Preferring a government of men, not of laws.

Jennifer Granholm speaks to the NYT on the president’s drone strike policies:

“We trust the president,” former Gov. Jennifer Granholm of Michigan said on Current TV. “And if this was Bush, I think that we would all be more up in arms because we wouldn’t trust that he would strike in a very targeted way and try to minimize damage rather than contain collateral damage.”

Right. Jennifer sees due process as a presidential whim, not as a legal principle. The 5th Amendment is optional.

It’s saying a lot, but I’ve never been more ashamed of her.

Illegal immigrants being pwnd, Democrats committing vote fraud, Useful idiots calling for confiscation of all profits, Union bosses lying about their employers, God is dead to Democrats, Women defined as vaginas

Just a day at the Democrat’s convention.

Young face put on illegal immigration at DNC
“I’ve had to live almost my entire life knowing I could be deported just because of the way I came here.” And “how you came here,” that would be… illegally? Same with how you stay here?

Just whose votes does Obama expect to gain by suing Arizona, or issuing that executive “no deportation” order? A possible answer:
State Rep. Hudson Hallum, 3 Others Plead Guilty to Election Fraud

Democrats loudly proclaim there’s no such thing as vote fraud, and call Republicans racists for mentioning it. But, is there any reason to believe arranging for illegal immigrants to vote would have caused Hudson Hallum the slightest pang of conscience? Is there any reason to believe the president’s executive order was not crassly political in its timing? He could have done it over 3 years ago if he thought it about justice or compassion.

DNC delegates: Let’s ban corporate profits!
And these are people supposedly knowledgeable about politics and business? They are selecting THEIR candidate for the most (as yet) important job in the world.

Steelworker Featured at DNC Didn’t Work for Bain
They’ve got commercials where Democrat operatives claim to have converted from the GOP, why not someone who prevaricates about where he worked?

On the removal of “God,” and “Jerusalem” from the platform. First, the floor vote was obviously a fraud. Second, the President either knew about it and agrees, or didn’t know about it and is incompetent. On his record, I lean toward believing the former – his acolytes made it clear they (also) don’t like people “clinging to religion,” or calling Jerusalem the capital of Israel. As if it was their decision rather than Israel’s.

Then, there’s the nearly incoherent speech by Sandra Fluke. Ms Fluke became famous because Rush Limbaugh used the word ‘slut’ to describe her demand that you pay for her birth control pills. Slut is imprecise, because it leaves out the Federal pimp. I’d say ‘cheap whore to big government.’ Cheap, because the contraceptives she wants your Uncle Sam on the hook for cost 4 bucks a month. Whore, because it’s not about wanting to have sex, it’s about making someone else pay for it.

DNC delegates: Let’s ban corporate profits!

And these are people supposedly knowledgable about politics and economics? They want to say Obama’s” “You didn’t build that,” is taken out of context? They ARE the context.

Steelworker Featured at DNC Didn’t Work for Bain

They’ve got commercials where Democrat operatives claim to have converted from the GOP, why not someone who prevaricates about where he worked?

The Democrats think these ideas are good ones for their brand. Consider that while (if) you’re watching the soaring rhetorician accept his annointment tonight.

Lessons from Obamaville

Obama: Occupy Wall Street ‘Not That Different’ From Tea Party Protests

In some ways, they’re not that different from some of the protests that we saw coming from the Tea Party…

mr. president, weasel words though those may be, the differences are obvious to any thinking person of principle.

None of the following citations demonstrate that all supporters of the #Occupy movement – whatever that actually means – are anti-semites, favor arson, think rape is a private matter for one consenting individual or feel compelled to perform public genital manipulation. It does suggest the #Occupy movement attracts people who not only support those ideas, but live them.

That is; racists, felons, and violent perverts are comfortable hanging out in the socio-political environment #Occupy has created. That #Occupy can be perceived as anarchist might explain some of this. Living in their various #Obamavilles, they constitute a target rich environment for criminals of all sorts.

Yet they discourage reporting crimes – rape, for example – so that their “movement” may not be sullied. This, while they ask the government to take more power, to suspend the rule of law, to arbitrarily dissolve specific contracts in their favor.

I detect hypocrisy, naivete and quite a bit of Alinskyite manipulation. #Occupy, insofar as they have any clearly stated goals, may reasonably be called fascists or communists or, more generally – totalitarians or statists. They think that Wall Street is the problem, not the general government’s considered and deliberate collusion with Fannie, Freddie, GM, Solyndra, General Electric, etc., etc. and etc..

Occupy’s mainstream message is most definitely not anarchism. It is statism. They want government to be larger and more intrusive: As long as it does what they want it to do.

Philosophically speaking, this strange and chaotic bonding of the extreme right with the extreme left has nothing in common with the tea party. The fundamental difference is this: How much intervention from the general government is desirable? #Occupy says “None.” and they say “All.”

There are some moderates who stand between the extremes of the motley crew of anarchists and the rigid collective of statists who compose #Occupy. That would be the tea party movement. Here are the examples:

I recall no arson committed by tea partiers.
Occupy Protester Arrested In $10M Arson Fire

No embassies were occupied by tea partiers. In particular, none with connotations of religious or racial discrimination. Did any tea party ever occupy a mosque, chanting about Palestinian terrorists, for example?
Occupy Boston Occupies Israeli Consulate

I can’t remember when tea partiers shut down a major port, nor then went on a smash and grab frenzy.
80 arrested at Occupy Oakland event Wednesday

No tea partier pushed a 78 year old women down some stairs. among other crimes:
Occupy protest turns violent outside Washington Convention Center

The tea party never had an incident reminiscent of Lara Logan’s ordeal in Tahrir Square.
‘F– Michelle Fields!’ — Interview With Reporter Harassed at Occupy DC Protest

The tea partiers displayed normal impulse control and a clear grasp of what the word ‘decency’ means. The OWS folks are experiencing some difficulties with that. In their own words:
We need a JO Tent to protect the women – Occupy Wallstreet

It’s not just the Wall Street occupiers who find public masturbation attractive.
Permit denied for Occupy Madison due to public masturbation

Women did not have to be segregated “for their own good” at tea party protests. For OWS, a private tent for masturbation may be necessary, but it is not sufficient. They also must have a tent where they can herd the women away from rapists.
Occupy Wall Street builds tent as ‘safe house’ to protect female protesters

I am waiting for NOW to comment on this.
#OccupyBaltimore Discourages Sexual Assault Victims From Contacting Police, Offers Counseling for Perpetrators

Someone of a cynical bent might point out that Joe Biden’s prediction that rapes would increase if the president’s “jobs” bill doesn’t pass is coming true. Not precisely how he expected, of course. I’m sure he thought they’d be reported to the police.

Jared Loughner was NOT a feminist…

…so don’t blame them.

I do not read the Huffington Post, but I was asked by a close friend to read this and then tell her what I thought. 

Do not bother to read it, I will summarize: The missing element in the dialog about why Jared Loughner shot a congresswoman is that nobody is blaming it on his misogyny. Also, guns are bad and men are violent. 

To give you a flavor of how truly bad this is, I give you a few selected bits (Yes, I have suffered on your behalf.) Keep in mind that this was written a full 9 days after the shootings:

…mental illness itself has critical gendered dynamics…

While it is obviously necessary to resist drawing premature conclusions based on a still-incomplete picture…

One only hopes that among the many Americans [Sheriff] Dupnik has inspired by his fearless calling out of right-wing bullies will be many more middle-aged and older white men…

Is it possible that if the congressperson in his district had been a man, Loughner would still have shot him? From what we know today, it’s impossible to say.

You are probably laughing already, but this howler takes the prize:

When the shooter is identified as mentally ill, much of the serious sociological or political dialogue shuts down. In this case the right has an obvious self-interest in depoliticizing the killings, attributing them to the crazed acts of a deranged lunatic, and accusing progressives of opportunistically using the tragedy as a stick with which to beat conservatives.

Why, one might wonder, is the “right’s” collective “self”-interest more obvious than say, deranged people’s self-interest? Is it not even more obvious that everyone has an interest in depoliticizing the killings? The identification of any particular group in this context presumes that group is responsible, why else is their self-interest notable compared to anyone and everyone’s self-interest?

Once accused, however, defending yourself is a further sign of culpability. The reason the “right” accused progressives of opportunistically politicizing the tragedy is because that is exactly what happened. Pointing this out is unfair and incivil.

Fatuous bunch of crap

Carolyn Lin is professor of communication sciences in the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, and associate dean of the UConn Graduate School. She is “an expert on campaign strategy.”

Here‘s the proof in her own words:

The most damaging aspect about negative political advertising is that when the lies about another candidate stick, there is no easy way for that candidate to rebut those lies…

Around the country, a lot of candidates have been condemning government and the need for government to participate in people’s lives. But Lin says most voters really don’t agree with that, since elimination of government might mean you have to pave your own street, establish you [sic] own fire department, go without food safety regulations, or live without government help in a disaster such as a hurricane, earthquake, or oil spill…

You have to craft messages in such a way that people can understand them. You need one clear message, and you need to hang on it throughout the campaign…

Says Lin, “Turnout will be the key for both candidates.”

“[T]he need for government to participate in people’s lives”? Need? Participate?? I guess that’s more profound than “Turnout will be the key for both candidates,” less profound than “when the lies about another candidate stick, there is no easy way for that candidate to rebut those lies,” and as profound as “You have to craft messages in such a way that people can understand them.”  Where would we be without expert campaign strategists?

“Elimination of government.” Where did she get that? Though I’d be happy to repair my own streets if people like Carolyn Lin were in charge: I’d be directing the moat digging and the placement of caltrops.

“Establish my own Fire Department?” Hell, Ingham County already tells me I have to establish my own Police Department.

I hope, for UConn’s sake, that parents paying for their children’s education there do not become aware this drivel.