The American Spectator : Will the 2012 Campaign Get Violent?

Text Size

A Further Perspective

Will the 2012 Campaign Get Violent?

By Jeffrey Lord on 8.21.12 @ 6:09AM

Are FRC, Sikh shootings, Occupy Wall Street warnings of more Leftist violence?

(Page 4 of 5)

• Communism and Nazis: The Black Book of Communism lists 25 million victims as falling to the idea of a socialist paradise in the Soviet Union, a breathtaking 65 million in Mao’s China, a mere 1.7 million in Pol Pot’s Cambodia. Communism is violent — no news flash there.

But when it comes to Nazis, they of the mass murder of some six million Jews based on religion, not to mention who knows how many gays and disabled human beings, the attack by the Nazi loving Wade Michael Page on the Sikh Temple is a sharp reminder of just how well the American Left loves to obscure the historical truth.

Over at the Atlantic writer Conor Friedersdorf managed to write an entire piece on the Sikh shooting focused on the flatly untrue proposition that the shooting was done by a “disgruntled military veteran perpetrating right-wing extremist violence…..” (Emphasis mine.) Worse, he seemed clueless about both the leftist roots of not only the all-white Ku Klux Klan and just who actually supported white supremacy in America — but the history of the Nazis.

Right wing? A lover of Nazis and white supremacy?

Hello?

Let’s go to one of Paul Ryan’s favorite economists, Ludwig von Mises. In his classic work Socialism, in which Mises dissects the Left in excruciatingly telling detail, Mises correctly says this of Nazism, the professed faith of Wade Michael Page:

The philosophy of the Nazis, the German National Socialist Labor Party, is the purest and most consistent manifestation of the anti-capitalistic and socialistic spirit of our age….The slogan into which the Nazis condensed their economic philosophy, viz., Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz (i.e. the commonweal ranks above private profit), is likewise the idea underlying the American New Deal and the Soviet management of economic affairs. It implies that profit-seeking business harms the vital interests of the immense majority, and that it is the sacred duty of popular government to prevent the emergence of profits by public control of production and distribution.

The Nazi’s were socialists, says Mises. Never better illustrated by their fervent belief in redistribution of economic resources — which is to say the quest for Lebensraum or “living space.” Concluding that Germans had been unfairly imprisoned within artificial borders, Hitler determined to do exactly what Rousseau advocated. He would go about “uprooting the stakes” that marked the borders of other countries — Austria, Czechoslovakia, France, Belgium, Holland, Norway and Russia to name a few — because, in Rousseau’s words, “the fruits belong to all.”

Mises points out the obvious:

For more than seventy years (before Hitler) the German professors of political science, history, law, geography and philosophy eagerly imbued their disciples with a hysterical hatred of capitalism, and preached the war of “liberation” against the capitalistic West. The German “socialists of the chair,” much admired in all foreign countries, were the pacemakers of the two World Wars. At the turn of the century the immense majority of the Germans were already radical supporters of socialism and aggressive nationalism. They were then already committed to the principles of Nazism. What was lacking and was added later was only a new term to signify their doctrine.

He goes on to say something else that is perpetually ignored — with considerable cause — by the American Left. The National Socialists of Germany, the Nazis, took their cue on mass violence from the Russian Communists. Watching the mass exterminations of Stalin the Nazis imported the idea wholesale: the one-party political system, the secret police, the concentration camps, the execution individually or en masse of opponents and so on. Says Mises:

There was nowhere more docile disciples of Lenin, Trotsky and Stalin than the Nazis were.

To the point: the Nazi-loving Sikh shooter Wade Michael Page was a devoted follower of the Left. His white supremacy not only a hallmark of the Nazi’s — but of white supremacists in America. Which is to say: progressives and leftists.

So again, the opening question.

Will the 2012 campaign get violent?

Page: ‹ First < 2 34 5 >

About the Author

Jeffrey Lord is a former Reagan White House political director and author. He writes from Pennsylvania at jlpa1@aol.com.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (254) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Jack in Wi| 8.21.12 @ 6:51AM

With all due respect: I consider much of this to be gibberish. Page was a racist who hated people with funny towels on their heads. He seems to have been too dumb to know the difference between Muslims and Sikhs. While it's true Hitler's party was called National Socailist most of his support came from the right side of the spectrum. As conditions worsened in Germany the right became frightened by the rise of of Communism in Germany. They moved toward Hitler as a natural counter balance. The Communists had a lot of ethnic Jewish leaders. They were far from practicing Jews. All their crimes in Russia caused a large surge in anti-semitism on the right throughout Eastern Europe, and indeed other places as well. Hitler comes from the right, at least in my opinion and most others. Although his party did use some leftwing terminolgy to get to the working classes. The Klu Klux Klan was a rightwing racist, antisemitic, and anti Catholic, group that comes from the old nativist traditions of the right.

The left has enough sins of it's own with the French Revolution Communism, Socialism, Anarchism, hatred of religion and many, many mass murders. I don't think trying to stick the left with all the sins of right wing extremist groups is the best idea. It is best to fight evil intellectually, with the truth, wherever it is found.

Jack London| 8.21.12 @ 8:10AM

Jeffrey Lord writing gibberish? Say it ain't so. I'm counting on him to be our Next Great American Historian.

By the way Jack - would you say that the overthrow of feudalism and absolute monarchy as in the French and Russian revolutions was a bad thing?

Jack in Wi| 8.21.12 @ 8:19AM

The French Revolution started out as a reform movement and degenerated into terror and disaster. It led to the leftwing disasters like the Communist and Socialist Revolutions, where many millions died. France under the King needed reforming not Revolution. It was another country bankrupted by foreign wars. This one the American Revolution. The 7 years war also helped put the country into the financial pits.

A. C. Santore| 8.21.12 @ 10:08AM

Wow! Your two comments reflect a deep misunderstanding of History. It's not worth explaining why.

Just one illustrative comment. If, as you write, the right "moved toward Hitler," doesn't that indicate that Hitler was leftist?

Jeffrey Lord is one of the stellar writers on American politics and government, whose writings are intelligent, well-researched, and lucid. You're hardly in a position to make such outrageous negative comments about him.

Jack in Wi| 8.21.12 @ 11:14AM

With all due respect: Mr. Lord is an awful windbag who spouts nonsense on many occasions. He, in my opinion, is just wrong in this instance. If Jeff could get it done in one paragraph he will take five. Economy with words is the way to good writing.

Boar Hunter| 8.21.12 @ 1:06PM

LOL, an excellent point Jack!

In the interest of brevity why don't you just start writing "I'm aggressively ignorant."

It gets right to the point and you would not have to take up so much space demonstrating your stupidity to those who have not learned to simply skip anything you write.

Nick| 8.21.12 @ 3:38PM

Tell us more about your hero, Herr Hitler, Jackboot the Nazi.
Tell us how he was such a friend of the Jews because he wanted to ship all of them to Madagascar.
Tell us how Adolph was such a mench because he delayed the "Final Solution" until 1942.
Tell us about the pictures you took with Mengele and Eichmann as a kid, anti-Semitic putz.

Jack in Wi| 8.21.12 @ 6:34PM

George-Nick talks his usual nonsense. It is a tactic of the looney Zionists to call everyone an antisemite who tells the histroical truth that they disagree with. You see he makes no rational statements but name calling and nonsense. He is a faux Catholic pushing war and hate for the the Israeli smear bund. Real Catholics work and pray for peace.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 3:12PM

Specifically, where did his two comments reveal a misunderstanding of history?

Why did you capitalize the word "history?" Was it just a mistake, or were you being Hegelian/Tolstoyan?

pogybait| 8.21.12 @ 10:21AM

No, we now have a despotic symbiosis where politicians and activists have been pushing for economic/social reforms as well as the nationalization of corporations and services in which unemployment and poverty still exists after trillions of dollars spent. At the same time, they organize to fight corporations and businesses at the expense of taxpayers using the government apparatus, quite frankly anyone with a job should be worried. So now the end result has made the debate quite toxic because of Obama's policies and his party that have been hijacked by leftist radicals and media trolls whose only currency in life has been the suppression of dissent.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 2:59PM

The overthrow of feudalism and absolute monarchy AS IN the French and Russian revolutions WAS indeed a bad thing.

Those revolutions didn't have to become bloodbaths; the people who led them were driven by hatred and class envy. A counterexample is the American Revolution, which took life but avoided the tumbrels in the streets, the reigns of terror, and so on.

RAM| 8.21.12 @ 8:11AM

Jack should read Liberal Fascism by Jonah Goldberg to get his facts straight on this topic

Jeff| 8.21.12 @ 9:02AM

No, Jack.

The Klan was a left-wing progressive racist organization.

They were elected as Democrats, supported FDR and Wilson, wrote the 1924 Democratic Party Platform. They were never "right-wingers"....that is a modern liberal media myth that bears no resemblance to recorded history.

CJW| 8.21.12 @ 9:33AM

FDR appointed Senator Hugo Black, a memeber of the KKK, to the Supreme court. Senator Robert Byrd was a member of the KKK. All Dems.

BackToBasics| 8.21.12 @ 7:25PM

CJW, all dems and racists. Sort of describes the elite RINO's these days which is where I think a lot of those dems went after the mid 1960's. About the only differences between dems and RINO's these days is that the dems know how to hide their racism better than the RINO's do and dems will allow a liberal black man to be president if he serves their purposes. The RINO's not only didn't lift one finger to defend conservative Herman Cain in the primaries but they also dumped on him as much as the dems did. They were as happy to have him out of the primaries as the democrats were.

Ryan| 8.21.12 @ 9:42AM

The Klan was an animal all its own - it was also VERY anti-communist. You're basically stating that every democrat in the South post-Civil War was a leftist, which is not the case. You're stating that practically EVERY civic leader at the time in the South was such.

Yes, they all practically voted for FDR, but that doesn't make them "progressives." I think that you're oversimplifying the matter, and, when practically applied to Southern politics at certain points, it doesn't pan out.

Remember, there were plenty of nonviolent activists at the time as well who weren't exactly conservative small-government types either, and they were in the right on the principles of civil rights at times....

Jack in Wi| 8.21.12 @ 11:05AM

The Democratic Party in the South was very conservative and on the right. It co-existed with the leftwing Democrats of the Northern big cities for historical and strategic reasons. The Democrats were both the party of the most extreme racists and a lot of big city leftists. Although I will say there were also a huge number of Catholics in the northern Democrats who also were in the party because the big city machines helped them out, when they were in economic distress. Roosevelts coalition was a strange, but very effective mix.

Ryan| 8.21.12 @ 12:32PM

"Conservative" in the "don't want change" way, but they were also ardent New Deal supporters....which was anything but conservative.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 5:05PM

That "don't want change" idea has as much to do with modern conservatism as the classical liberals who founded this country have to do with modern liberalism.

Doctor Right| 8.21.12 @ 9:22AM

LOL!

Jack calls someone a racist in the first line of his idiotic diatribe, and then quickly transitions into how "The Communists had a lot of ethnic Jewish leaders."

Jack, you are a sick, twisted, anti-Semitic fool.

And your knowledge of history is pathetic.

The rise of Nazi-ism in the Weimar Republic had NOTHING to do with fear at the "rise of communism."

Indeed, the same people often switched back-and-forth between NAZI and Communist groups, and the two organizations often worked together in the same goal of overthrowing the Weimar Government (NAZIs were socialists, Jack...I guess you didn't get the memo?)

The rise of NAZI-ism in Germany can be directly attributed to 2 specific things:

1) Justifiable anger at the unjust "peace" imposed upon Germany by the allies, which destroyed their economy, decimated their military, and ended their monarchy.

2) Historical anti-Semitism in Germany, which was used to great effect to gin people up.

You know all about blaming the Jews, don't you Jack?

Jack in Wi| 8.21.12 @ 11:10AM

After the National Socialists took power they were very effective in getting a lot of Communists to join them. Before they took power is was war in the streets between Communists and Nazi's. The Communists had murdered many millions before Hitler ever got a vote in Germany. The Jewish Communists did cause a huge increase in antsemitism. You just don't like to face the facts.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 4:47PM

Making war with communists doesn't mean you're not Leftist. It means you don't want THEM having power, but you may very well want the same type of power for yourself.

RCV| 8.21.12 @ 6:57PM

The overwhelming majority of Jews in Germany supported the Democratic Weimer republic and were not communists, Jack. Antisemitism had a long and prominent history in Germany, long before the rise of Hitler, thanks in no small part to Luther and others. Your willingness to blame Jews for just about anything, Jack, is a mirror of your sic, sick soul.

loulou| 8.21.12 @ 11:15AM

Jacksh*t in Wi is a pseudointellectual.

He/she/it tries with his kneejerk diatribes to persuade but he fails every time. Because he's basically a stupid person who fancies himself special. I wonder if he's a failed artist.

ebonystone| 8.21.12 @ 7:15PM

[1] The peace imposed on Germany was nowhere near as harsh or unjust as the peace that Germany had imposed on France in 1871, nor as the peace imposed by Germany on tsarist Russia at Brest-Litovsk earlier in 1918 -- Russia lost ca. 600,000 sq.mi. of territory, and about 1/3 of its population. Versailles left Germany with the strongest economy in Europe. And the monarchy ended even before the war did -- with the abdication of the Kaiser and the proclamation of a republic on 11-9-18.
[2] While it certainly existed, anti-semitism in Germany was pretty mild compared to most of the rest of Europe. There were no pogroms in Germany, and the Dreyfus Affair took place in France. Germany was the best place in Europe for Jews, and they knew it. The German Jews were well-assimilated, and highly patriotic. They were proud of their service in the Kaiser's forces in WW1. Their whole experience, for generations, in Germany led them to believe that Hitler couldn't possibly really mean what he said; that he was merely engaged in political rhetoric -- boob-bumping, as H.L. Mencken would have said.

spike59| 8.22.12 @ 5:43AM

Jackie in WI is a committed Paultard; anti-semitism and racism, for them, is as natural as breathing

CJW| 8.21.12 @ 11:16AM

Jack Wi
What do you mean by "right wing?"

spike59| 8.24.12 @ 6:30AM

i'm guessing anyone to the right of Mao

Occam's Tool| 8.21.12 @ 11:57AM

Defending the Left---the twin Jacks. Sheesh.

Yes, Obama is a Chicago thug politician, and violence has been used by them before, as in Philadelphia. It is quite possible that they may do so again, hopefully starting in either Jack's backyard.

benny havens| 8.21.12 @ 2:43PM

Ok, let’s work with a number line. Start at zero and go to the left and to the right.

Anarchists are all the way to the left of zero. Communists are just to the right of the Anarchists. Fascist are just to the right of the Communists. Socialists are just to the right of the Fascist. Progressives are just to the right of the Socialists. Liberals are just to the right of the Progressives. That brings us to zero, where the middle of the road and independents reside.

Now we start moving to the right. First come the Traditionalists. Next we come upon the Conservatives and Constitutionalist. Then just a little more to the right we have the Libertarians.

Let me tell you, the Nazis are a long way from the right of zero.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 4:25PM

Jack in Wi,

I appreciate, but disagree with, your post. It is true that we don't need to invent false arguments against the Left; they have plenty of real flaws. It is even true that we don't need to pin ALL of their flaws on them to prove them wrong.

However, Hitler was left-wing. While liberals pretend we have evil motives and invent other false differences between the sides, the true difference is simply in the methodology. They believe in statism and collectivism. We don't.

Hitler used the promise of "hope and change" and birthrights denied by evil rich oppressors to seize power, and having seized power, he grew his government and used it to manage all aspects of life. What of this does not remind you of textbook leftism?

Those conservatives who wish to retain "credibility" in the eyes of liberals shy away from the comparison. But it is valid. Today's Left works as Hitler did, from the "Big Lie" to the "blame greedy evil rich (Jewish) bankers". That many today call Hitler, and fascism, "right-wing" is a testament to the Left's ability to rewrite history. Scholars of the 1930s correctly placed them on the Left.

Both Hitler and the KKK may have fought against SPECIFIC big governments, but they had their own big-government replacements in mind. They're not on the right!

benny havens| 8.21.12 @ 7:27AM

To answer your question, “Will the 2012 campaign get violent?” You can make book on it.

When things get down to the wire and it looks like Dumb and Dumber are going to loose, don’t be surprised if their buddy Van Jones is called into action.

Eztli Olfrygt| 8.23.12 @ 7:04PM

Mr. Havens, the campaign may very well get violent but probably not in Tampa, FL. The OWS wackos & their ilk have been rather peaceable here in Florida. That is because the people here prefer to hash out their differences while sharing a piece of Key Lime pie.
Then again it may be because, unlike the potential victims in Oakland, Chicago, & New York, that wheel-chair bound old man in Tampa or in any of the cities of Florida may well be carrying a concealed weapon.
Would you care for a dollop of cream on your pie?

Mimi | 8.21.12 @ 7:58AM

We are NOT a Far-Left country...@ 20%, They do not have the numbers ! By the Obama Administration clinging to the left and not even considering throwing a Bone to the MIDDLE The scene is set. We may very well see LEFT/ VIOLENCE if not a teaser and threats at the Convention in Tampa....Watch the reaction when they have a loss at the election.
Too bad we don't have an adult in the Whitehouse.
After the election he will still be President...
We Americans are not ready to give up our sovereignty for the GLOBAL view.! Our treasure is in our blessed history and our founders gifts!
Wow is this election important!

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 9:20AM

In every presidential election for the past 20 years or so, the vote is nearly 50-50, split down a left-right axis. So I'd say that the left has a hold on about half of the American voters, depending on how weak or unlikeable the right-wing candidate is.

Suzyqpie| 8.21.12 @ 6:20PM

How would the success of the left wing incumbent play into your rubric?

Jack London| 8.21.12 @ 7:59AM

If the Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan are on the extreme left, who is on the extreme right?

c. j. acworth| 8.21.12 @ 8:21AM

I am. Be afraid, Jack. Be very afraid.

KennesawJack| 8.21.12 @ 5:28PM

Look beside you c. j. That's me standing there.

wukong| 8.21.12 @ 10:49AM

They are called Libertarians

JohnInFlorida| 8.21.12 @ 11:48AM

make that "small l" libertarians ... the "big L" kind seems to have a quirk or two that make the rest of us a little uncomfortable ...

;)

Deborah D| 8.21.12 @ 11:07AM

You might find this very informative. Forms of government: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jRQ76FYvw7M

Mimi | 8.21.12 @ 2:23PM

Thanks Deb, good link! Always good to keep on learning.

JimH| 8.21.12 @ 11:23AM

Thinking in terms of left and right across a two dimensional spectrum leads to these apparent contradictions; a better way to view the range of political thought is with the Pournelle chart.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pournelle_chart

Jacob McCandles| 8.21.12 @ 2:26PM

This chart is total BS and here's why. The Y-axis (Rationalism) describes a philosophy: social problems can be solved with the use of reason. Sounds nice huh? Here's the problem, and why the x and y axes are really not measuring different things: one either believes that the use of force is justified against an individual for the good of the state, or one does not. Rationalism is irrelevant. You believe in the individual or you believe in the state. It's a single axis.

Nick| 8.21.12 @ 2:51PM

Thanks for the link, JimH.
The three charts mentioned, cover the current political spectrum pretty well.

I've found it easier to picture the current range as a circle, with a line dividing it in half, from top to bottom. At the top is the Center. At the bottom are the anarchists & extreme libertarians, i.e., those who don't want any political system.

So, for the left side of the circle, starting at the bottom & moving around to the center, the groups included would be listed as follows:

Anarchist~Communist/Fascist~Socialist~Liberal~CL~Center

The right side, starting at the top, would look like this:

Center~CR/Libertarian~Conservative~Religious Con~Monarchist/Nationalist~Extreme Lib.

What lefties can't seem to get through their thick skulls is that our modern political spectrum has nothing to do with the fight that the far-left was having after the Great War & into the 1920s.
Actually, that left/right divide goes back a hundred years, to Hegel.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 3:30PM

I find these 2D charts self-serving on the part of the authors. While it is true that statism/leftism can be used to pursue a variety of agendas, the charts impose the idea that similar variety exists on the anti-statism side. This makes no sense. If one does not want state control over aspects of life, what does it matter what one's personal goals are in this area? He will pursue them independently.

Nick| 8.21.12 @ 3:55PM

I agree, JD, up to a point.

I started visualizing my own chart over ten years ago, when I was reading a lot of David Horowitz's stuff. He was on a campaign to properly label people based on where they fell on the political spectrum. Since, we live in a world where people are constantly labeled, he thought they should be labeled accurately.
I think he lost that fight!

p.s. Your comments were superb, yesterday, in Mr. Kominsky's thread, JD. Even better than their usual high-quality. Mr. Kominsky certainly was in no position to debate the life issue, so, he dismissed it as a "religious" issue. Just like the liberals, here, do. Great job.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 4:14PM

I have to say I was disappointed. I still like Ross Kaminsky, but I was hoping to get engagement. I should have asked him to explain his position, since he would not address mine.

CJW| 8.21.12 @ 6:24PM

JD/Nick
There really is not much to engage if you support abortion. They deny that the fetus is a person and entitled to protection because it is expedient to kill the fetus.

CJW| 8.21.12 @ 6:04PM

Nick
I think the left-center-right terminology began, as with many bad ideas, with the French Revolution. The reps sitting on the left in the Assembly wanted to change everything, the reps sitting on the right wanted to keep the old order, and those in the middle liked a little of both. Now that is a simplification but that is the source, I believe.

I think the most accurate way to look at it is that:

1. Those that want power to enrich themselves and order you how to live are totalitarians, such as commies, fascists, socialists, progressives, "lefties', all believers in a powerful government and idealogues. They know what is best for you, and will killyou if you do not agree.

2. Those that want only to enrich themselves, and don't really care how you live, are the traditional dictators, and the old time city political bosses. They are interested only in power to enrich themselves.

3.Those that believe in using government only to maintain order and the rule of law, and believe that people are smart enough to run their lives. These are our Founders, our constitutional government that is being eroded.

Nick| 8.21.12 @ 6:12PM

I would agree with that, W.
As with most things, there is reality, & the perception of reality.

I thought that I read that the classical Left/Right divide began with the followers of Hegel. But, I could be wrong.
Where is Stuart Koehl when we need him? Ha-ha!

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 3:27PM

The Rational portion of the Pournelle graph is subject to LOTS of interpretation and is therefore unreliable.

Occam's Tool| 8.21.12 @ 11:58AM

The Birchers are extreme Right. Buckley wanted no part of them.

The Bruce| 8.21.12 @ 3:24PM

Ron Paul.

PCC| 8.21.12 @ 8:00AM

With all due respect to Mr. Lord, whose views I respect and give due attention to, I think this is a bit of a stretch.

Jacob McCandles| 8.21.12 @ 10:47AM

I don't think so. Left/Right. Simple- Government Power vs. Individual Power. Race Identity vs. American Identity. Confiscation of Property by the Masses, or Property Rights of the individual.

Mr. Lord has it pegged pretty accurately.

TLP| 8.21.12 @ 8:01AM

In this Radical, Racist, Jew Hating, America Hating, Muslim Raised President, we have a Green Light. In fact, almost everything he has done since Day 1 has been a Green Light for one Leftist Group or another.

His Pardon of the Black Panther Scum in Philly, wearing Military Fatigues, and Brandishing a Weapon as they Verbally Assaulted White Voters coming up to Vote, was a Green Light to the Left. It was gonna be "By any means necessary" from now on. We see this in the Panthers latest calls for KILLING WHITE BABIES, accompanied by deafening Silence coming from President Green Light's Blacks Only Justice Department.

This was also seen as a Green Light to Blacks all over this Country. America's Cities are now NO GO ZONES in some States, after Dark. Blacks run wild all over this Country, Flash Mobbing Fast Food Restaurants, Small Businesses, Malls, and, if you're in Philly or Chicago? Entire City Streets.

His Apology Tour throughout his old Muslim Middle East Stomping Grounds, was a Green Light. His 1st Interviews to Al Arabia, and his 1st Speaches, given in Morocco and in Egypt, we're a Green Light. His admission, to George Stephanopoulas, that "The Muslim Call to Prayer is the most beautiful sound in the world", and then singing it? That was a Green Light, as has been every interaction that he has had with Israel's Netanyahu, his insistence that an End of all New Construction in Jerusalem be a Condition of any Peace Negotiations, as well as Israel's return to its 67 Borders.

TLP| 8.21.12 @ 8:52AM

His abandonment of Mubarek was a Green Light. His Illegal War against Libya was a Green Light. His Silence as Hamas and Hezbollah rain Rockets down on Israeli Cities, was a Green Light.

The refusal to describe the Fort Hood Murders or the attempt to Blow Up Times Square as acts of Terror, was a Green Light.

His whisperings to Medyedved, was a Green Light.

His assault on Honduras, for Constitutionally Expelling Manuel Zeleya, after he attempted to thwart that Country's Presidential Term Limits, was a Green Light to every Leftist Strongman in that Hemisphere, that they had a FRIEND in his White House, and that they could WORK with him. All of this can be found in Wikileaks. Look it up.

His Refusal to Enforce Immigration Laws, and his attacks against Arizona for protecting itself from Invasion, is a Green Light to Illegals.

Suing States for demanding the same Photo ID that one needs, if one wants to see this President or his Attorney General, is a Green Light for Voter Fraud in every Democrat Precint in the Country.

"We are the ones we've been waitin for" was a Green Light, as we witnessed, with the coming of the OCCUPY Scum.

He's President Green Light, and Green means Go.

Let's make sure that this Election goes the right way, lest GO turn to GONE. As in Liberty, Freedom, and Justice for all.

Unfckingbelievable.

e e eponymous| 8.21.12 @ 10:17AM

The Muslim call to prayer is indeed beautiful. Although I am not a Muslim, I often sing a prayer to Allah (I learned it on YouTube):

"There is no truth except Allah
Allah is the only eternal and immortal . . ."

I sing it in the style of the muezzin. Very haunting.

Albert Constantine Jr.| 8.21.12 @ 11:01AM

I suggest you try "Navy Blue" by Diane Renay. At the end, when she sings "Ah-Ahhhhhhhhh" and holds the high note, I think that is both beautiful and haunting (packaged together in a 50 year old pop love song that has a mild patriotic flavor, no less).

loulou| 8.21.12 @ 11:17AM

How about that Minnie Ripperton song with the high notes?

Albert Constantine Jr.| 8.21.12 @ 11:39AM

Lovin' You is Easy Cause You're Beautiful (LaLaLaLaLa LaLaLaLaLa)

The ululations are truly moving. She was taken from us way too soon.

Boar Hunter| 8.21.12 @ 1:08PM

I prefer Cindy Lauper's "At Last."

CJW| 8.21.12 @ 1:20PM

Being in Jersey, I think of Frankie Valli, the Four Seasons, and Dawn, Walk like a man, Candy girl, etc.

Albert Constantine Jr.| 8.21.12 @ 1:42PM

All of the Four Seasons hits merit their place, they I think I would single out "Ronnie" as beating the call to prayer in its Haunting beauty, followed closely behing by "Bye,Bye Baby".

Not merely coincidentally, either Bob Gaudio or Bob Crewe ( I forget which), who produced and/ or co-wrote many Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons hits, also produced the Diane Renay hit discussed above.

Skippy| 8.21.12 @ 1:56PM

If it ain't Etta, it ain't "At Last".

Boar Hunter| 8.21.12 @ 5:25PM

You have obviously not heard Lauper's version.

Skippy| 8.22.12 @ 3:29PM

Actually I have.
If you like her, as millions do, cool.
My Etta reference was inspired by Prince Bambo's Immaculation, when he had some gal named Beyonce(sp?)sing Ms. James' signature tune.
His sense of history began when he woke up today.

KyMouse| 8.21.12 @ 1:38PM

Ahhhhhh yes, Albert; and who could forget Patti Page singing that immortal one-in-every-port ballad "Left Right Out of Your Heart"?

"But since my name was Cindi Lou, I figured I was left right out of your heart..."

Good times, good times.

Occam's Tool| 8.21.12 @ 11:59AM

Yes, blood soaked prayers can be said to be haunting.

The Muslim call to prayer is the ugliest thing in the world. May we never get used to it in the USA.

TLP| 8.21.12 @ 5:28PM

Sometimes, I think I'm wasting my time.

I'm just saying.

KennesawJack| 8.21.12 @ 5:38PM

Tim, you're not. I have to admit, though, I don't understand why someone would teach themselves the Muslim call to slaughter on You Tube (or anywhere, for that matter). Take comfort in knowing that anyone who does that is beyond redemption, even by someone as presciently analytical as you. Keep on keepin' on, my man.

TLP| 8.21.12 @ 7:59PM

Thanks, Jack.

That means a lot to me.

spike59| 8.24.12 @ 6:29AM

i'm guessing that if ObaMao mentioned a love for drinking the blood of kittens under a full moon, your Prius would be parked in front of the nearest animal shelter posthaste, awating your turn for a swallow

Indy| 8.21.12 @ 8:38AM

Will the campaign get violent, well yes, if you are to believe OWS and they have a history of violence.

Something is very wrong in America, too many Federal Depts / Agencies are buying weapons and massive ammounts of ammo and nobody in the media nor Congress says a word? Why is that? Please explain to me why DHS needs so much ammo and why so many hollow point rounds? For training purposes, do you really think the American people are that stupid to buy that line?

Yesterday, I finally saw two stories but never in the MSM, why?

good discussion in the first link
http://www.theblaze.com/storie.....forcement/

http://dailycaller.com/2012/08.....-to-shoot/

Why is The Left silent on these purchases?
Mr. Lord, what is our government up to?

I've been calling my Senators / Rep and no answers, I encourage others to call, we have to force this issue out in the open. Is this the Civilian National Security Force POTUS spoke of during the 2008 campaign?

Indy| 8.21.12 @ 9:00AM

SSA buys 174K rounds -
"What would be the target of these 174, 000 rounds of hollow point bullets? It can’t simply be to control demonstrators or rioters. Hollow point bullets are so lethal that the Geneva Convention does not allow their use on the battle field in time of war. Hollow point bullets don’t just stop or hurt people, they penetrate the body, spread out, fragment and cause maximum damage to the body’s organs. Death often follows...In the war in Iraq, our military forces expended approximately 70 million rounds per year. In March DHS ordered 750 million rounds of hollow point ammunition. It then turned around and ordered an additional 750 million rounds of miscellaneous bullets including some that are capable of penetrating walls. This is enough ammunition to empty five rounds into the body of every living American citizen. Is this something we and the Congress should be concerned about? What’s the plan that requires so many dead Americans, even during times of civil unrest? Has Congress and the Administration vetted the plan in public

Does this concern anyone else?

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 9:17AM

I'm more concerned about the 450 MILLION .40 cal. rounds that Homeland Security has contracted to buy.

Indy| 8.21.12 @ 9:23AM

My point is we should all be concerned about all of it, something is very wrong in America when our governement makes these purchases with no questions asked, Congress is silent, the media is silent....we cannot be silent, we must question and hold our elected officials accountable.

Boar Hunter| 8.21.12 @ 11:47AM

I believe you should keep these things in mind, as we have a right to know.

But do not let it trouble your heart to excess.

There are likely a variety of factors resulting in the purchase. With Obama in office, all federal agencies are on a naked holiday as far as spending, and it is far more likely that they are simply inflating their budgets by purchasing everything they can before Obama gets kicked out of office.

As far as the ammunition itself, the law requires "Law Enforcement" personnel to shoot the same ammunition during training that they would use in real life.

In addition to the qualification course itself, practice is required. This generally necessitates the expenditure of several thousands of rounds per person annually.

I have personally fired in excess of 4000 rounds of ammo in one day and my little group was comprised of 18 individuals (72000). The Department of Homeland Security employees upward of 180,000-plus employees including the Customs and Boarder Patrol as well as the servicemen and women of the U.S. Coast Guard and the Secret Service.

Beyond that, consider that the original source of the information would have you walking around in a tin foil hat to thwart the mind altering submission rays they shoot at you from the black helicopters.

Drunken Sailor| 8.21.12 @ 12:11PM

Dead On BH. Do not overlook the way the goverment budget works. If they have money left over at the end of their budget year they don't get to carry it over. Their budget is cut by that much instead. Saw it every year in the military. The way to a bigger budget is to spend every cent you got, ask for a special allotment to finance a project, and then roll that cost into next years budget.

Sad but true. That is why we should push for zero line budgeting.

Boar Hunter| 8.21.12 @ 12:16PM

Oh, and as it relates to the sensationalized description of evil hollow points and bullets capable of penetrating walls, most bullets of any type are capable of penetrating walls. The argument is like saying that we only use 12 oz hammers because those 13 oz hammers really hurt when you hit your finger. Getting shot with any bullet is something most people are smart enough to avoid.

Were it inclined to do so, the United States Government would not likely be trying to put down an armed revolt using 9mm handguns. Our founding fathers recognized that "We the People" should be armed in such a manner as to nullify any attempt by the government to subjugate us.

By allowing the liberals and communists like Obama to frame the issue as if it relates to hunting or target shooting, we have simply allowed the sheep to disarm the sheep dogs and muzzle them in deference to the wolves.

DRed| 8.21.12 @ 12:56PM

You can read the ammunition requisitions-the DHS didn't buy 450 million rounds of ammo. They contract for a non-specific quantity of ammo at a specific price. 450 million is the maximum quantity of ammo that they would be contractually permitted to purchase at that price.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 4:13PM

The need to use up unused budgetary monies would be compelling except that the 450 MILLION .40 round contract is for three years. What did Homeland Security expect to be doing with those other two budget excesses? Buy another 450 MILLION rounds?

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 1:13PM

Not 9 mms., .40 cal. S&W. That seems to be the current federal favorite.

The FBI was behind the 10 mm. way back after the Miami Shootout, but that round seems to have been a bit too hefty, so they settled for the .40 Short & Weak.

Eagle Creek| 8.21.12 @ 11:04PM

One of the federal agencies, not sure which one, is purchasing bulk 357 SIG ammo

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 3:29PM

How many times have you fired 4000 rounds in one day? How about 1000 rounds in one day?

Assuming of course that you weren't firing on full auto.

Boar Hunter| 8.21.12 @ 5:58PM

I have fired well in excess of 4000 rounds in a single day on many, many occasions over a 13 year period of my life. Admittedly, that was the exception and although (I was) proficient with the HK MP-5, during that time, I was primarily using a .38 S&W. I used to have a very nice callous on the trigger finger of my right hand. I did not miss anything I shot at with that particular weapon, period, as the loser did push-ups.

You have the correct time frame for the development of the .40, but your conclusion is incorrect.

The FBI determined that of the ammunition tested, a bullet having the weight and diameter of the 10mm, when fired at a particular velocity was the optimum round for their agents to kill/stop bad guys.

The ammunition manufacturers informed the FBI that a case the length of the already existing 10mm was not required to propel the bullet at the desired velocity. Further, by shortening the case, they would have the ability to use the ammunition in pistols with a smaller grip and that would allow women to maintain a grip on the weapon when fired.

Indy| 8.21.12 @ 4:09PM

I just think questions should be asked. I am not part of the tin foil hat brigade. The ammo purchases seem excessive on the surface, enough so to at least warrant questions. If there is civil unrest and SSA buildings are at risk for violence, wouldn't local police be able to handle that?

Why do the EPA, Dept. of Education, IRS and other agencies need weapons?

Boar Hunter| 8.21.12 @ 6:12PM

A few points. First I was not implying you are in the tin foil hat brigade, those at Prison Planet are pretty close though.

Yes I do visit their site on occasion and I am not dismissing what they say, just bear in mind that they do have an agenda they are selling.

As it relates to the local police, remember, that in the event of civil unrest, the police will likely be overwhelmed with many issues. Not to offend them, but those agents attached to Federal, State and County office buildings will be tasked with the defense of their respected agencies property as they are generally not trained to do what the police will be busy doing (sorry for the analogy, but think fat lady with a shotgun). They will only be there to prevent your garden variety anarchist from destroying it with spray paint etc.

In any event, let me suggest that in the event that there is violence of the magnitude you suggest or even a substantial natural disaster, I WOULD NOT depend on the likelihood of receiving any protection from the local authorities.

You should be able to protect and provide for your families sustenance without assistance for a least a few days. I personally would not fault you for having enough supplies for a few weeks.

Indy| 8.21.12 @ 6:48PM

Indeed, my family has experienced more than one natural disaster, we have been without power for weeks and with lots of camping experience we are able to take on many challenges. We have no intention of relying on police for protection nor a stocked grocery store for food. If we have civil unrest, I feel for those in inner cities as they will have the hardest time.

DHS has been loading up on riot gear in addition to ammo, they are preparing for something, will any curious journalist ask a few questions? No, of course not, all is well and the utopia will come if only BHO wins a second term.

Indy| 8.21.12 @ 4:10PM

Why are our Border Patrol Agents issued bean bags as ammo?
"For the first time, federal officials also revealed that Terry and the elite squad of federal agents initially fired bean bags -- not bullets -- at the heavily armed drug cartel crew in the mountains south of Tucson in December 2010. During the exchange, Terry was shot and killed."

It would be interesting to learn of the history of depts / agencies and weapons, and see the trending on a chart from 1990 - present.

The only reason the Left is silent on this is simple, to protect POTUS. We have drones flying in the US, we have joint exercises (DHS, local police, military) in major cities as part of preparation for civil unrest, global food shortages are forecasted and more likely now due to the drought, Soros predicts civil unrest in both Europe and US (like him or hate him, Soros is usually accurate in his predictions because he is often behind them). If these massive purchases were under a GOP Administration, the Left would be in the streets in protest.

Not a tin foil hat, just my spidy senses tell me something is not right about this and it is not just an exercise to spend budget money or qualify in training exercises. Those in my circle who go to the range, fire just enough to keep their skills up, most cannot afford 4000 rounds for a day.

Boar Hunter| 8.21.12 @ 6:41PM

In regard to your last paragraph, the last time I fired anywhere near even a 100 rounds in a day was because it was issued to me and demanded by a large angry black man.

Let me be clear, I don't fault you or question your reasons for concern. Please consider, if Obama gave the order today, how many people would comply with a directive implied by Prison Planet.

Look up a group called Oath Keepers.org. There are many "sheep dogs" in the world who would still lay down their lives to protect you from the Obama's of the world. Yes they are duty bound to obey orders, but most every military and law enforcement person I have ever encountered swore an oath to protect those members of our society from exactly the type of actions Prison Planet would have you believe they would willingly be a party to.

I submit to you that that is just crazy talk.

I would suggest that you should be happy that when the Morlocks come for you that the people with the guns have enough ammunition for all of them. They are not stockpiling ammunition to thwart grandma, they have it for Occupy and the "inner city youths."

If Muslims detonated a large weapon of some type in a major city what type of chaos do you think would result? The government must be prepared for any contingency. As I said before, you should be prepared to take care of yourself and your family for at least a few days. Eventually, order would be restored, but you do not want to be one of the tragic victims of the chaos.

Indy| 8.21.12 @ 6:56PM

I'm not worried about my family, I do feel for the many innocent people who have no clue. I have had several interesting conversations with local police and veterans, very interesting chats.

TLP| 8.21.12 @ 8:51AM

His abandonment of Mubarek was a Green Light. His Illegal War against Libya was a Green Light. His Silence as Hamas and Hezbollah rain Rockets down on Israeli Cities, was a Green Light.

The refusal to describe the Fort Hood Murders or the attempt to Blow Up Times Square as acts of Terror, was a Green Light.

His whisperings to Medyedved, was a Green Light.

His Refusal to Enforce Immigration Laws, and his attacks against Arizona for protecting itself from Invasion, is a Green Light to Illegals.

Suing States for demanding the same Photo ID that one needs, if one wants to see this President or his Attorney General, is a Green Light for Voter Fraud in every Democrat Precint in the Country.

"We are the ones we've been waitin for" was a Green Light, as we witnessed, with the coming of the OCCUPY Scum.

He's President Green Light, and Green means Go.

Let's make sure that this Election goes the right way, lest GO turn to GONE. As in Liberty, Freedom, and Justice for all.

Unfckingbelievable.

TLP| 8.21.12 @ 8:59AM

Oops.

loulou| 8.21.12 @ 11:18AM

It bears repeating.

Occam's Tool| 8.21.12 @ 12:00PM

No apologies, Tim!

Kwan| 8.21.12 @ 8:53AM

"We Kinda Agree With Mao Tse Tung That Power Comes Largely From The Barrel Of A Gun."...Ron Bloom Obama's Manufacturing Czar. This is the kind of people that Obama surrounds himself with, psychotic communists that believe that murder and mayhem is the only way they can bring about their vision of a Marxist Utopia within the borders of the United States. No doubt Fast and Furious was an attempt by leftist strategists to disarm the American people, who would then become the hapless victims of Obama's Secret Police Force (the Civilian National Security Force), should they attempt to resist Obama's imposition of a Totalitarian Dictatorship upon the country. Should it become clear to the left that Obama's Marxist Revolution will be voted out of existence this November expect extreme violence to result.

A. C. Santore| 8.21.12 @ 10:22AM

Followed by martial law and the suspension of the Constitution and Bill of Rights [reportedly already in the works]. And bullet-proof sentry posts already on order ["your papers!"]. And don't forget the Social Security Administration's hundreds of thousands of hollow points [again, for WHAT? Social Security claimants?].

Our state governors need to be ready to nullify those actions and retain control of their own states. It's our best hope.

Ryan| 8.21.12 @ 12:33PM

Not with this military.

loulou| 8.21.12 @ 11:20AM

Then the governors will have to call out the National Guard with orders to shoot to kill all looters and rioters. That's the only language the leftist thugs understand.

KyMouse| 8.21.12 @ 1:45PM

But then, loulou, the press would dig up photos from the Kent State, and those photos would be worth 10,000 words to the Left.

Skippy| 8.21.12 @ 2:00PM

The rioters at Kent started the violence and got the natural consequences sent their way.
Zero sympathy for the "4 dead in Ohio".

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 4:15PM

Everybody knows that but nobody thinks it. "Four dead in Ohio" get a LOT of sympathy these days.

Von Mises Jr| 8.21.12 @ 8:58AM

Mises "Omnipotent Government" traces the Prussian Empire and the Weimar Republic that led to Nazi Germany. The Weimar Republic (1919 - 1933) consisted of three factions of the Social Democrat Party: Majority Socialist, Independent Socialist and Communist (P 203). The Communists were influenced by the Bolshevik Party in Russia.
The good news for America is that for the 50 years leading up to the Nazi Party in 1933, the German people had embraced socialism and there was no presence of capitalist ideas in any Party. They accepted War Socialism and believed it was better to steal from neighboring countries than to rely on division of labor and free trade.
While we have 20% of the people that are liberal as Indy points out, I don't believe that the country at large has embraced this doctrine. But those that have will resort to the same aggression.

Boar Hunter| 8.21.12 @ 12:52PM

The media ignores Obama's 20 years in Reverend Wright's church, Black Panthers at the polls or the elephant in the room that is Detroit, Chicago and Atlanta. Mobs of blacks specifically attack whites due to their racial animus and the media is silent.

Mongrel hordes of useless vermin in the Occupy movement are extolled by the media in the most glowing terms while Tea Party members are painted as violent, racists and terrorists.

Public schools and universities that were long ago taken over by social(ist) engineers who re-educated our children and trained the media propagandists have allowed a very small, but highly vocal group of people to manipulate the public discourse and force America down the road of destruction.

Alas for them, some of us remember history and are not so inclined to repeat it's failures.

DRed| 8.21.12 @ 1:12PM

It cannot be denied that Fascism and similar movements aiming at the establishment of dictatorships are full of the best intentions and that their intervention has, for the moment, saved European civilization. The merit that Fascism has thereby won for itself will live on eternally in history.

Skippy| 8.21.12 @ 2:01PM

WTF is that supposed to mean?

Von Mises Jr| 8.21.12 @ 5:37PM

He's a Fascist. Why are we talking to this POS?

DRed| 8.21.12 @ 5:42PM

It's from Liberalism, by Ludwig Von Mises. Strange how he didn't think the Fascists were left wing communists in 1929.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 7:38PM

The full Von Mises quote:

"It cannot be denied that Fascism and similar movements aiming at the establishment of dictatorships are full of the best intentions and that their intervention has, for the moment, saved European civilization. The merit that Fascism has thereby won for itself will live on eternally in history. But though its policy has brought salvation for the moment, it is not of the kind which could promise continued success. Fascism was an emergency makeshift. To view it as something more would be a fatal error."

Context kinda kills your spin, doesn't it?

Von Mises saw the immediate threat of communism as a greater threat, but didn't really like fascism either.

Von Mises Jr| 8.22.12 @ 4:11AM

Thank you JD. I usually ignore the troll, but I see he is the worst kind of scum and the correction is appreciated.
I have read some half-dozen Mises books and know he would not support fascism. His books "Socialism," "Theory and History" and "Omnipotent Government" all explode socialist theories. "Epistemological Problems with Economics" and his seminal "Human Action" also are not kind to D'Red Communist's ideas.
I have a couple more on the shelf to read by the great Von Mises. Thanks again friend.

DRed| 8.22.12 @ 10:50AM

I didn't say he liked fascism. But you all claim that fascism and communism are essentially the same thing. Why would Von Mises think the fascists had saved European civilization if they were a bunch of left-wing totalitarian socialists?

Nick| 8.22.12 @ 12:40PM

Now, now, DRed, I have explained to you many times (simplified, of course, for your level of comprehension) that communism is world-wide socialism, while fascism is national socialism. Mussolini, Hitler, et al, didn't want to take orders from Lenin or Stalin.
This is why the two didn't get along, among other reasons.

However, that Von Mises quote, that you violently wrenched out of context, was written in 1929, according to you. Hitler wasn't even in power, yet. So, he is probably referring to Mussolini, and "similar movements," which had kept their countries from imploding.

DRed| 8.22.12 @ 2:46PM

But if Mussloni was a murderous socialist, why was Von Mises lauding him for saving European civilization from murderous socialists?

Skippy| 8.22.12 @ 3:34PM

Easy.
The fascists hadn't had the time to murder millions yet.
I'm sure Von Mises would have written the same thing 20 years later. Right.

Nick| 8.22.12 @ 3:40PM

I don't know, DRed, I'm no expert on Von Mises.
Why don't you ask his son?
***WARNING!!***WARNING!!***
(Not to be taken literally. I'm sure that Von Mises Jr is just a pseudonym.)

DRed| 8.22.12 @ 4:15PM

My guess is that he had some sympathy with their general right wing beliefs, but was tragically mistaken about how murderous they were going to be. He would hardly be the one in Europe to have made that mistake.

Ryan| 8.21.12 @ 9:10AM

A handful of points:

1. I think that leftism is more defined by economic, rather than social, policy - it typically has always been so. That's why Nazis could definitely be defined as creatures of the left - their economics were distinctly leftist when examined.

2. By the same light, KKK-types, at least on the surface, are more for smaller government combined with an inherent racism. Though I have some sympathies with the neoconfederate movement when it comes to states' rights, there is a particular problem with the connection to racism there. If the Klan was leftist, then the entire South was leftist in the Civil War. The Klan at its most powerful point was racist AND anti-communist. Jeffrey, you fail to address this point.

3. I think there's going to be some sort of violence no matter who wins. If there is a close election, something is going to happen. Not on a wide scale, but I can see either inner-city riots for one victor, or a crazy gunman/militia type on the other.

CJW| 8.21.12 @ 11:11AM

The first KKK formed after the Civil War could not have been anti communitst for obvious reasons since the commies were not yet in power anywhere. The second KKK after WW1 was anti commie, as were most organizations.

The KKK was for small federal government because it viewed the federal government as supporting rights for blacks. It supported strong state govenrments to impose its views.

Being a member of the KKK was important to get votes as a Dem, and most of the well known KKK politicians, such as Senator Byrd and Hugo Black were Dems, not Republicans.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 2:29PM

Opposition to one government's agenda does not make one a "small government" supporter if one aims to replace the opposed government with a different big government.

The KKK wanted its racism institutionalized. The Left wants other group privileges institutionalized. Conservatism doesn't want any discrimination institutionalized. Which does the KKK most align with?

spike59| 8.23.12 @ 6:24AM

The KKK wanted its racism institutionalized.
================================
and the Left wants ITS racism institutionalized; they call it 'affirmative action'

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 9:14AM

It's all right, Mr. Lord. Because of all the facts you cite (although I respectfully disagree with you on the Sikh shooting - I don't know if it was a right-wing thing, but I don't think it was a left-wing thing, I don't know what it was), all the past history, the current behavior by elected representatives, and the sad spectacle of older right-wingers shouting "Hands off my Medicare," it is becoming unmistakably clear what the effect of leftist thought is on our American values.

Soon the left's conduct will have made it so clear what it means to be a leftie that our future elections will be landslides for the right, instead of these continuing dreary 50-50 slugfests we have suffered with for the past 4 or 5 presidential elections.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 2:18PM

The Left jumped all over the Sikh shooting, claiming that the shooter was right-wing (as they do after every shooting). This time, though, they didn't abandon the narrative once it was proven false, because they equate his white-supremacy with the Right. This follows the Left's long-standing policy of trying to define racism as right-wing, despite the absence of any actual such association.

Jeffrey Lord counters this lie with a more correct assertion - that white-supremacists' desire to achieve superiority through control of society, funneling power to their people at the expense of others, aligns with the political Left. They've more than asked for it with their lies.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 9:23AM

I see a possibility of violence during the last days of the 2012 Presidential campaign. I don't think the right is going to make any threat of violence, I think the left will be violent.

The good news for me is that I firmly believe that the violence will start as a token kind of thing that, if firmly met with resolve and discipline, will fade away very quickly. If met with indecision and equivocation, however, the violence will spread.

Al Adab| 8.21.12 @ 9:27AM

Those of us who remember 1968 and 1972 and the party conventions those years would be wise to warn about what OWS may try at the national conventions this year. That era represented the most dangerous time in our history since the civil war and the violence in the streets in those days came close to breaking the society apart.

We still suffer from the fallout of those times in many of the issues still debated in our political realm. That this administration is a direct descendant from the "far left" of those times should give us pause. Charlotte and Tampa are not far away.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 11:17AM

The cultural cues that were present in 1968 and 1972 are not present this year, that's why the risk of violence is a bit lower in 2012.

However, there IS a strain of radical nostalgia for the days of the 1960s among the youth of the Left, those who don't really know how it was. But for the Left, the stakes aren't as high as they were 40 - 45 years or so ago, so they're not quite as motivated.

Right-wingers are motivated because they rightly see the true stakes as they actually are, but the righties aren't ready for any violence other than as a reaction of lefty violence, so the threat isn't very likely to come from the right, and the left lacks the issue-based motivation that would inspire violence. There are always a few lefties who will go over the edge, but they still are only a few. It remains to be seen how the violent fringe will affect the rest. No one's going to fight over the phony claims of racism against the Right.

Deborah D| 8.21.12 @ 2:48PM

I hope you're correct, Bill, but when I see flash mobs (or as some call them, flash robs) going on in cities throughout the country, it makes me wonder who is behind them. What would an escalation of this type of behavior be? Leaving the cities and going to the suburbs? Or going to houses instead of businesses? If Obama wins or not, I think we'll see an escalation of this. I hope I'm wrong.

Pete| 8.21.12 @ 9:42AM

If it doesn't get violent, all those people buying guns and ammo right now to protect themselves, their families and their property will have been wrong. Better safe than sorry.

Skippy| 8.22.12 @ 3:36PM

Sounds like a quote I enjoy about belief in God.
"If I'm wrong, I'm a fool. If you're wrong, you're screwed."

Ed White| 8.21.12 @ 9:53AM

There is a dangerous and virulent streak of violence and fascism in American right-wing conservatism, now and throughout our country’s history.

Conservatives in the South who vehemently and violently defended and fought for slavery and Jim Crow are the most obvious example: From the vicious caning of political opponents on the floor of the Senate, to the fighting of the bloody Civil War, to the gunning down of hundreds of freed slaves in the reconstruction era, to the lynching of thousand of African-Americans in the 90 years after the Civil War, to all of the horrible violence of the civil rights struggles in the 1950s and 60s, the story of race relations in the South has been long and incredibly bloody. The North wasn’t exactly pure on race issues either, from the mass murder of blacks in Tulsa in 1921 to the rock throwing mobs of Chicago greeting Martin Luther King.

Jeff| 8.21.12 @ 11:38AM

Ed....

All those Southerners were decidedly NOT conservatives...they were quite vivid progressives. Read the 1924 Democratic Platform - which was written by the Ku Klux Klan.

Occam's Tool| 8.21.12 @ 12:02PM

Funny, though---those Southern "Conservatives" were Democrats who supported FDR...

The Dhimmicratic party was built on the bones of Lynched Blacks. There was a reason Jackie Robinson was REPUBLICAN...

Ed White| 8.21.12 @ 9:54AM

Racial violence hasn’t been the only from of political violence by those opposed to progressive change in this country either. Labor leaders have been assassinated; women suffragists and other progressive reformers have been tarred and feathered, and violently harassed. Tim McVeigh, the perpetrator of the country’s biggest single act of domestic terrorism was a far right-wing, militia activist. Sadly, the Tiller killing is only the latest in a long string of anti-abortion activists bombing clinics and murdering people.

Even more serious, though, is the kind of domestic political violence we have seen by certain politicians. Everyone should read Nixonland, which shows the depth of depravity of the kind of political movement Richard Nixon was leading – blatantly breaking the law right and left, seriously considering the firebombing of a think tank they didn’t like, gloating over gunning down the four students at Kent State.

Ed White| 8.21.12 @ 9:58AM

Just as political conservatives of an earlier generation had no problems aligning themselves with segregationists of the South while mobs were beating freedom riders almost to death, Bill Connor was sicking German Shepherds on children, and terrorists were firebombing churches with little girls inside them, there is a virulent strain of political conservatism today that is not troubled by political violence. Let us hope that progressives win the day over this kind of conservatism. If we don’t, I think it is safe to say we should fear for our country.

Mr. Lord, shame on you for giving us such a biased view of our country's history of political violence.

Anna K.| 8.21.12 @ 10:03AM

Thank you, Mr. White, for your efforts to bring a little truthful balance to Mr. Lord's prejudiced reporting.

Albert Constantine Jr.| 8.21.12 @ 11:44AM

...and speaking of hateful speaking and provocative progressives from the Klan/ Democrats, we hear from that old bulwark of the Confederacy, Atlanta, and the college which supplied so many officers of the Old South, Emory University. Is it final exam time for Professor Vigilante's poli sci students, or has a new session started already?

Skippy| 8.21.12 @ 2:27PM

...from Emory University.
All power to the people, man.
As long as they don't get too uppity.

Crassus| 8.21.12 @ 10:47AM

Bull Connor was a Democrat. And an Auburn fan.

e e eponymous| 8.21.12 @ 11:05AM

During the 1948 Democratic National Convention, Connor led the Alabama delegation in a walkout when the national party included a civil rights plank in its platform.

Connor was not a very loyal Democrat.

Jack London| 8.21.12 @ 11:17AM

My word Crassus – we really do miss this kind of penetrating analysis in America. All along Bill Connor and Martin Luther King were fighting on the same side - they just didn't know it. But now you and Jeffrey Lord can let the world know.

DRed| 8.21.12 @ 11:31AM

They were also in cahoots with Stalin, Hitler, Hillary Clinton and John Wilkes Boothe. I believe their platform is the standard leftist belief in the universal brotherhood of man, the superiority of the Aryan race, states rights, limited federal government, powerful federal government, a government subservient to a party operating outside the law, non-violent resistance, death camps, pro civil rights, anti-civil rights, racism, anti-racism, fascism, anti-fascim, communism, anti-communism, pro-union, violent oppression of unions, homosexual rights, death for homosexuals, abortion rights, pro-life, feminism, support for the traditional family, the glorification of white christian identity and violent anti-clericalism.

Jack London| 8.21.12 @ 11:47AM

You missed pro-rape and anti-rape.

George S| 8.21.12 @ 2:02PM

The Civil Rights movement was not about progressive ideology, far from it. It was about the equal application of the law. Blacks were denied equal protection because of racism; however, the Declaration and the Constitution gave us the leeway for a political transition from slavery to civil rights to Barack Obama. Those who opposed civil rights were racists -- whether Democrat or Republican -- and their political affiliations were irrelevant because politics is an interface between citizen and government, not citizen to citizen. The latter is almost impossible to accomplish without bloodshed (i.e., the Civil War) which is why Dr. King is revered today.

Progressives, on the other hand, look to steal private property and wealth to transfer to others who are not so industrious. They play to the jealousy of people to use as cannon fodder in "the revolution" to usurp power. That's why millions have been killed in the name of Marxism. The civil rights movement was not about taking property from Whites. But that is what Obama thinks the ultimate goal should be, and why he seeks to use Blacks and other groups as cannon fodder for his transformation. How else can you explain their economic misery.

Occam's Tool| 8.21.12 @ 12:03PM

Crassus: Bull Connor was a double asshole, then. Roll Tide!

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 12:51PM

Bull Connor was an elected official, who campaigned on the Democrat Party ticket every time he ran, and who was nominated to be a candidate for office by his local Democrat Party.

CJW| 8.21.12 @ 1:25PM

As did, Governors Ross Barnett, Lester Maddox, George Wallace, Orval Faubus, etc, and the Dem Senators that filibustered the Civil Rights Acts, such as Al Gore sr., Eastland, Fullbright, and the rest of the all star dem team.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 3:31PM

Yep. It's no good to try to go back and rewrite history to make the old-time Democrats and the old-time Republicans any different from what they once were.

Kwan| 8.21.12 @ 11:32AM

Hey yeah right. Our only hope for salvation is that we can get da "progressive" community organizer reelected this November so dat we can get some mo of dat dere "progressive" progress: High unemployment, no-growth economy, ever-growing massive debt, non-stop growth of big government, foreign policy incompetence (remember Egypt), dimwit marxist morons running our federal agencies, commie-rats working 24/7 to subvert our Constitution. Let us "progress" Forward and "Win the Future" with Comrades Barack and Joe in 2012.

Drunken Sailor| 8.21.12 @ 12:18PM

"a biased view of our country's history of political violence."

Talk about projecting.

spike59| 8.24.12 @ 6:26AM

there is a virulent strain of political conservatism today that is not troubled by political violence.
------------------------------------
anything resembling an example? oh, yeah, i keep forgetting those rapes at TEA Party events...oops, that was your blessed Occupiers...well, how about those peaceful protesters being beaten down in the streets by the Birchers....oops, that was SEIU and ACORN...well, how about those Right-wingers standing outside polling places with billy clubs intimidating voters...oops, that was the New Black Panther Party...or the guy who tried to shoot up an office because of the politics of its staff...ooops, that was an LGBT activist...now, what do they all have in common? NOW i remember; undying leftist love for ObaMao!!!!!

Al Adab| 8.21.12 @ 11:02AM

Are not they the racists who view every issue and historical event through the prism of race?

Jack London| 8.21.12 @ 11:19AM

Al - I guess you didn't fully comprehend Ed when he said:

"Racial violence hasn’t been the only from of political violence by those opposed to progressive change in this country either. Labor leaders have been assassinated; women suffragists and other progressive reformers have been tarred and feathered, and violently harassed. "

George S| 8.21.12 @ 12:58PM

Labor leaders (plural?) have been assassinated? Who? The only ones I can think of: one was murdered by a labor political opponent and the other is still missing after running afoul with Mob money. Suffragettes tarred and feathered? When? Where? I thought that was common in England but -- I may be wrong -- not here in the U.S.

Trouble is: fully comprehending the "Ed"s of the world is... (sigh) why bother.

Al Adab| 8.21.12 @ 1:26PM

Not to worry. Anytime the debate claims that progressivism has proven a cultural or national good or that "the oppressed" need help from government, the legitimacy of the debator is gone.

Back to the tundra, Jack my friend.

Jack London| 8.21.12 @ 1:29PM

I guess you disapprove of the Civil Rights Act then Al. I had you down as a decent man but it seems I was wrong.

Drunken Sailor| 8.21.12 @ 1:54PM

Al approves of the Civil Right act. That's why he was never a Democrat.

Still writing fiction I see? It suites you.

Jack London| 8.21.12 @ 2:01PM

"Al approves of the Civil Right act."

No he doesn't - he wrote: "Anytime the debate claims that... "the oppressed" need help from government, the legitimacy of the debator is gone.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 2:37PM

The Civil Rights Act has no provision granting government support to "the oppressed". It demanded treating everyone equally, not giving anyone "extra" help. There is no distinction of "oppressed" vs "non-oppressed" in it, and no active government promotion. Only the standard law enforcement we conservatives like.

Later laws created proactive preferential treatment for black people. We oppose these.

Drunken Sailor| 8.21.12 @ 3:16PM

"Anytime the debate claims that......"

Finish the quote, don't change it. Who are you, Obama's speech writer? Just beacause the left now claims the Civil rights movement does not change history. They were the ones standing against it.

Al Adab| 8.21.12 @ 3:41PM

Which Civil Rights Act is Jack referencing? There were several and the only problem with any of them was the requirement (mandate) that prevented a business owner from being a bigot if he so chose. Masters dissertation to follow on request.

It was the solid Democrat South which imposed Jim Crow and the Republican party which led the way toward ending it even under Democrat Presidents.

Jeff| 8.21.12 @ 3:46PM

Jack London....

The reason we had to have a 1964 Civil Rights Act is because we needed a "re-do"...between the 13th, 14th and 15th Amendments to the Constitution, plus the civil rights bills of the 1860's and 1870's...blacks had every civil right. Your side spent the next 100 years taking them away...and lynching besides. And using this business to get elected on progressive platforms.
Not to mention a higher percentage of R's voted for the 1964 bill than D's.

Shameless, one would think.

DRed| 8.21.12 @ 4:34PM

Good lord, what a load a garbage. The only thing worse than your historical analysis is your terrible writing style. I mean. . .what's wrong. . .with using. . .regular punctuation. . . .

Are the ellipses supposed to indicate you pausing to dredge up some more mendacious ahistorical false equivalencies? Calling someone shameless after implying that 'my side' was responsible for lynching because you are too dishonest to admit that political party affiliation doesn't correspond through time with political beliefs is . . .really. . .well. . .shameless.

Nick| 8.21.12 @ 4:48PM

Pot calling kettle, DRed. Your side invented ahistorical false equivalencies, remember?

People who lynched blacks for a hundred years after Reconstruction tended to be conservative democrats, therefore, ALL of today's conservatives are racists.

A logical fallacy that the left invented.
This is called "getting a taste of your own medicine" or "you can dish it out, but can't take it."

DRed| 8.21.12 @ 4:57PM

No, I don't remember that. Are you saying that nobody in the history of political rhetoric had ever used an ahistorical false equivalency before modern american liberals introduced it.

But thank you for at least admitting that Jeff Lord is full of crap.

Nick| 8.21.12 @ 5:29PM

"Are you saying that blah, blah, blah."

I would have stated it, if that's what I meant. Your obtuseness is showing, again, DRed.
And, I admitted no such thing about Mr. Lord. Nice try.

DRed| 8.21.12 @ 5:45PM

Well, you did say that 'my side' invented ahistorical false equivalencies, remember? If 'we' invented them, then surely they did not exist beforehand. Or did you not mean what you said?

Nick| 8.21.12 @ 6:01PM

What, did you turn into Greg Brady, with his exact words, DRed?
Or, are you "playing" dumb, and claiming that you suddenly can't recognize my rhetorical flourishes anymore?
I don't really think you are a literal "pot," either, Einstein.

DRed| 8.22.12 @ 10:52AM

Who is Greg Brady?

What I'm doing, Nick, is arguing like you do.

Albert Constantine Jr.| 8.22.12 @ 11:19AM

DRed;

"Who is Greg Brady?"

If you don't know that one, you probably will miss a common pop culture marker like "Pork Chops and Apple Sauce- sounds swell".

DRed| 8.22.12 @ 12:19PM

Indeed. Although that does sound good. I like pork chops.

Nick| 8.22.12 @ 12:45PM

Don't forget "Oh, my nose!" & "Mom always said, 'Don't play ball in the house.'", Mr. Constantine.

You are projecting again, DRed. You are arguing like you always do. When you can't refute facts, you turn to semantics, in order to obfuscate and deflect. How very sad.

DRed| 8.22.12 @ 2:49PM

I'm sorry, Nick-you said something factual? I must have missed it.

Nick| 8.22.12 @ 3:34PM

Are you going to cry now, DRed? Would you like a cookie?

I told you, before, don't take this stuff so seriously, man.
It's just the internet.

DRed| 8.22.12 @ 4:16PM

I'm not offended-don't get that Catholic guilt going.

Jack London| 8.21.12 @ 1:49PM

This is interesting to look at - we have a long history of very violent anti-union oppression, although strikers have fought back with extreme measures at times. Wiki has a good timeline that's worth perusing at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T.....and_events

It includes:

8 June 1904 (United States)
A battle between the Colorado Militia and striking miners at Dunnville ended with six union members dead and 15 taken prisoner.
20 April 1914 (United States)
The "Ludlow Massacre." In an attempt to persuade strikers at Colorado's Ludlow Mine Field to return to work, company "guards," engaged by John D. Rockefeller, Jr. and other mine operators and sworn into the State Militia just for the occasion, attacked a union tent camp with machine guns, then set it afire. Five men, two women and 12 children died as a result
19 January 1915 (United States)
World famous labor leader Joe Hill was arrested in Salt Lake City, Utah. He was convicted on trumped up murder charges, and was executed 21 months later despite worldwide protests and two attempts to intervene by President Woodrow Wilson.
1 August 1917 (United States)
IWW organizer Frank Little was lynched in Butte, Montana.
26 August 1919 (United States)
United Mine Worker organizer Fannie Sellins was gunned down by company guards in Brackenridge, Pennsylvania.

And tarring and feathering (of union people) has taken place too.

George S| 8.21.12 @ 2:23PM

None is political violence. The assertion was that racial violence isn't the only political violence. (Never mind that political violence is between government and citizen whereas union violence is between two entities -- owners and workers).

So far, you still fail to make a point. The article is based on violence by those who think they are entitled to the wealth of others. The same way striking unions attack strikebreakers simply because they are willing to work for less, thus depriving the union worker the "profit" associated with unionization.

Jack London| 8.21.12 @ 3:03PM

Sorry George, but the very definition of politics is about social differences and the struggle for a better deal. To negate the struggle of workers as 'entitled to the wealth of others' is to deny social justice and progress. In your world no doubt you'd have children down the mines.

George S| 8.21.12 @ 4:21PM

No, Jack. Politics is the interface between citizen and government.

Democracy: the interface is by majority vote.

Democrat Republic: the interface is electing representatives and an executive that govern by balancing the majority vote within prescribed limitations (i.e., a constitution or a Bill of Rights).

Parliamentary: the interface is between the citizen and their representative but not the executive - their representatives select the executive (or monarch).

Dictatorship: the interface does not exist; the people have no say.

Social differences are accounted for in the process. The struggle which you speak is a struggle for ideas to prevail. But the Marxist in you does not see it that way, instead you see it as the struggle of inequalities born from the inherent differences between human beings. The whole premise of Marxism rests jealousy, and that jealousy is exploited by the power seekers to gain power and wealth by enslaving its people. It is much more difficult to get ahead on your own. Much easier to force wealth transfer at threat of imprisonment. Throw in progressive income taxes and a legislature that does not respect the Constitution and that happens.

Skippy| 8.21.12 @ 2:36PM

"And tarring and feathering (of union people) has taken place too."

With a lot more union thugs getting the T&F makeover very soon!

"Does this rail I was run out of town on make my butt look big?"

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 3:15PM

Don't forget the Homestead Massacre, the Centralia Massacre, the murder of Wesley Everest, the kangaroo court trial of Joe Hill, and a few other dark moments for the right during the period of the Red years of the organized labor movement.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 3:20PM

By the way, more recently is the near-death of George Alexander, a saw operator in the Pacific Northwest, who was running a saw cutting a tree spiked by EarthFirst! when it hit a spike and the saw blade disintegrated, striking Alexander in the face and jaw. That was just a few years ago.

A political act all right.

Nick| 8.21.12 @ 3:26PM

You forgot to mention, Jack'o, that since its beginnings, the marxist thug-union movement has been rife with violence against police officers, replacement workers, and business owners.

In the Chicago Haymarket Square Riot, May 4, 1886, for example, union thugs threw a bomb at police, and killed 7 police men. Lefties still celebrate this act of violence & claim that the conspirators that were hanged were innocent.

http://www.history.com/topics/haymarket-riot

There was also the assassination of the former Gov. Steunenberg of Idaho, December 30, 1905, by union thugs.

http://www.history.com/this-da.....sassinated

I could go on & on.
If only Rockefeller, Ford, Carnegie, etc., had dealt with the communist Gompers, & his ilk, with the same tactics that the thugs used, America would be a better place today.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 3:32PM

Yep. Both the left and the right have committed acts of violence.

Nick| 8.21.12 @ 4:05PM

Police men, replacement workers, and business owners are the "right," Bill8472?

What "acts of violence" did Gov. Steunenberg (who was a democrat, by the way) commit?
There is no moral equivalence between the murders committed by the union thugs & the acts of self-defense used by the police, replacement workers, and business owners. None.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 4:19PM

I don't think the concept of self-defense counts for much in the case of the sheriff and some townspeople firing on the IWW workers on the excursion boat, the Verona, or the American Legion deciding they didn't want any IWW organizers like Wesley Everest running around agitating the lumbermen, so they broke into the union hall, grabbed him, took him to the nearest bridge and lynched him. Some say they also castrated him, others dispute that. Still, I'd say an unprovoked hanging is bad enough.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 4:24PM

It can't be denied that the right has dark moments it must answer for.

Nick| 8.21.12 @ 5:22PM

"I don't think the concept of self-defense counts for much in the case of [...]."

Well, I do, Bill.
You failed to mention that 300 thugs, some of whom were armed, left Seattle on the Verona & Callista to invade Everett, butting in on something that wasn't their business. As union thugs are wont to do.

Also, who fired the first shot? If it was a union thug, it was indeed self-defense. If the thugs had stayed in Seattle, no one would have been killed, including the two deputies. With the history of commie union-thug violence, the people of Everett had every reason to be fearful of them.

"Still, I'd say an unprovoked hanging is bad enough."

Unprovoked??? Umm, Wesley Everest was a triple-murderer.

I don't mean to imply that, occasionally, union men & family members didn't suffer from injustices. But, these were isolated incidences. Not an organized effort of violence. Unlike, Gompers & the other marxist leaders of American labor.

Conservatives don't spread commie-union propaganda, Bill.

DRed| 8.21.12 @ 5:39PM

What do you think the Pinkerton Agency did?

Nick| 8.21.12 @ 5:50PM

If that was addressed to me, DRed, the Pinkertons hunted down criminals and protected private property.

They weren't perfect, and, they did make mistakes.
Like when they fire-bombed Jesse James' mother's house, and killed his 15 year old brother, thus turning a murderer and bank-robber into a folk-hero.

The Pinkertons were the good-guys, which is why lefties hate them soooo much.

DRed| 8.21.12 @ 5:55PM

haha. You have such a manichean view of history.

Nick| 8.21.12 @ 6:05PM

And you have the typical college social science professor's view of history. I.e., marxist revisionist history.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 4:26PM

In the Ludlow Massacre, National Guard troops, called out by the Colorado governor from Trinidad, CO, surrounded a tent village set up by striking workers, with their children and women present, were fired upon by troops using M1917 water-cooled heavy machine guns and M1903 Springfields. No self-defense there, either.

CJW| 8.21.12 @ 6:41PM

GeorgeS,
You are correct. Jock Yablonski was murdered by three thugs hired by the Mineworkers officials, believed to be Tony Boyle. Britt Hume wrote a good book on it, "Death in the Mines."
Jimmy Hoffa? Who knows.

Albert Constantine Jr.| 8.21.12 @ 9:50PM

A colorful book on the Hoffa killing is Charles Brandt's "I Hear You Paint Houses", which is the story of Frank Sheeran, a hitman for/ from the Teamsters whom Brandt credits with the Hoffa killing and some others. As I've posted here before, Sheeran is credited as sort of a Forrest Gump or Zelig of criminal activity in the 60s and 70s, but he is not a composite character; he was serving state prison time here in Delaware, and is regarded by the FBI as one of those involved in Hoffa's demise.

The former labor leader/ assassin's kind thoughts on Joe Biden (the book was published before 2008) are interesting, as well.

CJW| 8.21.12 @ 11:24PM

Albert
Thanks. Will check out the book.
The Yablonski murder was especially bad. They also killed his wife and daughter.

Albert Constantine Jr.| 8.22.12 @ 11:16AM

I remember it being covered heavily in the news 40 or so years ago. I imagine in Western PA, it must have been saturation coverage.

Boar Hunter| 8.21.12 @ 1:31PM

A simple point, simply, but perfectly made.

The sheep are so funny. In their effort to make everything fair and equal they implemented affirmative action and hate crime legislation. Everything liberals do is perverted and despicable. These evil liars and hypocrites must dumb down and reduce all humanity to accommodate the lowest common denominator among us.

Liberals have caused us to attach warning tags to everything. We know they are so stupid that nothing will actually prevent them from electrocuting, cutting, burning or otherwise maiming themselves, but once again it's "not fair" to hold someone accountable for their own stupidity. The only thing the labels protect is those forced to sell their products to liberals.

Houdini| 8.21.12 @ 12:36PM

Soros must be paying by the word today. Interesting that only "progressives" are labled reformers. All that reform sure is doing the job that was intended....lousy schools, bloated government, higher unemployment, and increased poverty to name a few. With more reform...why we could simply destroy this country....oh forgot, that's exactly what cretins like yourself want.

George S| 8.21.12 @ 1:33PM

What militia group was McVeigh associated with? Seems to me he was a deranged fellow who snapped at the Waco attack (talk about domestic terrorism... Reno ordered the attack because the compound had an automatic weapons permit which had expired because the $200 fee wasn't paid thus giving BATF the headline raid they needed to stave off budget cuts) and was, in all probability, singled out by Muslim terrorists to help him along. Ever wondered why the time frame from McVeigh's arrest to execution was the quickest ever? Only governments who have something to keep under wraps does that happen.

Abortion murders? Name 10 since the passage of Roe. Bombings? I'll' match any clinic bombing with military recruiting booths, judge's residences and other targets from Bill Ayers to the FALN (evil right-wingers they, eh?)

Jack London| 8.21.12 @ 1:59PM

This isn't a contest George. There have been six abortion clinic murders and numerous attacks. And no matter how you spin it McVeigh was an anti-government fanatic whose views are the same as many who post here on AmSpec. The idea he was in league with some Muslim group is ludicrous conspiracy thinking put out by birther types - you're too smart to fall for that though I'm sure.

George S| 8.21.12 @ 2:11PM

No one here is remotely in the same deranged league as McVie. No one!

Jack London| 8.21.12 @ 3:11PM

"No one here is remotely in the same deranged league as McVie"

Well we don't know do we. Some of the anti-government posts from people like JD are similar to the notes that McVeigh wrote.

Drunken Sailor| 8.21.12 @ 3:20PM

That's twice you have called out JD by name. Must really piss you off that he sees right through you and can run circles around you?

JD. I think the victory is yours. Jack's newest line of attacking you is indirectly since he can never answer your questions.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 3:33PM

He has developed a particular obsession, hasn't he? But you're exactly right. He calls me names and condemns me as a person, but never responds to my arguments except for the occasional straw man retort.

Tell me, Jack, how does anything I've written resemble McVeigh sufficiently that it gives you honest reason to believe I'd bomb anything?

JD| 8.21.12 @ 2:13PM

We are not McVeigh, and no one here would bomb a federal building. You seem to think that you get to define us. We define ourselves.

loulou| 8.21.12 @ 2:34PM

Tim McVeigh was associated with Muslims. Reporter Jayna Davis wrote about this.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 3:23PM

McVeigh tried to join a milita, but they refused to allow him to join.

Ken (Old Texican)| 8.21.12 @ 10:35AM

Jeffrey,
pretty long on history.....pretty short on options for the future.

There is an old saying: an OLD man won't fight you. He will merely shoot you.

Truer words never spoken.

I wonder if the Tampa area Sherriffs departments have quietly issued a gazillion armed deputy badges and armbands.
I think the majority of them were issued to "mature individuals" (old) with hopes of restraint on the part of the deputies.

If the demonstrators start hurting people, I'm pretty sure those deputies have been ordered to shoot the perps in the leg.....first.

What if "sympathetic rtiots" take place across Tampa or even Florida...or wherever. We need lots of sworn deputies.

I have heard quiet rumors about just how fast Texas can mobilize a hundred thousand emergency deputies...phone trees...three hours.

We can also mobilize those deputies to guard polling stations where needed.

So Jeffrey let's talk a little more about the immediate future.

RCV| 8.21.12 @ 11:42AM

As the GOP's hopes for success in November grow dimmer, Jeffrey Lord's columns get more strident and even sillier.

Occam's Tool| 8.21.12 @ 12:04PM

RCV: Obama is going down, my man. Get out of CA for a moment.

Ken (Old Texican)| 8.21.12 @ 12:42PM

Doctor,
RCV's head will remain firmly implanted in his arse.
He is the classic Limosine Liberal.
He sits insulated from the pain of fellow Californians.
Heh.
He uses the word "strident".....well...Republicans and conservatives are not cranking up riots at the Democrat convention ...are we?

Hopefully, we can save RCV from himself...once again.

RCV| 8.21.12 @ 4:25PM

Occam - you're blinded by your hatred of Obama. Read the state by state polls and get a dose of reality. The electoral result will be Obama 301 Romney 237. Romneymayeven squeak out a slight national popular vote majority. But it won't matter.

Skippy| 8.22.12 @ 4:02PM

Keep thinking that, Pres. Carter.

spike59| 8.23.12 @ 6:30AM

RCV, read the polls yourself; if the best ObaMao can do is a 2-4% lead when all adults are sampled instead of likely voters, and democrats are oversampled by 10-12%, i'd say there is a serious problem for the Obamessiah; particularly when the one thing virtually all polls agree on is that Republican enthusiasm is significantly higher in 2012 than 2008, and Democrat enthusiasm is significantly lower-it's going to be 2010 all over

JD| 8.21.12 @ 11:50AM

Leftism is, at its root, an attack on an enemy. Whether through "regulation" or "redistribution", Leftism seeks to right a perceived wrong perpetrated by some evil that needs to be restrained. Without an enemy, there is no Leftism. That is why it invents enemies - to sustain itself.

Contrast the Right, which has only one enemy: the Left. If the Left ceased to exist, the Right would be fine. We have ideals that don't require enemies.

The attachment of racism to the Right, which is the opposite of reality, is a common Leftist tactic for rationalizing hatred of enemies. So too their general distortion of language and redefinition of words - these enable dishonest speech, which is required when making someone an enemy undeservedly. For example, fascism, a leftist system, has been redefined in their minds as right-wing (even as they practice it), because the word is associated with Hitler, who is universally considered bad.

Jack London| 8.21.12 @ 12:32PM

Ah - what would the world be without the resident village idiot, ie JD. He's so confused he doesn't even understand that the very act of being right wing creates enemies because you believe in promoting inequality. And as for 'Hitler, who is universally considered bad' - this would come as some surprise to the far-right white supremacists with swastika tattoos, who practice the most extreme form of inequality.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 12:55PM

They know Hitler was bad, they just like it that way.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 1:24PM

We do not believe in promoting inequality. We believe in fairness. You believe in trying to promote equality through unfairness, which leads to more inequality.

Once again, your ideology requires you to lie about people who disagree with you. The truth does not suit you.

The word "universal" exists independent from the word "unanimous" because it implies "not quite unanimous, but true among the majority of people across a spectrum". Your reading comprehension issues continue to plague our discussions.

But unlike Jeffrey Lord, you do not correctly understand that there is nothing right-wing about white-supremacy. You cling to your straw man, fearing your inability to win arguments without it.

Jack London| 8.21.12 @ 1:35PM

"We do not believe in promoting inequality."

Yes you do - that's precisely why you'll be voting for a ticket that will drive our already extreme inequality higher.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 2:10PM

Ah, the childish mindset of the liberal. Being, like a five-year-old, incapable of grasping not just specific alternate perspectives, but even the IDEA of alternate perspectives, you can't help but judge our motives based on how YOU think our ideas will play out, even though it's quite clear that we don't think that way.

It is you who promote inequality by voting for a system of government management and complexity. Complexity favors the most capable, and government management favors those with resources to bribe and lobby.

At any rate, you've completely twisted my original point, which is that YOUR politics require an enemy to attack, and ours do not. Your flawed belief that we create inequality, thus victims, thus enemies, does not refute my point that we don't need enemies.

Al Adab| 8.21.12 @ 3:32PM

No Jack we don't promote inequality. What we oppose in enforced equality of result or outcome. But you know that. Your side and our side mean different things by the word. You mean homoginization of circumstance, we mean equality before the law wherein each is treated the same regardless of socio-economic condition. Alas, I am preaching to the wind for the icy mind of my friend from the arctic will not comprehend the value in freedom.

"That some become rich means that others may become rich." A. Lincoln

"To tax one person class or group to benefit another person class or group, is theft." John W. Davis

Do we not prefer Liberty with the opportunity of success to a gurantee of subsistence without it?

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 3:40PM

I know you're talking about someone else, but for myself, I promote liberty before equality. Liberty, if honored, will result (because human nature is what it is) in equality.

The key to equality is that everyone is supposed to be treated equally under the law.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 3:41PM

"...will result in INequality." Error.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 4:04PM

Imagine a society with total equality. How would it look?

Would we all have equal incomes? Well, then those who have crappy jobs (garbage men, for instance) would be jealous of those who have fun jobs (CEO, etc).

Would we fix that by eliminating crappy jobs (and fun jobs)? Impossible - someone needs to pick up the garbage!

Maybe we could have a rotation. You be the garbage man this week, the CEO next week, then the brain surgeon, then the accountant, and then the nuclear engineer. Does anyone see any problem with having the same person do all of those jobs? Methinks he might not do all of them very well.

Even if ability were magically equalized, education and experience are needed for a wide variety of specialized jobs, and no one person can have the qualifications for every job in the modern world. It's the Left's "people depend on other people" mantra, except instead of justifying redistribution beyond the normal payment for jobs, now it's making liberal idealism look bad. Oops!

JD| 8.21.12 @ 4:05PM

So if we can't all do every job, then someone must have the crappy job, and someone else will get the fun job, and mostly we'll be stuck that way. How do we determine who does what? Here's where liberal "equality" gets fun.

In reality, the best jobs go to the most qualified. In liberal utopia, though, we're all equally capable. So people would have to get selected to be trained and educated for the best jobs by RANDOM CHANCE. How do you think the garbage man will feel, living out his life sorting through trash, knowing that he's not a CEO or doctor or fashion model or professional athlete or whatever not because of any failure of his, but because of a lottery administered by the government? Can you say "civil unrest?"

Liberal utopia looks like a disaster!

Inequality is ESSENTIAL in an interdependent society. It's the only source of legitimacy for the disparity in roles that we must have.

That doesn't mean we conservatives advocate creating inequality, though. It exists by nature. Heck, those of you who believe in evolution REQUIRE it to generate change!

We advocate equality under the law, as Bill said.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 4:41PM

For one take on what an entirely equal society would look like, I've always enjoyed the Kurt Vonnegut, Jr., short story Harrison Bergeron. Evidently you can read the entire text on the net for free.

CJW| 8.21.12 @ 1:28PM

Comrdade Jack
You are plagiarizing my name for purpie. I refer to him as the Village Idiot.
Are you purpie now also using jack london?

Drunken Sailor| 8.21.12 @ 2:00PM

Sadly I think they are two of the same mold.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 12:49PM

Martin Luther King, Sr., was a registered Republican in Alabama. His son, Martin Luther King, Jr., was also a registered Republican.

It is also true that Martin Luther King, Jr. did not endorse any Presidential candidate in his entire career, or so he (and his son) said. Martin Luther King, Jr., claimed to be uncommitted to either the Republicans or the Democrats in his lifetime.

Ken (Old Texican)| 8.21.12 @ 12:50PM

Jack,
you are pathetic. Soros should not pay you today.

spike59| 8.24.12 @ 6:18AM

ObaMao has already paid her with funds (Obama money) loaded on the EBT card

Who Knows?| 8.21.12 @ 1:25PM

“There are countless examples of this kind of violent display from recent years alone.”

Countless?

Come on, man. There are surely too many examples, but they are countable. And, further, the loss of life, the physical injuries and the cost of damage and police protection, while regrettable, are also countable.

$20 million damage in Seattle? BAD! But, relative to the many trillions of dollars of NOT damaged assets in Seattle, let alone the whole USA? A tiny percentage.

Otherwise, I enjoy your talk down history lane, and agree that it’s the left, and their core belief in the group, or communal leanings, verses the right’s emphasis on the individual, which uses violence most.

The right---1% violent.

The left---99% violent.

The violence to be feared is physical, but no doubt we can see it being employed non-physically, as well. There are NO LIMITS, as lawfare is also rampant---leftist lawyers amorally doing violence to the Constitution.

The Takings Clause is regularly being guillotined.

What’s mine is mine, what’s yours is mine. That’s the leftist belief.

They believe THEY are the world---join THEM!

Or else.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 3:08PM

Of course the acts of political violence are countable, as are all known acts of violence during the past, say, 40 years. The number would be high, but not infinite.

What I would find interesting is not so much the total count but the comparison of the number of right-wing violent acts with the number of left-wing violent acts. I would bet my last $20 that the former is a far lower number than the latter.

I was thinking yesterday that the right's attitude toward tolerance and non-violence is the attitude that leftists falsely claim they have.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 4:08PM

The Left would never agree with your count. The Sikh shooting is just one of many examples of an incident they would falsely attribute to us.

In all honesty, anyone who does not personally believe in violent means can claim that any who use violence are not associated with them. The claim might not be strong, but it can be made.

Bill8472| 8.21.12 @ 4:31PM

No one could agree on a count. There are too many ways of defining a violent act, whether it was political or not, and so on. My point is that the number of violent acts, whether political or not, is not infinite. We could go back to the date of the death of Christ and work forward, and we'd still have a finite number.

jdondet| 8.21.12 @ 2:00PM

Mr. Lord:

My counterpoint to your article is, what was the Democratic Party prior to 1896? The party prior to that year was primarily the party of the plantation. I just cannot see plantation owners as committed leftist. That element of the party did last until the 1960’s.

It is in the election of 1896 with the nomination of William Jennings Bryant that the modern Democratic Party begins to emerge. Bryant is a mass Populist with his 'Free Silver' campaign.

Your point about the left and Communism and Nazism is right. The American Left has this in its political landscape; it is only a matter of degrees with those people. About 10 years ago I visited a Neo-Nazi website.

Someone had I known had made an assertion about the then Democratic Party platform and the Neo-Nazis and I wished to see for myself.

I knew the Neo-Nazis had to have a political agenda. I forgotten most of what I saw there, but one thing I do recall. This is paraphrasing, ‘The government owes every white man a job, if no job is available then the labor of a brown man to support that white man.’

Now if one were to take out the words ‘white man’ and insert your favorite group say the ‘underprivileged.’ Were one then to substitute ‘brown man’ with ‘rich man.’ It could read like this,‘ the government owes the underprivileged a job, if no job is available then the labor of a rich man to support the underprivileged,’ sounds like modern social justice and Occupy to me !

JD| 8.21.12 @ 2:11PM

One does not need to make the word substitutions. Leftism is Leftism regardless of who it intends to favor. It is a means, not a specific goal.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 3:02PM

"I just cannot see plantation owners as committed leftist. "

Why not? Angelo Mozillo, George Soros, and any other big business types who profit via corrupt relationships with big government leaders are all Leftists. Like the character James Taggart in Atlas Shrugged, they are an essential part of fascist Leftism.

Ryan| 8.21.12 @ 4:34PM

It's trying to define past political realities in modern terms. It just doesn't fit.

jdondet| 8.21.12 @ 7:21PM

You cannot equate southern plantation owners and states rights with the corporatism you mention with Soros and friends. My point was the Democratic Party changed from Jefferson and Jackson, to Pelosi and Obama, people who are poles apart.

Indy| 8.21.12 @ 7:46PM

If you haven't read The Shadow Party, you will find it eye-opening, the transition to the Soros, Clinton, Leftist Party has been well planned and executed. Nobody on the right ever calls out the Dems to ask what happened to their party, Truman and JFK would not be welcome. The Left constantly harps on how the "far right" has hijacked the GOP and never does the GOP respond, cowards. The Tea Party is trying to restore conservative principles, how extreme it is to live within our means.

spike59| 8.22.12 @ 5:51AM

just look what the Left did to JFK; Oswald was a committed member of the Leftist 'Fair Play for Cuba Committee', whose views on Castro were no different from the views of the CBC.

Albert Constantine Jr.| 8.21.12 @ 6:07PM

It is not for nothing that the American Nazi Party endorsed OWS.

Jeff| 8.21.12 @ 11:10PM

jdondet...

"I just cannot see plantation owners as committed leftist."

Plantation owners...aka slave owners...by definition were opposed to individual liberty....a key to leftist philosophy. They were also opposed to free trade.....yet another conservative principle.

They may not look like bomb throwing leftists of today...but they were devoted leftists for sure.

Prester John| 8.21.12 @ 6:45PM

I live in a typical suburb outside of DC and know of a woman and her teenage son being called Nazis for daring to hand out GOP literature outside a polling place in a Dem precinct. In my own precinct someone said, "I didn't know there were black Nazis" when he saw my Herman Cain sign as I was getting signatures to get him on the primary ballot.

Given these incidents will there be violence in November? I say you can count on it, it's just a matter of how early it's clear Duh One will lose and by how much.

JD| 8.21.12 @ 7:44PM

There would undoubtedly have been violence had Obama lost in 2008, which wasn't THAT far from happening.

My church gave up being a polling place after that election, after the hostile behavior of an angry pro-Obama mob harassing all comers outside. It was truly a nasty time. They were convinced, to a one, by the MSM that Obama was going to win in a landslide. Had he actually lost, they would have insisted that there was massive vote fraud (which would have been very ironic).

In voting, as in everything else, they have been conditioned to simply refuse to accept reality if it doesn't align with their worldview.

Pelleas| 8.21.12 @ 7:42PM

It will ONLY get violent, with rabid rabble-rousers such as Lord, who seem to have some perverse desire for it to get so..

The "conspiracy theories" on The Right get nuttier and nuttier...

Nick| 8.21.12 @ 7:50PM

So says the tinker-bell who thinks he's going to be burned at the stake if the GOP wins the White House and Congress this November.

spike59| 8.22.12 @ 5:52AM

...sez the idiot who ignores decades and decades of US history

spike59| 8.22.12 @ 5:48AM

i have no doubt that this campaign will turn violent; given the demonization of Romney and Ryan by the ObaMao camp...these are people who piously intone "words matter" whenever their feathers get ruffled, and they truly believe that. So, when they call Romney a felon and a killer, and allege that Ryan wants to push Granny's wheelchair off a cliff, they're not just 'speechifying', they're HOPING for trouble, which the compliant lapdog media will blame on Palin, the TEA Party, and Breitbart

Skippy| 8.22.12 @ 4:13PM

Sic vis pacem, para bellum.

Patrick in Michigan | 8.22.12 @ 8:50PM

Good Lord....Um, Mr. Lord!

But seriously, no. There will be too much security at the events. Both Republican and Democratic. I doubt we'll ever see another 68 convention debacle like that again. Too much police state.

just my opinion.

Latest Headlines

Not Ready for Primetime Players

Daniel J. Flynn|91 comments

Assessing a Week of Scandal

Matt Purple|114 comments

Oops, Maybe Government is Tyrannical

Marta H. Mossburg|53 comments

Soros Funds Anti-‘Torture’ Report

Mark Tooley|92 comments

Treasure State Treasury

Bill Croke|3 comments

My Generation’s Disease

Benjamin Brophy|53 comments

The View From the Other Side

George H. Wittman|16 comments

USPS: Radical Surgery Needed

Peter Hannaford|19 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Elijah Harper, R.I.P.

Aaron Goldstein | 1:07PM

If Only the Tsar Knew!

F.H. Buckley | 11:14AM

Low-Level IRS Staffer: No, We Didn’t Mastermind This Entire Thing

Matt Purple | 5.17.13

UPDATED: IRS Acting Chief Apologizes, But Defends His Actions

Kaylin Bugos | 5.17.13

Voter Fraud Affected Election Results in Missouri

Kaylin Bugos | 5.17.13

Purple Privacy Push Persists in House Drone Hearing

Luca Gattoni-Celli | 5.17.13

IRS Director: ‘Some People Call Me Maurice’

Kyle Peterson | 5.17.13

Laughing to Keep From Crying

Ross Kaminsky | 5.17.13

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Pope Culture

By George Sim Johnston

A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck

By P.J. O'Rourke

Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
Dames at Sea

By John Corry
In the Absence of Guns

By Mark Steyn

In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The Metaphysical Martini

By Werner J. Dannhauser
Counting the Costs of Clintonism

By Robert H. Bork

The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
Chuck McHagel

By George Neumayr

It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted

By Douglas Bartholomew
It’s the Best Time of the Year

By Mark Steyn

The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
The Bush Crack-Up

By Brit Hume

Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?