‘Countering Violent Extremism’ Is A Perfect Phrasing

Posted on

by Smitty

Ed Driscoll seems to think this is ‘wussy‘ formulation. Note the accuracy, however, when used in the singular. What have we done against Mahmoud Ahmadinejad? Counter A Violent Extremist (CAVE), that’s what!

I, for one, welcome this refreshing outburst of accuracy in countering the Flemish Menace from my otherwise systematically incompetent overlords.

Via Totten @ Insty, we have more clarity from Dr. Krauthammer:

This is not just an America in decline. This is an America in retreat — accepting, ratifying and declaring its decline, and inviting rising powers to fill the vacuum.

Nor is this retreat by inadvertence. This is retreat by design and, indeed, on principle. It’s the perfect fulfillment of Obama’s adopted Third World narrative of American misdeeds, disrespect and domination from which he has come to redeem us and the world. Hence his foundational declaration at the U.N. General Assembly last September that “No one nation can or should try to dominate another nation” (guess who’s been the dominant nation for the last two decades?) and his dismissal of any “world order that elevates one nation or group of people over another.” (NATO? The West?)

What a cold political winter this is.

Does Alcee Hastings Have A Point?

Posted on Comments

by Smitty (h/t The Corner)

It is an endless source of startlement when listening to the Left, how words suddenly don’t mean what you think they do. Call it linguistic Progress. One example is how the word ‘illegal’ ceased to mean ‘not legal’ in an immigration context.

Another is how the ‘Cut’ in YouCut moved from being associated with budgetary sanity and became tied with terrorism.

  1. What is Osama bin Laden? A terrorist.
  2. What do terrorists do? Cut off heads.
  3. What dots does Alcee Hastings likely hope the audience will connect in this soundbite? YouCut participants are terrorists.


The minor premise that the Congress is not accountable to the people is equally well-founded. Thank you for this winner, FL-23.

Shocker: Rand Paul Overwhelmingly Popular in Lower Glennbeckistan

Posted on Comments

Rand Paul 59%, Jack Hussein Pelosi Conway 34%

A new Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of Likely Voters in Kentucky, taken Wednesday night, shows Paul earning 59% of the vote, while Conway picks up 34% support . . .
Paul . . . is now supported by 82% of the GOP faithful. That figure is up from 69% earlier. Paul also earns 73% support from unaffiliated voters at this time.  . . .
Conway, on the other hand, attracts support from just 59% of Democrats.

Ever since they lynched that Census worker, Kentuckians have led the way in “Southern populist terrorism,” and clearly their support for vicious hatemonger Rand Paul represents the triumph of the Beck/Palin/Bachmann Axis of Right-Wing Extremism.

Speaking of Michelle Bachmann, here’s another dangerous kook from Minnesota, Ed Morrissey:

It’s still early in Kentucky, but the internals show that one of the nominees is a fringe, marginal candidate. It’s just not the Republican.

Kentucky über alles!

(Guest-posted by My Inner Charles Johnson.)

UPDATE: “In a single day [MSNBC] devoted 37 minutes over eight segments to implying that [Rand Paul] might be a racist.” Which was very interesting to the approximately 17 people in Kentucky who watch MSNBC.

Goreture II: There’s Moore

Posted on Comments

by Smitty

(If you don’t start with Paco, this post will make little sense)

Agent Kowalski grimaced at Faisal, securely bound in the chair. The table was empty save the screen sitting on some cheap playback gear. The Gore tape had failed. Or had it succeeded too well? Could the robotic utterances of Al Gore have affected a brain bleaching on Faisal Shahzad? Repeated questioning on the would-be Times Sqare Bomber produced nothing save a stream of Ramones lyrics.

There had to be something else. Something truly monstrous. Suddenly, Kowalski knew.

“Faisal, would you like to watch a movie? Don’t you think that Megan Fox is hot in those Transormers movies? Was Allah going to set you up with 72 virgin variations on the theme of Ms. Fox?”

Shahzad grimaced and said nothing, but a sudden intensity in his eyes betrayed a smoldering lust.

“Great, well, here is a treat for you, then, while I go out for a sandwich,” and Kowalski hit play on the DVD and left the room.

Sicko started, followed almost immediately by a “Noooooooooo” that rolled down the hall to bounce off the back of the smiling Kowalski.

Update: TrogloPundit does a face-plant in the heart of horror:

Goreture III

Let’s See If We Can Clear That Up For Dr. Krauthammer

Posted on Comments

by Smitty

Dr. Krauthammer, via The Corner, emphasis mine.

On Mexican President Felipe Calderon’s criticism of the Arizona immigration law:

Well, I’m sort of offended when the president of Mexico says, criticizing the Arizona law: ‘It’s placing our people in the face of discrimination.’ If they’re his people, what are they doing in the United States? If they’re his people, why did they leave Mexico, abandon his country, to live under the jurisdiction and the laws of the United States?

When the so-called elites use the word ‘our’, this pronoun points to the modern liberal club wielding power. They are the anointed ones who call the shots.

This globetrotting clique really doesn’t see borders as more than a vestige of the Ancien Constitutional Régime. Your laughable interest in such marks you a bitter Klingon and a racist, to boot.

As with other words, such as ‘illegal’, which doesn’t seem to mean what you might think, ‘our’ in this case has a shocking meaning, quite different from the apparent.

We’ll just have to wait for Dr. K to come around.

Paging Dr. Hendrick–A Surgeon’s Devastating Appraisal Of ObamaCare

Posted on Comments

by Smitty (h/t Dr. Wolf)

This lengthy clip is narrated somewhat dryly by Daniel Cox, M.D., and focuses on surgeons, yet is quite good:

Going Galt: When Will Surgeons Say Enough is Enough? from Daniel Cox on Vimeo.

I’ve screen capped the Thomas Hendrick quotation for your convenience:

And here is the Medicus survey slide, one among many devastating slides in the pitch:

Delivery from Dr. Cox is in a bland tone, which is a feature. The facts sell themselves.

One surmises that the Democratic strategy is to rely on the American non-attention span, hoping that the people will just ‘kind of forget’ the whole mess in time for November.

I was in attendance at the Moran health care forum featured at the mid-point. What a pile of hooey that was.

Refusing elective surgery to lawyers? As strikes go, that would be kinda funny.

Dr. Cox ends the video on such a positive, patriotic note that I am brought to tears. Well worth your time.

Everybody Should Buy Gold, Even If Glenn Beck Gets Paid to Tell You So

Posted on Comments

Look, the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost more than 300 points today, and the DJIA is down more than 1,130 points since closing at 11,205 on April 26. The Greek debt crisis is pulling down the European economy, more than 700 U.S. banks are now on the FDIC “troubled” list, and concern about a “double-dip” recession is becoming mainstream. Now, let’s look at this chart of gold prices over the past five years:

If you were investing in real estate or plowing your 401(k) into stocks five years ago, don’t you wish you’d bought gold instead? Yet according to Democrats, it is somehow wrong for Glenn Beck to tell you about this, because his advertisers happen to share the same opinion:

“On numerous occasions, Glenn Beck has dedicated entire segments of his program to explaining why the U.S. money supply is destined for hyperinflation with Barack Obama as president. He will often promote the purchase of gold as the only safe investment alternative for consumers who want to safeguard their livelihoods. When the show cuts to commercial break, viewers are treated to an advertisement from Goldline . . .”

If you’re a Beck fan, you know that the guy who is trying to make this into a “scandal” is Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-Ouchenozzle), and that Beck has responded by launching a new Web site, WeinerFacts.com.

While you’re reading this blog, by the way, be sure to enjoy a cold refreshing Corona ExtraTM beer.

As my blogger friends know, I don’t actually drink beer, but I always make a point of having a delicious Corona beer in my hand when I’m photographed at a party, because I’m trying to get a product-placement deal with the Mexican beer cartel.

So far, I have not been able to persuade the manufacturers of Corona that making me their officially sponsored right-wing blogger would be good for business, and Anheuser-Busch also nixed my pitch, which is why I stopped drinking pretending to drink Budweiser.

Some readers may be asking themselves, “Is it legal for Stacy to pimp himself out to advertisers so shamelessly? Couldn’t he be arrested for that?”

Not to worry, dear readers. I have consulted the nation’s finest legal mind, Professor Glenn Reynolds, who informs me that I am perfectly within my rights.

If you want to attend a fine law school, the University of Tennessee has an excellent faculty. While visiting beautiful East Tennessee, be sure to stop by Granny’s Fireworks at 1948 Bristol Highway in Watauga, where you’ll find the finest products at the lowest prices. And if you want me to shut up with these shameless product pitches, just hit the tip jar.

Silence is golden, IYKWIMAITYD.

UPDATE: Oh, look: “Financial reform” just cleared the cloture hurdle in the Senate! Doesn’t that inspire you to invest more money in Wall Street?

Of course not. Buy more gold immediately. And hit the tip jar, because this kind of excellent (but entirely unofficial) financial advice has got to be worth something.

UPDATE II: Doug Powers:

I have a strange feeling that my 401K is about to sink so low tomorrow that it may well put the final plug on the Gulf oil leak.

Anybody want to suggest an over/under on how many points the DJIA loses Friday? It hasn’t closed under 10,000 since February 8, so the prospect of 100 days of gains being wiped out . . . Hey, how’s that Hope and Change workin’ out for ya?

And thank you, Scott Brown — you’re on your way to becoming the Arlen Specter of Massachusetts.

VIDEO: Pat Toomey Ad

Posted on Comments

As Dave Weigel says — hey, he’s got me blogrolled at an MSM site, of course I’m kissing his ass — Toomey spent a year waiting to campaign against Arlen Specter, but he’s not wasting time on regrets:

TV Clear Choice from Pat Toomey on Vimeo.

The first post-primary Rasmussen poll shows Joe Sestak with a slight lead, which was to be expected, and not merely for the huge media attention to the Democratic primary campaign. As I had foreseen ( “Republicans for Arlen Specter,” April 22), the honest liberal Sestak is a better candidate for Democrats than the two-faced “moderate” crapweasel Specter. It’s unfortunate that the Democratic primary voters figured this out, too.

Despite Sestak’s relative greater strength, in comparison to Specter, the fact is that Sestak spent himself broke in the Democratic primary, while Toomey had the pleasant experience of sitting on his money, waiting to unload on the battered winner of the Specter-Sestak slugfest. And it is significant that Toomey launched this TV ad campaign so early. Robert Costa at National Review reports:

“This race is now much more interesting and competitive,” says Larry Sabato, director of the Center for Politics at the University of Virginia. “Toomey would have beaten Specter like a drum, given this year’s environment. Sestak can be far more competitive. However, my sense is that this is a GOP year in Pennsylvania. Tom Corbett, the gubernatorial nominee, should help Toomey, and there will be a great deal of straight-ticket voting in the fall. But it’s early, and some caution is in order.”
Defining Sestak as a classic left-progressive early on is a key goal, Toomey strategists tell National Review Online. . . .
Unlike Specter, who flailed trying to peg Sestak as a weak leader and ran negative ads questioning Sestak’s Navy record, Toomey is determined to make the candidates’ positions the topic of conversation. “I will need to communicate a very clear contrast between Joe and myself,” Toomey says. “Joe, by virtue of his record, is a Nancy Pelosi liberal. While I am confident that Pennsylvania does not want to elect a San Francisco liberal to the United States Senate, I know that I have to keep barnstorming the state to make my case.”

Basically, Toomey needs to brand Sestak as a liberal now — while Sestak is still low on campaign cash — and thus put Sestak on the defensive. Once Sestak replenishes his coffers, his first job will be to dig himself out of a hole of negative perception.