher announced that their mother Baroness Thatcher died peacefully following a stroke this morning.

‘A further statement will be made later.’

Britain’s first and only woman prime minister, who won three consecutive general elections, has been in fragile health since she suffered a series of minor strokes more than a decade ago.

The West has lost one of it’s greatest leaders.

A tenacious fight for freedom and liberty, she was despised by the Left and by the Useful Idiots on the Right because she stood on principle.

Lady Thatcher believed in Absolute Truth; she respected Tradition and Custom; she was always guided by Right Reason; and she had a deeply imbedded Moral Sense.

I have no doubt the first words she heard as she entered Heaven were: ‘Well done, good and faithful servant, well done’.

Requiescat in pace, fair Lady.

‘Well done, good and faithful servant, well done’

…is awarded to Squid, regular commentator over at Protein Wisdom.

Last Thursday, Jeff published a post that dealt with the story of a New York state Father who was feeling the heavy and tyrannical hand of law enforcement. He quoted from a story at The Blaze, reported by Jason Howerton. A highlight:

A New York father has had his firearms all but confiscated after the Suffolk County Pistol License Bureau suspended his pistol license indefinitely over a perceived threat made by his 10-year-old son and two of his classmates at school.

John Mayer, of Commack, N.Y., told TheBlaze that the incident occurred on March 1. It was like any other day, the father explained. He put his son on the bus and sent him off to school.

Later that day, Mayer got a call from school officials at Pines Elementary School informing him that his 10-year-old son and two other students were talking about going to a boy’s house with a water gun, “paint gun” and a BB gun. There had reportedly been a school yard pushing incident the day before involving the boys, excluding Mayer’s son, and they were seemingly talking about getting even in some way.

Mayer told TheBlaze that a teacher overheard the students talking and informed the principal, who then immediately called police and filed a report. He said the principal told police something to the effect of, there’s a “kid with a gun, ready to go.” Mayer maintains that no serious death threats were made by the students. The Hauppauge Public School District has not returned several messages left by TheBlaze, therefore, it is not clear what they are claiming was said.

There’s more information contained in Jeff’s post here, and an update from The Blaze here.

[Once again, I think one of the biggest lessons we can learn here is that you can no longer immediately trust any members of law enforcement.  One must approach them all with a suspect eye until proof can be obtained that they have not gone over the the enemy Left.  How Goddamn sad.]

Squid’s response to this story is a damn fine Righteous Rant:

I say fuck it — let’s fight fire with fire. Make accusations of improper behavior by every police officer’s kid, and demand that those officers be stripped of any personal weapons in their homes, and suspend their certifications until such time that they can prove their children aren’t violent psychopaths. Same thing with every elected official’s kid, every social worker’s kid, every teacher’s kid or principal’s kid, and so on. Disarm every single one of these statist would-be tyrants, so that when we come with our torches and pitchforks, they’ll have no better defense than what they would force us to live with.

As the brilliant, daring, and very, very respectable Alinsky once said — make the bastards live up to their own rules. Demand it, loudly, and don’t let up. Jam the system with so much noise and paperwork and legal maneuvering that they are forced to spend all their time defending themselves, and have none left to molest the rest of us. Disabuse them of the notion that we’re all willing to lay down quietly to present our necks to their boots.

They think we’re ungovernable? Poor bastards can’t even dream of what ungovernable really looks like. Fuck ‘em.

While I may disagree with Squid over the details about how to fight back [I'm still thinking about them], I agree wholeheartedly with him that we must, we are are compelled to, act in such a way that we are ungovernable. Let’s ‘jam the system’ and jam it good and hard. Sow confusion. Resist as much as possible, even if it’s just a small act. Be relentless.

As Mark Levin said some months back:

Why is it that the left are the only people in this country who can resist, who can obstruct, who can sabotage?

I say we resist and where we can obstruct and where we can sabotage tyranny.

The Left In America has declared us Outlaws. It’s time we live up to our name.

Resistentiam Tyrannis nunc.
Resistentiam Tyrannis saecula.
PROSCRIPTUS!

Resistance to Tyranny now.
Resistance to Tyranny forever.
OUTLAWS!

From John Hoge [worth quoting at length]:

It’s been two weeks since I requested answers to these questions:

1. Is it the position of the State’s Attorney that operation of a blog allows one unlimited license to contact another person without regard to Maryland Criminal Statutes 3-803 and/or 3-805?

2. Does Mr. Broccilino believe that a public person such as himself may not seek to demand that someone cease contacting him as provided by Maryland Criminal Statutes 3-803 and/or 3-805?

3. Is it the policy of State’s Attorney that non-residents of Maryland must or should avoid entering the state if they are being stalked by a Maryland resident?

I have not yet received a response from either State’s Attorney Dario J. Broccolino or a member of his staff.

I was prompted to ask these questions because of his office’s handling of harassment complaints filed by families from Texas and Virginia that were not prosecuted. Of course, it is possible that a complaint can be filed without sufficient supporting evidence. However, it appears that all of the evidence necessary to establish that harassment occurred and who did it was well documented. The State’s Attorney’s Office’s response was

Stay off the Internet if you don’t want to be harassed.

The Virginia family has also be stalked by a convicted violent felon for the past year. After the wife was stalked by that individual in a Howard County courthouse parking lot, she was told

If you’re so concerned for your safety, stay out of Maryland.

Moreover Jim Brewer, the Assistant State’s Attorney who handled both cases, had no interest in hearing from the complainants. He told them up front that his decision not to prosecute had been made.

Over the past couple of weeks, I’ve encouraged others to contact the Howard County State’s Attorney’s Office to see what they could find out about these questions and suggested that today should be a date to report their findings. I look forward to their reports.

Aaron Walker has kindly provided tips on how to go about contacting the Howard County States’s Attorney Office.

Thanks Aaron.

Also, here’s the e-mail he sent.

Here’s the one Stacy McCain sent.

And here’s a list from John of who has participated so far in

Everyone Blog About the Howard County States’s Attorney’s Office Day

-

WARNING: This post contains thinking so convoluted and perverse that, if you find yourself thinking it an acceptable way to act, you should immediately seek help at a poison control center or hit yourself repeatedly upside your head with a 2×4.

In Part I, Jeff Goldstein explained the Left In America’s plan of attack to accomplish the goal of the confiscation of our firearms and how they are using Republicans to do some of their dirty work.

In this Part, Zombie makes what Ed Driscoll correctly labels ‘a brilliant observation’ as he observed the protests surround Obama’s recent appearance in San Francisco [tip of the fedora to Smitty]:

The weird thing about this protest is that many of the protesters seemed to be great fans of Obama. It was patently obvious that just about everybody here (except the World Can’t Waiters) voted for Obama; this was less of a protest and more of a passive-aggressive emotional manipulation: “You wouldn’t want to disappoint me, would you?” “Don’t break my heart.” and so on.

“Be a man of your word.” Apparently these are the kind of people who believe campaign promises.

It all culminated in this one sign, which of all the signs at the protest disturbed me the most. Yes, Obama really did say “Show me the movement. Make me do it.” (At least according to Michael Pollan, who quoted Obama while speaking at an environmental event in 2009.) In fact, a more extended quote from that speech might explain the motivation behind this entire protest:

Now, this agenda that I’m talking about, your own agenda, is not gonna happen just because we have a President and a First Lady who are sympathetic. That’s not how change comes. Change is much, much harder than that. Presidents cannot flip the switch and make things happen…. A friend of mine had occasion to have dinner with him and Michelle, and Obama made it clear that he got it, that he really did understand the issue, but he also said he didn’t think the time was right to push hard. He understood the forces arrayed on the other side and the great amount of political capital it would take to defeat them. … He challenged my friend, he said, “Show me the movement. Make me do it. Make me do it.”

…Now, that language, that language, “Make me do it,” is very interesting. Presidents have uttered that word – those words before. Roosevelt used them when he was being lobbied about certain issues. There’s a very interesting scene when Martin Luther King came to Lyndon Johnson and said, “We need this Voting Rights Act. You know, we need your help,” and Johnson turned to him and said, “I wanna do it. Make me do it.” He wasn’t just gonna do it. He needed to be made. He was telling Martin Luther King to get out in the street and make it happen.

Another example, President Clinton in 1993, he had a very difficult budget negotiation in Congress. He lost a lot. He moved way to the right and gave up a lot of his campaign promises to get this 1993, his first budget. And, at the signing of this budget, Bernie Sanders, the member of his caucus furthest to his left was there, and he came over to Bernie Sanders and he started pounding on his chest like this and he said, “Why weren’t you screaming at me? I needed you to be screaming at me, because then I could have brought you something.” So, as kindly as you feel towards Michelle and Barack, keep those lessons in mind.

Vilsack said something similar to a group of activists he met with just last month, “I need your help. Build a movement.” And he understands. Because the farm lobby is already organizing against him. So, we need to get organized. We need to flex our muscles. …

Now is not the time to savor the moment or rest. Now is the time to make Obama do it. Let’s show him the movement.

This explains how people who voted for Obama can be out in the street seemingly to protest “against” him. Turns out this whole protest was nothing more play-acting for the cameras, a group of faux protesters colluding with Obama to create a Potemkin “movement” which he can then cite as justification for making an unpopular decision he already wanted to make anyway. “I had no choice — there’s a mass movement against this pipeline! I must bow to the will of the people.”

The more I thought about this sign and its implications, the more disturbed I became. This explains not just today’s anti-Keystone pipeline protest, but also much of what has gone on in politics since 2008. It explains the media’s otherwise inexplicable glorification and attempted legitimization of the Occupy Wall Street movement; it explains the media’s desperate demonization of the Tea Party (so as to prevent the impression that it was a mass movement); it explains all sorts of outrages and protests and petitions and marches by the American far-left “against” a president whose agenda is identical to theirs. Every time the left erupted over some issue, I used to wonder, “Why are you complaining to Obama? He agrees with you!” Turns out that of course they all know full well that he agrees with them, that he and they are all on the same side. The purpose is not to change Obama’s mind, the purpose is to provide him with political cover to make bad or unpopular decisions, by fabricating hollow “popular uprisings” which he can then point to as indicative of overall public opinion.

Indeed, that is quite the brilliant observation.

Now it must be stated that this tactic is something politicians have used since ancient times, but the Left has perfected it.

This is why, whenever you’re dealing with the Left In America, it is imperative that you always — always — look beneath the surface of their actions. Ten times out of ten, you will find a different motive behind the one on the facade.

Over at Protein Wisdom, Jeff Goldstein quotes at length from a piece by Robert Romano that appeared on Net Right Daily, entitled: The GOP’s Real Grassroots Problem.

It is very thoughtful and insightful and well-worth a read. A highlight:

For the inside-the-Beltway Republicans, real limited government candidates must not be allowed to run. And if they run they must not be allowed to win. And if they win, they must not be allowed to govern. Senators like Rand Paul, Mike Lee, and Ted Cruz who are turning Washington, D.C. upside down in defense of constitutional principles never would have been allowed to emerge in the top-down prescriptive, safe candidate approach advocated by the institutional Republican establishment.

The grassroots has been spurned for over 100 years now. Since World War II, there have been arguably only two conservatives presidential nominees to the party, and only one of them got elected.

The real question is can the marriage between organizational Republicans and the grassroots be saved, and does either partner want it to be?

Here’s the first part of Jeff’s commentary on this piece:

I’ll answer: the partnership, such as it is, can and should be saved, but only out of expedience — and even then, only when it benefits the grass roots. Which is to say, it’s time to flip the script and let the establicans and the RINOs know that if they wish to vote for the lesser of two evils (from their perspective) — something they’ve been requiring of their base for years and years now — they’ll have to choose between conservatives/constitutionalists/classical liberals and big government statists on the left.

Typically, when called upon to do this, the establishment has worked to make sure conservative interlopers are defeated, if only as a way to punish the base for its temerity in nominating such creatures to begin with. This needs to end — and it needs to end by way of the grass roots doing what people like Rick Moran so clearly despise: purging from the party those statists who, like their leftwing counterparts, agitate for bigger government, and in so doing, work with Democrats and the media to demonize all those who don’t accept the paradigm under which the need (and public desire) for big government is a settled question.

Please do take the time to click here and read the rest of Jeff’s remarks.

If the GOP is worth saving [and I'm no longer convinced it is, but I
remain open-minded], then we should probably study how Disraeli overcame his versions of the RINO and Establishment types and remade the Conservative Party into a true conservative party, so that there was truly a difference between the Liberals and Tories.

While both Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher were successful in the short term, able to pull their respective countries back from the edges of the pit of Socialism, they were both stopped from leaving greater positive legacies by the backstabbing wets in their own parties. They were undermined by traitors from within. Many of their accomplishments were squandered by the Establishment Grandees who equally despised both of them.

Yeah you…I’m taking to you…you, blogreader breath.

Why aren’t you checking-in every day at The Necropolitan Sentinel [fna: The Conservative Commune] to see if Dan has published another one of his insightful, erudite, and witty observations on politics and the culture?

Well, amigos?

Here’s some samples of what you’ve been missing by not making Dano’s place a regular stop on your travels through The Ether…

-From a post entitled Lethe’d Dullness:

Yesterday, David Brooks published a fantasia on how marriage was going to . . . engender responsibility among gays. I know this because David Swindle posted the article approvingly on Facebook. But bestowal of the rubric ‘marriage’ on same sex couples is not magically going to convert them to any sense of onerous social responsibility, and the evidence is that many of them, the most radical ones, continue to ally politically with such people as 4th-trimester abortionists, racialists, promoters of sex education for kindergartners, and the like. Now I don’t want to be a dick about their arrangements. If people in a same-sex union wish to refer to it as a marriage, I am not going to tell them otherwise. If a particular church or denomination wishes to marry them in a religious ceremony, that’s hardly my business, either. I have hetero friends who have been married in civil ceremonies, and it never really occurs to me to tell them that they’re not properly married, though I might on reflection wish that they had chosen a church ceremony. As far as I know, they are not harassed by orthodox Christians and Jews. Does a young couple tell me they are in love? I might have reservations, but I will keep them to myself, unless I am asked, because they think so, and that is what is most important.

…

I find no evidence to suggest that those gays who are fully on board with the Proggie Agenda are at all interested in negotiation. They demand respect, but don’t feel any obligation to reciprocate. It’s purely fatuous to beguile oneself with imagining that they are pluralistic with relation to marriage or anything else.

I remember when they said they just wanted a place at the table. Now, they wish to sit at the head of it, and tell those who set it to shut up, and they will be dismissed if they speak out of turn, especially if they are privileged by being white or male, or white male worst of all, because their privilege means that they are not one of the special subjectivities and shut up, the infantile grown ups are having an important conversation. It’s the sort of thing that I must be taught to unremember, I’m sure, because these memories are embarrassing to some people, and they have a right not to be embarrassed, especially by the truth.

-From Evolution, Progress, Reason, Iago:

Marriage, like other human institutions, can be said to have ‘evolved’ in the service of a wide variety of societies in a wide variety of cultures in various times and locations around the world. The ancient Greeks, we are told, depending on the particular city state or other portion of what we generally refer to when we speak of ancient Greek society, practiced homosexuality more or less openly according to more or less codified rules of engagement, and yet there and in other cultures where homosexuality is comparatively unsuppressed, nothing like gay marriage ever did take root. It would seem therefore that whatever the function of marriage was in those societies that practiced it–and those are the vast majority that we know about–it was felt to be necessary for heterosexual couples only. And this arrangement, sanctioned by religion and the polity, imposed certain obligations on those people who partook of it and in their judgments believed that it was right for them not only as members of the religion or polity or both, but also as individuals. The irony is, as many have noted, that those most opposed to the entire institution of marriage, those who treated it most scornfully, who trivialized it mocked it most mercilessly as a form of bondage, now discover that it is impossible for them to be happy without at least having the ‘right’ to it. But that is not a contradiction, really, because they continue to seek to destroy it by denaturing it. Gays have a right to their own ‘culture,’ as some of them continually have reminded us by being way ‘out’ with leather fetish, bathhouses, and public orgies, but nobody else has a right to any sort of culture from which they are excluded in any way. Any such culture and its institutions must be destroyed. That is what, finally, is meant by ‘diversity’ on any number of fronts.

You might have thought that after all the pooh-poohing about the slippery-slope warnings of alarmists that they would have wanted to disprove them, and show that their motives were as they had represented them, but they don’t care about any of that at all. What’s important is the power of unremitting iconoclasm and erasure of anything that is not new-normative. They have allied themselves with some pretty unsavory bedfellows, including the hyper-abortionists, racialists, millenialist Gaiaists, thought-crimes advocates and most appallingly the Islamist enablers. They are not at all alarmed to see the general erosion of American liberties or the constitutional abuses wrought by progressivism generally, including all the invasions of privacy, if it means more power; and unfortunately they have in this way proved themselves every bit as grasping as any other faction in American politics. This is ‘evolution.’ Tolerance, diversity and coexistence now mean that people who do not belong to any of the approved victim-categories will sit down and shut up, because someone else’s subjectivity trumps theirs. This also is ‘evolution.’

In this Update to the same post, Dan puts the funhouse mirror view that is Leftist Logic on full display:

To marry someone of the opposite sex is no different from marrying someone of the same sex, because there’s no difference between the sexes, right? Men and women don’t think differently, despite all the scientific evidence, or if they do, it’s just because they have been disparately socialized (not evolved, pig!), unless the research shows something that might be construed to the advantage of women. Gay men don’t think differently from straight men, except sexually–unless they want to claim that they do, and the same for lesbians. If heteros do think differently from one another in certain ways, that doesn’t mean there’s anything different about their relationships. Gays and lesbians never make a big deal of the difference between their own sexuality and that of heterosexuals, so why should we make any distinction, now, FFS? They’re just the same, with the distinction that their marginalization has given them unique insight into the human condition, so they are the same only better. So shut up, supremacist. Our weddings are different, they’re distinctive, they have panache, they’re not tethered to your tired formulas, but they’re just the same.

-In this post from today, Dan offers a tactic for battling the Left:

I could go on and on, but what I want to say is simply this: never let a lefty tell you that you owe him an explanation for anything, never let him buttonhole you or try to get your ‘feedback’ about any one of his pet outrages, until you can get him to answer regarding your own. Ever. And make sure that you hound every lefty and every lefty organization and every lefty blog and every lefty news outlet to answer your questions, day and night. Never give them a moment’s rest, and never let them turn the subject in their direction until you are satisfied. If they don’t know the answers, ask them why they don’t know, and why they don’t make your business theirs, just as they seek to make their business yours. Make the story always about your concern, about your outrage, about your narratives. Demand the answers. Demand accountability. Demand everything you want.

That’s what they do.

There’s more here by Dan on the same subject.

-Finally: I think you’ll amused in a cynical way by this one: “Verily, the din”: Some Extraordinarily Craptastic Writing, For Your Delectation.

-So…have you bookmarked Dan yet? You don’t want me coming over there and doing it for you.

Oh. My. God. We’ve been played for boobs!…

From Counsel & Heal, Christine Hsu reporting, we learn the horrific [but titillating] news [tip of the fedora to Matt 'Bazoombas' Drudge]:

Women have long been told that a good bra can help support the chest, relieve back pain and prevent sagging. However, a new 15-year French study reveals the opposite: bras do little to reduce back pain and, over time, they can actually make breasts sag even more.

Researcher Prof. Jean-Denis Rouillon, a sports science expert from the University of Besançon in eastern France claims that "bras are a false necessity," according to The Local.

"Medically, physiologically, anatomically – breasts gain no benefit from being denied gravity," said Rouillon. "On the contrary, they get saggier with a bra."

I’ve long told anyone who would listen that: Gravity is your friend.

According to The Connexion, the findings suggest that breasts would gain more tone and support themselves [Bob: I've been supporting them for years!] if no bra was used. Researchers explain that bras limit the growth of supporting breast tissues, leaving the breast to wither and degrade more quickly.

The study found that women who took off their bras for good experienced a 7mm lift in their nipples each year [Bob: !] they didn’t wear a bra. Researchers also found that bra-less women developed firmer breasts and saw their stretch marks fade [Bob: !!].

Do you hear that, ladies? Let your major-league yabbos roam free! As free as the wind goes!

More:

However, Rouillon says the findings do not mean all women should throw away their bras.

"It would be dangerous to advise all women to stop wearing their soutien-gorge as the women involved were not a representative sample of the population," Rouillon said, according to The Connexion.

While his initial results "validated the hypothesis that the bra is a false ‘need’," he says that women who have been wearing bras for a long time would not gain any benefit from stopping now.

Says you, you cheese-eating surrender monkey who smells like Limburger.

It seems to me that the fact that this Frog did not use a representative sample of the female population requires that, once again, the Americans have to step-in and do this thing right.

Rest assured that TCOTS News will stay on top of this swelling situation [though, occasionally, we will let the it be on top, IYKWIMAITYD].

SPECIAL MESSAGE: I, Dr. Robert Oswald Belvedere, OB-GYN / OB-BUNGA-BUNGA, am calling on my colleagues, Dr. Robert Stacy McCain, OB-GYN and Dr. Dan ‘Dano’ Collins, OB-CHUBBA, and Dr. Clyde ‘Fingers’ Proctor, OB-SCAT, to join me for an emergency meeting in the Chesty Morgan Conference Room at The Collins-McCain Institute for Therapeutic Breast Staring this evening to discuss the matter and drink heavily — I’ll bring the samples.

Here is a list of those Republican Senators who voted for cloture so that the bill to illegally repeal the Second Amendment can proceed on it’s merry, despotic way:

Alexander (R-TN)
Ayotte (R-NH)
Burr (R-NC)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Coburn (R-OK)
Collins (R-ME)
Corker (R-TN)
Flake (R-AZ)
Graham (R-SC)
Heller (R-NV)
Hoeven (R-ND)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kirk (R-IL)
McCain (R-AZ)
Toomey (R-PA)
Wicker (R-MS)

Even those these fools are all wet, I say we drown ‘em — after, of course, we tar and feather ‘em.

Jeff Goldstein has saved me some writing time:

As some Newtown families, props being used by the very gun grabbers who have set up the kinds of gun-free shooting galleries in which their children were slain, held hands and prayed for more than 60 votes (having been flown in at taxpayer expense to lobby our representatives to take away our natural rights), it occurred to me that, with 16 Republicans voting that a debate on amending an unalienable right is perfectly in keeping with the Constitution, the Republican party then and there died. Went tits up. Ceased to be. If John McCain and Lindsay Graham and Lamar Alexander are in your party — and carry much weight in that party — you are in the wrong party.

Those pictures of the Newtown parents are why we have an amendment process in the first place. It makes demagoguery difficult. It puts time and space between a ginned up mob and extensive deliberation, something that we no longer engage in — with at least one bill to be voted on not yet released to the public in legislative language.

So. I proposed this half-seriously back in 2008-9, but it’s now time to reintroduce it in earnest: the time has come for a third party. Now, that third party may lose, at least initially, but at least those who join it can point, laugh, and say I told you so. If we’re going to lose anyway — and at this point, a vote for either national party is a losing proposition — we may as well do so with our integrity intact.

THIS.

Please do take the time to read the rest of his post here.

Resistentiam Tyrannis nunc.
Resistentiam Tyrannis saecula.
PROSCRIPTUS!

Resistance to Tyranny now.
Resistance to Tyranny forever.
OUTLAWS!

FYI: ‘Wet’ is a British term for those Tory members who opposed Margaret Thatcher. Wikipedia has a good definition [emphasis mine]:

Historically, the term "wet" was English public school slang for someone judged to be weak, feeble or "soppy". Within the political context it was used both as a noun and an adjective to describe people or policies which Thatcher would have considered to be weak or "wet"

That’s why I use the term to describe the Useful Idiots above.

Many on the Right [I'm ignoring the Left on this subject because they are all lost causes in matters like this] have been going around for over two decades saying something exactly or near the following statement: ‘When the Soviet Union fell, we defeated Communism’.

What brought this to mind was reading and hearing people use a variation of that phrase these past several days when they were discussing the legacy of Margaret Thatcher. It’s gone something like this: ‘Reagan, Thatcher, and John Paul II together defeated Communism’.

We never ‘defeated Communism’.

We defeated Soviet Communism when The Iron Curtain was lifted and the USSR fell.

Communism still lives and, in some places like Red China, thrives [as much as such an unnatural system can thrive].

The battle against it rages on.

Communism is still a menace.

In fact, it is more of a menace now that the Democratic Party in America has been taken over by Communists.

I have no compunction about using that word because

Since the Progressives began moving into the Party in the late 19th Century and up until the 1960′s, the Leftist Democrats were Fascists — they had no desire to nationalize every industry and no plan to eventually take ownership of all private property. They merely wanted to construct a large regulatory state, where government kept a firm and controlling hand on commerce and took a hands-off approach to what they considered private and personal matters [such as what went on in bedrooms].

This all began to change in the late 1960′s when the, for lack of a better term, New Left [really a collection of Marxists, Maoists, Trotskyites, and all sorts of other -ites] decided to gain power from within the Democratic Party. People like the Socialist Michael Harrington fought with the more violent-minded of their comrades on the Radical Left in favor of adopting the strategy of pursuing this course of action — and they eventually won. The Radical Left took control of the Party in less than two decades. They were aided in this effort by those of their ilk who had invaded other influential institutions, such as think tanks, the Mainstream Media, and education. For years, they all worked behind the scenes, occasionally releasing trial balloons to gauge, via the reaction to them, how far they could now push their Revolutionary Agenda. It was a Creeping, Stealthy Socialism.

With the election of a Radical Leftist President [who oversaw a bureaucracy that had been thoroughly infiltrated by the Radical Left] and a Democratic Congress [which also had been thoroughly infiltrated by the Radical Left], the Revolutionaries began to come out in the open. And one thing that was very clear was that these Leftists were not interested any longer in incremental change. Their figurehead came right-out and declared they wanted to fundamentally transform The United States Of America. In other words, they wanted to make it into something unrecognizable, an alien entity — a transubstantiation of Biblical proportions.

Sure, the Left In America still lied and deceived — they’ve always had to do so because most people find their real intentions and ideas repugnant once they understand them, so the Left has to rely on things like The Big Lie — but they now openly fought for such things as the Socialization of the health care system, ‘gay marriage’, and the confiscation of firearms.

They were emboldened and they became brazen.

On the plus-side: this behavior has slowly caused more and more people to wake up to their responsibilities as citizens of The American Republic.

However, our numbers are not even close to approaching a majority.

Because, on the negative side: a sizable chunk of the populace has put material comforts above their spiritual comforts and the Left is right there, waiting to sit them on their lap and hug them as Santa Claus made real.

No…Communism was never defeated: it is a parasite that is alive and well and feeding off the body of The American Republic.

From The Forge, Katherine Rosario reporting, we learn [tip of the fedora to the Drudge Report]:

One would naturally think it impossible that anyone would hesitate – even for an instant – to honor the woman who tackled communism head on as prime minister of Great Britain. Lady Margaret Thatcher was a principled politician who helped to foster the special relationship between Great Britain and the United States that we all benefit from today.

A Senate resolution to honor Lady Thatcher was supposed to pass last night.  However, per well placed sources on the Hill, Democrats have a hold on the resolution.

I am not surprised by this at all.

All Leftists suffer from a case of stunted growth, or as I call it juvenilis continuus.  You see, to be able to obey the party line in all things, one must regress to that time in one’s youth when one’s brain was not fully formed.

We’re The Left: We Are DEVO!

Over at The Corner yesterday, NRO published a post by Chuck Donovan, of the Charlotte Lozier Institute, entitled: The Banality (And Bipartisanship Of Evil, that is worth quoting in full because it helps put the whole situation regarding mass murderer Kermit Gosnell in a proper perspective [emphasis mine]:

Over the past three weeks, the horrific information first revealed in a 2011 grand-jury report made its way (partway at least) into the public conversation through the murder trial of Dr. Kermit Gosnell. The depravity of which human beings are capable is no revelation in the second decade of the 21st century, but even to the modern mind, familiar as it is with the near-daily depredations of suicide bombers and nuclear terrorist-states, the jamming of scissors into the necks of babies and the “snipping” of their spinal cords somehow breaches a last ruined wall of civilization.

Maybe it’s that delicate word “snipping.” Does it really capture the act of assassination — do we want to know? Is a near-term baby’s spine as fragile as a wisteria tendril? Better to focus one’s thoughts away from such expressions; surely life is more durable and an assault upon it more difficult to execute than that?

Here is what magnifies this particular barbarism. It purports to be the opposite of what it is. Atrocities in a state of war do not purport to be rescue missions. Mentally disturbed people charging down school hallways do not proclaim themselves to be census takers. But Kermit Gosnell and the motley array of teenagers, nurses down on their luck, and neighborhood volunteers claim to be medical personnel. They open their “clinics” with the goal of filling them with the dismembered bodies of the unborn from their emptied mothers. They are (pick the name) “for women,” engaged in “reproductive services,” champions of “planned parenthood.” But so much of their work is to eviscerate an aspect of womanhood, to maul reproduction, to destroy parenthood.

Once medical personnel took an oath — ancient and stoic, not creedal or religious — against crimes like this. Hippocrates understood that the power to heal was a close cousin to the power to kill. Today, ethics are an optional accessory for many.

Is not all well, now that Gosnell and his assistants are being prosecuted? Isn’t he an exception rather than the rule, merely a substandard “provider”? The argument matters, legally. For whatever reason, Dr. Gosnell failed to avoid the “dreaded complication,” the survival of near- or post-viable babies slated for abortion. Under state law Gosnell had an affirmative duty to provide medical care to an infant born alive at any stage of gestation. Slain inside the womb, the baby has no guarantee of protection. He also, manifestly, failed the women in his care. He treated their lives with no more regard than the fetal remains he hoarded under his roof.

It took more than a misjudgment of gestational age or lack of skill with an amniotic needle, however, to produce the nightmare at 3801 Lancaster Ave. The inversion of the medical profession began at the national level four decades ago when the U.S. Supreme Court decreed that our Constitution stands in the way of viewing mother and baby as dual patients. The inversion grew with each passing year, where effort after effort to restore a public policy of maternal and fetal care was frustrated by abortion-industry litigation. And then, when incremental gains were made and routine legislation such as clinic inspections was upheld, there came the everyday monster of bureaucratic neglect.

One visit to Gosnell’s clinic should have been enough to secure its closure. Instead, as the grand-jury report laid out, the administration of Republican governor Tom Ridge, reversing the policy of the late Democrat Bob Casey, ended abortion-clinic inspections, viewing them, as a state health official at the time has testified, as “putting up a barrier to women” seeking abortions. Instead, 17 years and dozens of corpses later, the barrier around the Gosnell clinic was yellow crime-scene tape.

Turning away from horrifying scenes can be natural. Just ask viewers of Louisville’s NCAA regional final. At a social level, turning away can take the form of a cumulative numbness. Drawing no specific analogy (missing the uniqueness of historical events is itself a form of numbness), one recalls Hannah Arendt’s insight that “once ideologies’ claim to total validity is taken literally they become the nuclei of logical systems in which . . . everything follows comprehensibly and even compulsorily once the first premise is accepted.” Last year, turning away from the disaster of 40 years of legal abortion and inviting more, a national political party renewed its pledge to “oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine” the abortion right.

Kermit Gosnell is the decaying nucleus of a logical system. He had, and has, catalysts in both parties and at all levels of government. His crimes and punishment will mean little if they do not give birth to a national soul-searching.

And that soul-searching in many areas is long overdue.

The national nightmare that is the Leftist Rule we live under is of our own generation. We created it by not resisting the long march through all of our institutions by the Revolutionaries. We turned away from the ‘horrifying’ and banal scenes of their crimes wherever and whenever they occurred because we didn’t want to face the Reality that everything we hold dear was under attack [Could This Be One Explanation?].

And now we are paying the price…and millions of babies have paid the ultimate price.

All we can do now is try to right the situation.

As to why we feel the compulsion to turn away, I think I know one reason why…

We in The West like [perhaps love] to think of ourselves as so civilized — so much more advanced than our ancestors. Over the centuries we have striven to reduce the violence in our Societies and refine our behavior in all areas. And at this we have been quite successful, but, in our laurel grasping, we have made the mistake of deluding ourselves into believing that this has resulted in a fundamental transformation of the Nature Of Man — that we have permanently altered it and are superior to all who came before us.

Well, we haven’t and we aren’t.

We are still the same as Adam and Eve. We are still are fallen creatures who have never shaken-off our propensity to reject Right Reason and embrace Evil in all it’s forms, both mild and vicious and every point in between.

Any advancement in behavior we have achieved has been through Will and requires constant maintenance of it’s strength to preserve it.

If enough people can grasp this Truth, then The West stands a chance of surviving.

If not, then we will enter the darkest of dark ages.

God have mercy on our souls.

SIDENOTE I: Kudos to Kristen Powers for using her national forum to bring up the issue of the MSM’s ignoring of the trial of this serial killer [tip of the fedora to Wombat-Socho's Live At Five].

SIDENOTE II: Stacy McCain asks a question that we should all ask.

From Mark Steyn’s latest column:

…Mrs. Thatcher was a “divisive” figure, but that hardly does her justice. She was “divided” not only from the opposition party but from most of her own, and from almost the entire British establishment, including the publicly funded arts panjandrums who ran the likes of the National Theatre and cheerfully commissioned one anti-Thatcher diatribe after another at taxpayer expense. And she was profoundly “divided” from millions and millions of the British people, perhaps a majority.

Nevertheless, she won….

Hmmm…sounds like what happened in Britain in 1979, could happen here if our version of Margaret Thatcher ran.

Are you listening Mrs. Palin?

[The Committee, as always, welcomes your suggestions — just e-mail us]
_________________

Audrey Tautou…

Christina Aguilera…

Florencia Tesouro…

Miranda Lambert…

Lucy Clarkson…

Michea Crawford…

Ivy Nedkova…

Adriana Lima…

Barbara Palvin…

Danni King…

Lauren Bedford…

Ana de la Reguera…

Still not sated?
Well, the Reaganite Republican is serving-up
a very hot Puerto Rican dish
and Becca’s got
a lovely bit of crumpet for you
and Gator Doug has put together
a very tasty buffet.

Mark Steyn from late this morning over at The Corner:

…Relatively few people wish to commit mass murder on the scale of Gosnell – that’s the good news. The bad news is that the vast ranks of newspaper publishers, TV executives, editors, news producers, radio assignment editors, and reporters somehow reached an instant, near universal consensus that a man who may well be America’s all-time champion mass murderer isn’t a story at all, never mind one to hold the front page for – because they didn’t see him as a murderer; they saw him as a “choice-provider” who got a little out of hand.

That’s a dark, disturbing stain on our culture and our morality. It says nothing good about where we’re headed as a society….

The culture he speaks of has become a Culture Of Death, where ideas are revered more than Human Life.  Where children are tortured, murdered, and discarded in trash cans, their tiny, precious feet retained as souvenirs.

Mr. Steyn published the following post this afternoon that is worth quoting in full:

Jay, not to get all competitive about that Salon twit’s slur on NR’s Gosnell commentary, I see I also wrote this in January 2012 – or, in pro-choice-speak, five trimesters ago:

Santorum’s respect for all life, including even the smallest bleakest meanest two-hour life, speaks well for him, especially in comparison with his fellow Pennsylvanian, the accused mass murderer Kermit Gosnell, an industrial-scale abortionist at a Philadelphia charnel house who plunged scissors into the spinal cords of healthy delivered babies. Few of Gosnell’s employees seemed to find anything “weird” about that: Indeed, they helped him out by tossing their remains in jars and bags piled up in freezers and cupboards.

That’s what pro-choicers like Donna Brazile need to ask themselves: why is it “weird” to think that in a civilized society plunging scissors into the spinal cords of dozens and dozens of healthy, delivered babies ought to be front-page and network news?

Here are two views of the Gosnell story’s importance. Since January 2011, this lady has written almost two dozen posts on the subject, whereas this lady dispenses with the subject in a single Tweet:

Meh. The story needn’t be nationalized. It’s being used to attack reproductive health care for women.

Here is the District Attorney’s report to the grand jury. Look at the bodies on pages 85 and 102, or the severed feet on page 74, or the head with “snipped” neck on page 115.

But as Ms Byrne and too much of America says:

Meh.

And so a progressive society evolves, from the me-generation to the meh-generation.

The Banal Apostles of Baal go along their merry way, contented in their Nihilistic Narcissism.

Below the fold are those pictures Mr. Steyn refers to above from the grand jury report.  I urge you, despite your misgivings, to view them — stare at them for a while and let the full horror of the results of Leftism wash over you.

Page 85:

Page 102:

Page 74:

Page 115:

Behold Leftism.  Behold Pure Evil.

Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist,
Behind his eyes he says, ‘I still exist.’

This is the way, step inside.
This is the way, step inside…

A M A N D A    A M M A N N . . .

Please click on the image above to see full-size.

But those that seek my soul, to destroy it, shall go into the lower parts of the earth.
They shall fall by the sword: they shall be a portion for foxes.

—Psalm 63: 9-10

‘…that our flag was still there…’

Photo by The Boston Globe — posted by Ryan Broderick

You can get the latest news at Viral Read via Stacy McCain, Becca Lower and others.