Friday, October 29, 2010


This is one time when I wish to be an Alaskan resident. Since loser, Linda Murkowski, is trying to sabotage candidate Joe Miller's campaign to be the next Republican senator (which he won fair and square), turnabout's fair play, especially in light of the crap shoot the courts are playing.
The court made two opposing decisions in one day about a "list of write in's" at the polling place. Murkowski attempted to re-write the write-in law in her favor. First the law was upheld that no lists were allowed, then later in the day, another court said lists of write-in candidates would be allowed! What is happening to our courts these days, but that's a story for another time.

If you are a resident of Alaksa, or know anyone who is, please pass this plan around. The plan is on the Conservatives 4 Palin website here.

Alaska Radio Host Launches Murkowski Sabotage Plan
by Rachel Rose Hartman

A conservative radio host in Alaska is calling on residents to sabotage Sen. Lisa Murkowski's campaign by flooding the state with write-in bids -- and listeners are following suit.

Kyle Hopkins reports for the Anchorage Daily News that more than 100 people filed paperwork in Alaska on Thursday to register as U.S. Senate candidates.

KFQD 750 AM radio host Dan Fagan is calling the plan an act of "civil disobedience" to protest what he views is an illegal effort by the state to aid Murkowski's write-in campaign. Fagan supports Republican nominee Joe Miller, a tea party candidate who beat Murkowski in a primary upset earlier this year.

A website devoted to promoting Sarah Palin, another Miller backer, dubs the effort Operation Alaska Chaos.

The state Republican and Democratic parties went to court to stop the state from providing voters at polling stations with a list of write-in candidates' names. The parties and other voting-rights advocates argue that the list provides Murkowski with an unfair advantage and violates state law.

That case remains active in the Alaska court system, with the state Supreme Court scheduled to hear oral arguments on Friday.

But Fagan isn't waiting for a last-minute decision. The host hopes that his effort will diminish any advantage Murkowski could receive via the state-sanctioned write-in list, by crowding the list with 100 or so names of new write-in candidates who filed before Thursday's deadline.

(Photo of Murkowski: AP/Chris Miller)

Wednesday, October 27, 2010


We heard him say it with our own ears -- My name is not on the ballot, but my agenda is. In all his speeches, across the fruited plain, for over two years, before a cherry-picked adoring audience, it's always about him. "My name may not be on the ballot, but our agenda for moving forward is on the ballot, and I need everybody to turn out," Obama said Tuesday afternoon during an appearance on the Rev. Al Sharpton's radio show. Is he saying this election is a referendum on him? Sounds like.

On the other hand, House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) had another message: "They can't talk about their record," he said on Monday in a radio appearance. "You know, this election is going to be a referendum on their job-killing policies."

This is the stand that Democrats must play because they cannot stand on their issues. Most of us will never forget that wintry cold Sunday night back in March when they eeked out enough votes to pass Obamacare by two. Most of us will never forget how they did it. It was the straw that broke the camel's back, and why November 2nd is so critical to us. This destruction has been going on for decades.

Basically, it's not any one thing the libs have done, but a sum of its parts. This overreach is a pattern of Democrats, but never on such a grand scale. Another reason why Nov 2nd is more a referendum than an election.

Dennis Prager writes a great piece on this 'Referendum', and what will happen if the Democrats are allowed to continue along this path of destruction. It's an inspiration to get out and vote, to get your neighbors, friends, and family [even foes, if you can convince them) to follow. Our nation depends on it.

P.S. Thought and prayers to Carly Fiorina, and happy to hear you're back out there -- on your way to a historic win!

This Is a Referendum, Not an Election
by Dennis Prager - October 26, 2010

Next Tuesday, Nov. 2, 2010 is not Election Day. It is Referendum Day.

It may be commonplace for commentators to announce that every election is "the most important election in our lifetime" or something analogous. But having never said that of a presidential election, let alone an off-year election, this commentator cannot be accused of crying wolf when I say that this off-year election is not simply the most important of my lifetime. It is the most important since the Civil War.

The reason is that unlike all previous elections, this one is actually a referendum on the direction of the United States of America.

If the Democrats win:

-- The American people have announced, consciously or not, that they support the Democratic Party's "fundamental transformation" -- those were President Obama's words when he campaigned, and he has lived up to them -- of America from a liberty-based state of limited government into an equality-based welfare state with an ever-expanding government.

-- America will change from a country that emphasizes producing wealth to a country that emphasizes redistribution of wealth.

The left has never been primarily interested in creating wealth. Its primary goal always and everywhere has been to redistribute it. That so many businessmen and much of Wall Street are only now awakening to this fact is only a testament to the staggering lack of wisdom in big business.

-- America will produce increasingly narcissistic citizens.

For proof, just look at the virtual shutdown of much of France and the ubiquitous rioting of vast numbers of its citizens over a tiny change in its welfare state -- raising the age of retirement from 60 to 62. The idea that one will work two more years before receiving benefits until death so offends vast numbers of French -- including young people who have every reason to believe they will live until the age of 100 -- that they are fighting it as if their very lives were in jeopardy. That is the self-centeredness that all welfare states engender in their citizens.

-- America will further reinforce the conviction that minorities are victims -- who must be protected from their fellow Americans by the state.

Latinos, blacks, Muslims, gays and vast numbers of women have been told by the left and its political party that they are all persecuted by a country that is SIXHIRB -- Sexist, Intolerant, Xenophobic, Homophobic, Islamophobic, Racist and Bigoted. That America is the least SIXHIRB country in the world is a fact that has been all but drowned out by the left-wing domination of television and print news media, all the entertainment media, and the high schools and universities.

-- America will continue to undermine its unique ability to Americanize people of all ethnic, national, racial, and religious backgrounds

With a Democratic victory the country's very motto -- E Pluribus Unum, "Out of Many One" -- will continue to erode as ethnic and racial identities rather one American identity are increasingly celebrated. Germany's chancellor Angela Merkel has just announced that Germany's experiment with multiculturalism has "utterly failed," but the left and its political party, the Democrats, have redoubled their efforts to supplant E Pluribus Unum with multiculturalism.

-- America will continue its economic slide.

With a Democratic victory, unsustainable debts will mount, wealth-producing companies will continue to flee from higher taxes and more regulations, energy use will be taxed in the name of environmentalist utopianism, and the government will continue to print dollars.

-- America will become increasingly secular.

With a Democratic victory, the left's goal of rendering America's other motto, "In God We Trust," an anachronism will come closer to fruition. Leftism is a jealous god. As in Western Europe, the Judeo-Christian roots of this country are ceasing to play the indispensible moral role they have played since before 1776.

And what would constitute a Democrat victory next Tuesday? Anything other than a Republican landslide. Any other result will be interpreted by the media and by the Democrats as solely a result of the economic recession and as the normal losses of the dominant party in off-year elections.

In other words, the only way to ensure that the electoral results are seen as a repudiation of the growth of the state and the other Democrat and leftist goals is through an enormous Republican victory.

Only then will America understand that this election was not first about jobs. It was above all about America.

Read more Dennis Prager columns here.

Tuesday, October 26, 2010

My Favorite Jim Geraghty (NRO) Quote

Commenting on the intra-party spat between the Democrat nominee for governor in Rhode Island, Frank T. Caprio, and Obama, Mr. Geraghty, of National Review Online, compared it to Shovel Ready Projects. On live radio, Mr. Caprio told Obama to "take his endorsement and really shove it". Originally Obama refused to endorse Mr. Caprio who is behaving like a Republican, but in typical "about face" fashion, Obama changed his stance on the issue, and decided to endorse him while on a campaign stop at a local factory.

From the NYT piece:
More than a political sideshow, the Rhode Island intra-party spat was a stark reminder that the president is willing to go to great lengths to keep his party in power on Capitol Hill – even if it means stepping into a hornet’s nest of local politics and getting stung.
Which leads me to my favorite Jim Geraghty quote:
This may be a "stark reminder" of that, but I don't know. After the declaration that the Cambridge police acted stupidly; the obliviousness to Democrats' worsening political problems for much of the cycle; the inability to move the numbers for Jon Corzine, Creigh Deeds, or Martha Coakley; the presumption that Pennsylvania Democrats would accept Arlen Specter; the ubiquitous vacations and golf rounds; the empty Oval Office address on the oil spill; and the endless invocation of the tired, repetitive, ineffective pushing-cars-out-of-ditches-and-sipping-Slurpees line, it may simply be a stark reminder that President Obama has the political instincts of a standard river trout.

(Side note: I am familiar with taking something -- most often a dissatisfying job--and shoving it. I am not familiar with how "really shoving it" differs from the standard shoving.)
Nicely done, Jim.

– Jim Geraghty writes the Campaign Spot on NRO.

Tuesday, October 19, 2010


In elementary school, our teacher screened a little known Cary Grant film "The Howards of Virginia". Now you might ask, why would a teacher be showing a Cary Grant film during school hours? Well, we were studying American Colonialism (you know, Obama's favorite 'hate America' topic), back in the day when American History was still taught in schools with great detail. It was a film [and subject] I never forgot, and still hold near to my heart today.

It’s about the events leading up to the Revolutionary War, encompassing the early career of Thomas Jefferson. The film pays meticulous attention to detail, and tells the story about pioneers who paved the way for the riches we enjoy today, through hard backbreaking work, untold sacrifices, pain & suffering, and the joy of success.

Juxtapose that with what we have today - - a nation almost 50% dependent on entitlements, most of whom do nothing for it. It’s not surprising that Obama and his ilk want to terminate our Senior citizens, because we know history, and the importance of hard work, charity, capitalism, and above all – freedom.

Is it any wonder why so many of us have gotten our second wind, and mustered up the strength & confidence to get out there and save our great country for our children and our children’s children. Long live the Tea Party and the spirit which drives this great force.

One of our biggest supporters, The Heritage Foundation writes an excellent piece about the Tea Party, what happens when a country is dependent on Big Government, why the Tea Party has grown by leaps and bounds, and why it’s here to stay. God bless Heritage for keeping us so well informed and strong enough to fight Goliath. Consider becoming a member and sign up for their Morning Bell. Check out the link to Jim DeMint's great piece about us in POLITICO.

The Tea Party Is Here to Stay
The Heritage Foundation - October 14, 2010

Today, The Heritage Foundation released its 2010 Index of Dependence on Government. This annual report tracks the growth of dependence-creating federal programs, programs that crowd-out what was once America's great civil society. At one time, social obligations and services were carried out by community groups, family networks and even local governments. Now, an ever growing and ever more unaccountable federal bureaucracy undermines our spirit of self-reliance and self-improvement by making more and more Americans dependent on Big Government. In 2010, we witnessed a record-breaking surge in American dependence on the federal government including:

Government support for dependent persons has grown from $7,293 per person in 1962, to $31,950 per person today (adjusted for inflation).

132.5 million Americans either pay no income tax or live in a household that pays no income tax. This is up from just 34.8 million in 1984.

Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid eat up 41% of all non-interest federal program spending. Unchecked, this will grow to 62% over the next decade.

Not all dependence is bad. As Heritage Foundation Center for Data Analysis director Bill Beach writes: "People spend most of their childhoods utterly dependent on their parents, and many people will rely on caregivers during their last years. Dependence on family, neighbors, fellow members of community groups, and—yes—local government is the normal, everyday stuff of life." But dependence on the federal government is categorically different. Federal government aid does not strengthen communities and families: just look at how the federal welfare system undermined family structures and hollowed-out communities for a generation.

Worse, federal government programs quickly become a drain on the vitality of the nation. Jonathan Rauch explains in his book, "Government's End": "By definition, the power of government to solve problems comes from its ability to reassign resources, whether by taxing, spending, regulating, or simply passing laws. But that very ability energizes countless investors and entrepreneurs and ordinary Americans to go digging for gold by lobbying government. In time, a whole industry - large sophisticated, professional, and to a considerable extent self-serving - emerges and then assumes a life of its own. This industry is a drain on the productive economy, and there appears to be no natural limit to its growth."

But there is still hope for our country: the Tea Party. Decentralized and skeptical of central authority, the Tea Party offers baffled politicians and lobbyists no one to co-opt. Sally Oljar of Tea Party Patriots recently told Rauch: "Our real mission is education and providing resources to grassroots activists who want to return the country to our founding principles. We recognize that's going to require a cultural change that will take many years to accomplish."

The Heritage Foundation fully supports their endeavors and believes the Tea Party movement is here to stay. Heritage Foundation president Ed Feulner and Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) write in today's Politico:

Americans have been disappointed by leaders in both parties who campaigned to right past wrongs and then, after getting to Washington, cared more about power than promises. Tea party supporters care more about principle than party labels or politics. ... [T]he tea party has roots that are deeper and aim higher. Deeper because it is within the best tradition of popular movements in our history — from the Great Awakening that gave rise to the American Revolution to the conservative revival that helped elect Ronald Reagan. Higher because it aims to recover our moral compass, bequeathed by our Founders and preserved ever since.
Some past grass-roots movements have succeeded, and others have failed. Success comes because the energy of the moment is translated into a lasting, governing philosophy consistent with the settled opinions of the American people. On this score, prospects look good. The tea party isn’t about to go away after the November elections. Its powerful message of limited government is likely to remain a sharp thorn in the side of those in both parties who want to continue politics as usual.

As The Daily Caller notes today: "The Heritage Foundation think-tank has made it clear: they may be an established conservative organization, but they’re with the Tea Party activists who’ve risen up to protest Washington’s old ways." The only way for us to end the era of big government dependency is to fight against it together. As Ed Feulner would say: "Onward!"

Monday, October 18, 2010


Join or Die
by Benjamin Franklin
Cartoon in the Pennsylvania Gazette
May 9, 1754

In his well known best humor, Ben Franklin wrote a satirical commentary in his Pennsylvania Gazette suggesting that as a way to thank the Brits for their policy of sending convicted felons to America, American colonists should send rattlesnakes to England. Three years later, his infamous cartoon was born with a more serious edge.

This cartoon shows a snake cut into eight pieces, each labeled with the name of one of the colonies. The position of each colony in the snake corresponds to the geographic position of the colonies along the American coast, with the snake's tail pointing south and the head pointing north. The colonies, from tail to head (south to north), are: South Carolina, North Carolina, Virginia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, New York, and New England (New England refered to the colonies of Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, and New Hampshire). The caption reads, "JOIN, or DIE."

The cartoon appeared along with Franklin's editorial about the "disunited state" of the colonies, and helped make his point about the importance of colonial unity during the French and Indian War. At the time, there was a superstition that a snake which had been cut into pieces would come back to life if the pieces were put together before sunset.

The Gadsden Flag
By 1775, the snake symbol wasn't being printed in newspapers, but was appearing on uniform buttons, paper money, banners and flags. The snake was no longer cut in to pieces, but shown as a coiled American timber rattlesnake.

Some Marines enlisting in the fall of 1775 were carrying drums painted yellow, emblazoned with a fierce rattlesnake, coiled and ready to strike, with thirteen rattles, and the motto "Don't Tread on Me" and the beginning of a new flag was born.


This knocked me over. If anything should alarm you, it would be the possibility of this happening. Rush Limbaugh closed his show today with a knock-out punch:

"To help Obama achieve his agenda, get rid of Congress, get rid of the Supreme Court, and shred the Constitution!"
Holy Cow!

This was Rush's final advice to a Teacher/Mom who was desperate to spare her child from writing an essay on how to help Obama advance his agenda. It doesn't take Rush long to respond with another pearl of wisdom, and at the final break -- he delivered one of his best!

This is what we have to deal with in our public schools, and another excellent example why our education system should not be in the hands of government, too tempted to form the minds of our young.

An observation: These past few days, Obama has sounded desperate, shreaking, and out-of-sorts. Can anyone remember when he actually did something presidential? After a much anticipated lame duck session, Obama will be back on the road again, doing what he loves best -- campaigning. This time, for his election.

Can we ever catch a break?

Sunday, October 17, 2010


There is a lot of concern for voter fraud in the Nov 2nd election, but we have learned a few things since the 2008 election -- it's rampant. The dismissal of the New Black Panther voter intimidation case, and just recently Michelle Obama's unlawful electioneering at a Chicago polling place has hit a nerve. As atrocious as these two examples are, they pale in comparison to the illegal votes cast, or votes prevented from being cast.

Gigi Gaston, a Democrat, is a filmaker and director of a documentary "We Will Not Be Silenced 2008" which reveals alarming voter fraud completely ignored by the press and law enforcement. This election must be different, with thousands of 'watchdogs' out there carrying cameras, videocamera, or a cell phone with both.

By now, it is apparent to many that applying the laws of our country has become a game of eenie-meenie-minie-moe. This election is our chance to bring back our country, founded on Judao-Christian principles and rules of law that apply to everyone. This election is our chance to stop this "fundamental transformation of the United States of America".

Pajamas Media has a new initiative for election day 2010 called "VOTER FRAUD WATCH" and is laid out by CEO Roger Simon, where all us little Star Reporters can report "Something Fishy".

‘Voter Fraud Watch’ — Uncle Pajamas Wants You!
by Roger L. Simon - October 10, 2010


PJMedia is announcing a new initiative for election day 2010 — “VOTER FRAUD WATCH.” This initiative is to be carried forth on Pajamas Media and PJTV.

As almost everyone would agree, in a democracy the integrity of the vote is paramount. If significant fraud or intimidation occurs at our polling places during an election, our democratic system of government is in peril.

PJMedia has been at the forefront of this struggle for integrity of the vote, most recently via its coverage of the Department of Justice/New Black Panther controversy. This coverage was led by DOJ whistle blower and former attorney in the department’s voter rights division, J. Christian Adams. Mr. Adams has agreed to lend his legal expertise to “Voter Fraud Watch.”


Under “Voter Fraud Watch” PJMedia seeks to develop a network of citizen journalists/poll watchers to monitor as many polling places as possible across the nation on election day. These people would report back to us — with either video, still photos, text or some combination thereof — on cases of voter fraud, intimidation or other voting malfeasances they may encounter. We will then cover these occurrences heavily on Pajamas Media and PJTV and promote them to the media at large.

It should go without saying that we expect these reports to be made irrespective of the political party or ideology of the person or persons involved.


Most important are voter intimidation and “electioneering within X feet of the poll.” (The X is there because this distance is matter of state law. Please check the requirements in your state.) These areas are obvious and visible.

According to Christian Adams, other areas of interest are:

1. Forced assistance. Everyone has a right to have someone help them vote, except their employer or union representative. But all too often forced assistance is imposed on elderly voters. The voter doesn’t get to vote, but instead the assistor votes for them. This allows large numbers of votes to be cast by a single machine connected assistor. This particularly corrupts the “down ballot” contests where the voters would otherwise have no idea for whom to vote.

2. Registration fraud. In many places, political organizations are submitting large numbers of registrations. Often they are duplicates, meaning someone gets registered multiple times. They are often deficient, and do not include information such as Social Security numbers or DL numbers. If they are registered without these numbers, as many often are, there is no assurance that these are real people. In states without voter ID, they will be able to vote as ghost voters.

3. And, of course, dead voters.

We would also be interested in instances of behavior that, while not strictly illegal, arguably stretch ethical limits for voting in a democracy. Again, this would be irrespective of political party or ideology.


The methods for uploading these election day reports are still evolving, but will be publicized on Pajamas Media and PJTV shortly. Our producer/editor Bryan Preston is preparing an instructional video on “best techniques” for shooting and uploading video in the field with Flipcams, iPhones, Blackberrys and other cellular phones. He will also be producing a test video from an actual polling place in his home state of Texas, where the polls open for early voting a couple of weeks in advance of election day on November 2.

But none of these methods and techniques are helpful without you. We need your participation in the project in the form of suggestions now (please leave them in the comments section below) and in the field on election day. In all areas you are allowed to bring a camera to the polls and photograph outside. In some you are allowed to photograph inside. Again, this is a matter of state law.

In any case, if you would like to join us in this project, and we hope you do, contact us at Please indicate your area of the country and level of video and/or camera expertise. We are aware that other organizations have taken an interest in voting matters this election and would be pleased to cooperate with them as well.

We look forward to more dialogue on this topic in the very near future. Don’t forget to leave your suggestions.

Roger Simon is a mystery writer, screenwriter and CEO of Pajamas Media.

Saturday, October 16, 2010


Beware the rabid dog. Liberals are licking their wounds, and in recent rallies, Obama has sounded desperate, fatigued, and completely out of sorts. In a recent statement, he was at his race-baiting best and played the Rosa Parks card. Claiming that he had pulled America out of the ditch the Republicans had made, he said:

"We can't have special interests sitting shotgun. We gotta have middle class families up in front. We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for the ride, but they gotta sit in back."
Stooping to a new low, Obama used a racially charged pajorative that no other leader would be able to get away with. In this Univision interview, he is more divisive than ever before, making America out to be the enemy. With just one week until this critical election, apparently there are no holds barred, including lambasting your own country. This is a president who is suing one of our sister states, and asking Latinos to join the fight against the enemy -- America. Could he be any more divisive?

On the other hand, Democrats are sounding like Ronald Reagan all of a sudden. This is when the libs are at their worst, and the fangs will come out with just days before the election. It's known as the October Surprise, and I'm not talking baseball.

I remember the 1992 Senatorial election between Bruce Herschensohn and the evil Barbara Boxer. Herschensohn had closed a double digit gap, and a desperate Boxer came out with a smear tactic in the eleventh hour before the election accusing him of frequenting strip clubs.

Herschensohn admitted that he had visited a strip club with his girlfriend and another couple once, but that didn't matter to Boxer. She took a one time incident and exploded it hours before the election, costing, what many believe, the election for Bruce Herschensohn. Ironically, Mr. Herschensohn is one of the rare and decent politicians we have had in decades, and Boxer tried to destroy him.

Although his campaign attempted to expose Boxer's deception, she won by five points -- and we're still stuck with her. Who can forget her lambaste of Brig. Gen. Michael Walsh to "call me senator". Wake up California!

Boxer has a reputation of pulling out the stops in the eleventh hour. She did it again in 1998 against state Treasurer Matt Fong, accusing him of not supporting patients' right to due HMOs, untrue, but when did the truth matter to Boxer?

We have déjà vu all over again, and be prepared for another Boxer slime blast, Ms. Fiorina, for she will find something, blow it out of proportion, and smear it just before the election with no time to respond, but enough time to do the damage.

Are these the kind of people we want running our country? I don't see conservatives running smear campaigns. They are running on facts, and libs cannot do that, because the facts speak for themselves. It's important to focus on this -- facts not smear, facts not blame -- in the waning days before the mid-term elections. They are so critical.

Forewarned is forearmed. Now, get out and vote.

Friday, October 15, 2010


In the royal court of King Louis Obama and Michelle Antoinette the laws apply to thou but not to them. We have seen this in incidentals such as cauliflower for us but french fries for them; no Las Vegas trips for us but excessive vacations to Europe and Martha's Vinyard for them; Mme Antoinette says Barack "will require you to work" while he plays endless rounds of golf, surpassing the 8 years George W. Bush was in office.

But the most egregious was the dismissal of the New Black Panther voter intimidation case. In the same vein, we now have Michelle Obama stumping for her husband inside a polling place in, of all places, their hometown of Chicago.

The press and the White House are, of course, downplaying this with a "Stand By Your Man" excuse, but if it were First Lady Laura Bush or, heaven forbid, Pat Nixon, they would be up before a Senate hearing.

The man who knows first hand about the New Black Panter case, J. Christian Adams formerly of the DOJ, writes a short piece on the injustice of tyranny in Pajamas Media.

Michelle Obama and Election Integrity
Did FLOTUS flout election law?
by J. Christian Adams - October 14, 2010

The laws are supposed to apply equally to everyone, or so we thought most of our lives. Today Michelle Obama did something that was never tolerated during any of the many elections which I monitored: she politicked inside the polling place. This is the latest example of the Obama administration not believing in equality before law.

Today, when Michelle Obama voted early in Chicago, she reportedly told a voter that he needed to vote to keep her husband’s legislative agenda alive. This took place in an area where such electioneering is prohibited by Illinois law. The law has criminal consequences.

Like the New Black Panther case, photographs exist of the lawbreaking. And like the dismissal of the New Black Panther case, the administration has swung into action to abet lawbreaking. White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said it shouldn’t come as much of a surprise that the first lady supports her husband’s agenda.

Like so much about the New Black Panther case, that isn’t the point. The point is the rule of law, that precious institution that makes America thrive and, in her darker hours, survive. Laws should apply equally to everyone, whether a president or a prisoner. That is the revolutionary idea that drove our revolution.

People like Pete Rose and Richard Nixon learned that America has little tolerance for those who think they are above the law.

Is this the worst thing to afflict an election? Of course not. Armed New Black Panthers were obviously much worse. In the larger scheme of things, Michelle Obama’s lawbreaking is authentic “small potatoes.” But someone in her position has a higher obligation to the institutions our nation treasures, like the rule of law.

The stand-up response from the first lady, and the White House press shop, would be to admit a mistake, affirm they believe in respect of the rules that protect election integrity. But this isn’t a stand-up administration. Like the stonewall that followed the New Black Panther dismissal, we have learned that this is an administration incapable of admitting they screwed up.

What does a ban on electioneering have to do with election integrity? It prevents people from being bothered, coerced, or badgered. A blanket ban on electioneering in the polls prevents both what happened in Chicago today and the thuggery that characterized elections throughout our history. Michelle Obama should step up and admit a mistake, and talk about the importance of laws ensuring election integrity. To do otherwise tells us what we need to know how much they respect election integrity safeguards.

J. Christian Adams is an election lawyer who served in the Voting Rights Section at the U.S. Department of Justice. His website is

Tuesday, October 12, 2010


Barack Hussein Obama's roots are now out of the closet. Will it make a difference? Possibly. By November 2nd? God willing.

Where does Obama's Soviet slanted view come from? In Red State, Erick Erickson writes:

"Why would the President of the United States want to slander 3 million American companies, and their tens of millions of employees? Why would he assume them evil enough to subvert the law deliberately like this? Is the man who got his political start in the home of a terrorist, who spent twenty years worshipping in the church of a man who preached contempt for America, whose childhood mentor was a communist radical, and who shows no more understanding of basic economics than a cliff notes reading of Das Kapital . . . projecting?" (Read full piece here. It's a good one)

Those of us who were listening saw the product of his roots early on. He gave it up when he opened his mouth on the campaign trail mentioning the need for a civilian military "more powerful than our military"; when he told Joe the Plumber (later threatened with an IRS audit) "when you spread the wealth around it's good for everybody"; he revealed it again talking to Wall Street when he said "I do think at a certain point you've made enough money".

But, ladies and gentlemen, we have a president who has lied to the American people so many times during his twenty months in office, it's unfathomable. It's historic. His current deceit has taken on a new dimension. While stumping in Philadelphia this weekend, Obama made the outrageous statement that the United States Chamber of Commerce "was a threat to democracy".

Say what? The only thing that is a threat to democracy is Barack Hussein Obama. In his Cloward & Piven style of destroying our economic structure, he has taken over the industries of auto, banking, insurance, finance, healthcare, and threatens the takeover of unions, natural resources (Cap & Trade), and anything else he can get his hands on.

The issue here is - where's Obama's proof, and more importantly -- where is the press in demanding proof behind this slanderous statement? Why can’t the press, the politicians and the public get beyond the fear of racism accusations and demand proof? Whether it's proof of his recent statements, or proof of his birth, or proof of his academic history, or proof of his legal practice, why is Obama not pressed for answers, where they would demand them of President Bush?

Obama's recent assault on the United States Chamber of Commerce in their use of foreign funds for political use is completely unfounded. His assault on Karl Rove and GOP strategist El Gillespie is also unfounded. Again, where is his proof? Why is no one demanding it? Why is no one questioning his use of foreign funds? There were many loopholes in an investigation of Obama’s 2008 campaign funds, and many unanswered questions. Barack Obama has received more funds from big oil companies, including the foreign country owned BP, from those 'evil' insurance companies, and 'greedy' Wall Street, from millions of anonymous donations, and no one questions it.

Obama is now apparently backing off his vile accusations of the Chamber of Commerce, but he has planted the seed, leaving Vice President Joe Biden and White House Advisor David Axelrod to continue planting the lies. Thugocracy reigns.

Once again, the infamous Ann Coulter quotation speaks volumes:

"You can always tell what the libs are up to, by what they accuse you of doing."

Friday, October 8, 2010


As the Nov 2nd elections are finally within reach, we are witnessing the onslaught of a herd of wolves in sheep's clothing. Suddenly the Democrats are talking like conservatives, but their voting records show these people are lying.

Will Americans be fooled this time? Will they fall for the smooth talking leftists who cannot run on their victories over the past 20 months? Say it ain't so, Joe.

The left voted over 90% of the time with either Pelosi, Reid, Obama, or all three and these three are perfectly happy to be temporarily dissed, as long as the Democrat candidates win, so that they can maintain the absolute power they have enjoyed over the past miserable 20 months.

Shows how strongly they stand behind their principles.

In her Eagle Forum, the quick-witted and knowledgeable Phyllis Schlafly lays out some excellent questions that should be asked of ALL candidates -- of both parties -- to help make that final decision where to cast their vote.

Questions for Congressional Candidates
by Phyllis Schlafly - October 8, 2010

We look forward to the 2010 elections in the hope that we can decisively reject Barack Obama's plans to "fundamentally transform the United States." Here are some questions voters can ask all candidates to help decide whom to vote for.

  • Will you vote against all tax increases and new taxes?
  • Will you vote to extend all the Republican tax cuts?
  • Will you vote to cut federal spending to the pre-bailout level?
  • Will you vote to abolish the death tax without passing a new tax (called "carryover basis") on the sale of inherited property?
  • Will you pledge to vote to repeal Obamacare?
  • Will you vote for legislation providing that all health plans receiving federal tax benefits include the availability of high-deductible insurance with health savings accounts?
  • Will you pledge to enact a government-wide ban on the funding of abortions in any health plan that receives federal benefits?
  • Will you pledge to vote against any form of amnesty for illegal aliens?
  • Will you vote to cut off funds for the Attorney General to sue to get a judge to knock out Arizona's popular immigration-enforcement law?
  • Will you vote to require employers to use the E-Verify system to verify the Social Security numbers of their employees?
  • Will you order the federal government to build the fence on our southern border as legislated in the Secure Fence Act of 2006?
  • Will you send U.S. troops to our southern border to prevent illegal entry?
  • Will you vote for legislation providing that no judge can force the government to communicate with anyone in a language other than English?
  • Will you vote for legislation requiring that aliens seeking to enter or remain in the United States must renounce a belief in jihad, sharia, polygamy, child marriage, arranged marriage, "honor" killings, and female genital mutilation?
  • Will you vote to prohibit Mexican trucks on U.S. roads?
  • Will you vote to stop giving the benefits of U.S. citizenship to babies ("anchor babies") born to illegal aliens?
  • Will you vote for legislation repealing EMTALA (which requires hospitals to provide free medical care to illegal aliens) and limiting Plyler v. Doe (which requires public schools to give a free education to the children of illegal aliens)?
  • Will you vote against any bills that exceed the enumerated constitutional powers of Congress?
  • Will you vote to prohibit the use of taxpayers' funds for any activity designed to promote economic or political union with North America or any foreign countries?
  • Will you pledge to vote No on increased federal involvement in education?
  • Will you urge congressional committee chairmen to hold public hearings on the grab for legislative powers by supremacist judges, and then take appropriate action to require the judiciary to respect the separation of powers?
  • Will you vote to tie federal school appropriations to informed, written parental consent for curricula, surveys, classes or books that may be privacy-invading or offensive to religion or conscience?
  • Will you vote to defund Planned Parenthood?
  • Will you pledge to vote No on any attempt to repeal DOMA?
  • Will you support the right of all fit parents to the care, custody, and control of the upbringing of their children, even if parents are divorced?
  • Will you vote No on any effort to revive the so-called Equal Rights Amendment and on any legislation implying that the ERA, which expired in 1982, is still somehow viable?
  • Will you vote against repeal of the law that forbids open homosexuals from serving in our military?
  • Will you oppose any and all proposals for a national Constitutional Convention (known as a Con Con)?
  • Will you oppose any attempt to bypass the Electoral College by a vote-transfer deceit called National Popular Vote?
  • Will you vote against any legislation to pretend that the District of Columbia is a state and entitled to a state's representation in Congress?
  • Will you vote No on any carbon tax or cap-and-trade bill?
  • Will you vote to eliminate the ban on our favorite light bulbs?
  • Will you vote No on Card Check that eliminates the secret ballot in workers' elections?
  • Will you vote for legislation providing that actions claiming a violation of the Establishment Clause shall not be eligible for an award of attorney's fees?
Questions especially for Senate candidates:

  • Will you vote No on the New START Treaty, which would restrict our right to build anti-missile defenses?
  • Will you vote No on the UN Law of the Sea Treaty?
  • Will you vote No on the UN Treaty on the Rights of the Child?
  • Will you vote No on the UN Treaty on Women (known as CEDAW)?
  • Will you vote against any judicial nominee who espouses the unconstitutional theories of a "living" or "evolving" Constitution, or an "activist" judiciary?
The more Yes answers to these questions, the more support the candidate deserves.

Tuesday, October 5, 2010


Jim DeMint makes an excellent point. In the business [real] world, when an employee is fired they are escorted off the premises and not allowed to return for fear of future damage. What kind of damage can a group of ticked off congressional people do in the Obama Regime? I shudder to think.

The pressure will be on Republicans to cave in to the whim of Democrats, especially towards the holidays, but another one-third of them will be up for re-election in 2012. Although many of us will be overwhelmed during that time, and having been there last year (who can forget the Harry Reid Christmas Eve obamacare vote), it will be time to melt the phone lines -- again.

If not, they will rob us blind. They have a whole Christmas list of items just waiting to ram down our throats, but this is a new era, and Americans saw up close and personal how 'politics as usual' was done. Well, that is no longer acceptable and we can make a difference.

We're reminded that the Republicans did not shove taxes, pork, or earmarks through before the Pelosi Regime took over. Is turnabout fair play? I think not. The Senator from South Carolina, Jim DeMint, writes a great piece on this in National Review Online:

The Fired Congress
In December, more than a dozen senators will come back to Washington and decide how much more tax money to take from Americans, without being accountable to any of them.
by Jim DeMint - October 5, 2010

Some companies have a policy that once someone is fired, they aren’t allowed back on the premises out of fear they might do further damage to the company. It’s too bad Congress doesn’t have the same policy. Because before they’re replaced in January, all of the Democrats who are put out of a job in November will be able to come back and rob the nation blind.

More than a dozen senators will come back to Washington and decide how much more tax money to take from Americans, without being accountable to any of them. Higher taxes, cap-and-trade, amnesty, and card check will be top-priority items for the Fired Congress, otherwise known as the lame-duck Congress. They’re also likely to roll unfinished appropriations bills into a massive, pork-stuffed omnibus to snag every last possible earmark on their way out of Washington.

This must not happen. The only acceptable outcome of the lame-duck session is a continuing resolution to keep government operating at current levels of spending and taxation, as I pushed the Senate to do in 2006 after Republicans lost the majority to the Democrats. No last-minute earmarks, no add-ons, no tax increases, and no big deficit spending.

By simply passing a continuing resolution that kept the government funded at current levels until February 2007, Republicans stopped more than 10,000 earmarks from being enacted and prevented big spenders in Congress from wasting billions of dollars on pork-barrel projects. Then, 2007 became the year without earmarks, because when that temporary continuing resolution expired in February, Congress extended it for the rest of the year. We should adopt the same approach during the 2010 lame-duck session.

To stop a wasteful omnibus and instead secure a continuing resolution, Republicans must hold together. Fortunately, the GOP may have a few reinforcements on the way. Three new senators will take office immediately following the midterms — one each from Delaware, Illinois, and West Virginia, where special elections are being held to replace temporarily appointed senators. And the Republicans running in these races are eager to help.

Illinois Republican Senate candidate Mark Kirk has promised that if he wins, “I will become the 42nd Republican senator, with the opportunity to put the brakes on any lame-duck overreach.”

Delaware Republican candidate Christine O’Donnell has made it part of her pitch, too. “Who do you want serving in that lame-duck session?” she has said. “Someone who’s going to promote that very liberal agenda that can’t even get enough Democratic support, or someone who is going to push back against the establishment?”

West Virginia’s Republican Senate candidate, John Raese, who is up in the polls, has stated unequivocally that he would oppose the Democrats’ lame-duck agenda. He has said, “It is completely inappropriate for House and Senate Democrats, who would be in cahoots with President Obama, to take up any legislation that would significantly affect the country after an election that will considerably alter the political landscape of Congress. Any attempt to do so would be a slap in the face to all Americans who voted for a change from the liberal status quo.”

More candidates should go on the record with such statements. There’s a whole month of campaigning left before the midterms, and voters can extract promises from their elected officials not to let the Fired Congress pass major legislation. This is a reasonable request that even the Democrats should be able to support. Colorado Republican Senate candidate Ken Buck has called on Democratic senator Michael Bennet to promise to oppose any tax hikes Harry Reid may try to ram through during the lame-duck session. All Senate Democrats up for election this year should be asked to do the same.

Getting more elected officials to speak out against a spendthrift lame-duck session can help deter the Democratic leadership from cramming it with votes. It’s been reported that Democrats are considering as many as 20 pieces of legislation to bring up for a vote. After failing to get the New START Treaty (an agreement that hurts America’s missile-defense systems) ratified, to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell,” and to pass legislation to give amnesty to illegal aliens, Democrats see opportunity after the elections, when a number of their members won’t have anything to lose.

Democrats are also hoping that the pressure of a Christmas deadline will get some Republicans to break their way. White House senior adviser David Axelrod recently said he thinks Republicans will “blink” and help Democrats raise taxes as the end-of-the year deadline approaches. Republicans must not cave.

Democrats are playing political games and Americans are going to fire them for it in November. When the Democrats come back in December to box up their personal belongings, Republicans must make sure that’s all they take with them.

Monday, October 4, 2010


Here is a well spoken, strong man. The kind of leader conservatives want, someone unafraid to call a spade a spade, a person of faith, and a person of principles. He is retired Army three-star General Jerry Boykin, and he had a few words to say to CBN news anchor Lee Webb. As Mr. Webb said, he "doesn't pull any punches."

Wonder if he would consider running in 2012....


We are going to start hearing all about a Democrat surge in the weeks and days before our November 2nd historic elections -- especially in light of the highly successful Communist/Socialist gathering of Oct 2nd at our nation's capitol. And you can believe that, as much as a Democrat surge.

CSPAN used an 8-28 rally photo (here) for this Socialist gathering and later had to pull it because they were exposed.  Just goes to show you that the real media is taking hold. It also shows the left is openly embracing their socialist/communist identity.

These people are so desperate, the gloves are coming off (as usual) and the stuff will be slinging right and left -- pun intended. This is where the biased mainstream media will play their most important role to date -- misleading the American people in a pivotal mid-term election.

In case some of us have forgotten, and younger voters have been programmed by the liberal education system, Erick Erickson points out in Red State:

What Was Before Is Again
by Erick Erickson - October 4, 2010

The New York Times ran an article over the weekend that the House of Representatives is still not in the hands of the GOP. A Newsweek survey came out with an oddity of a generic ballot answer. Gallup has been jumping all over the place.

Had I a show, I’d say “roll the tape.” Instead, you’ll have to settle for this.

Here’s Charlie Cook’s review of the October generic ballot data trickling out:

In polls by the Gallup Organization for CNN and USA Today, among all adult Americans, Republicans have now been ahead of Democrats on the generic ballot test in all five surveys taken since mid-August. In the most recent poll, taken last Tuesday and Wednesday, Republicans had a 3-point advantage among registered voters, 48 to 45 percent.

A CBS News poll … among registered voters still found a narrow one-point Democratic edge, 42 to 41 percent, but that’s compared to a 10-point Democratic advantage in October 1992.

An … ABC News poll found a 3-point Republican advantage among adults nationwide, 47 to 44 percent, compared to a 6-point GOP edge in both September and August ABC/Washington Post polls.

Tim Curran in Roll Call noted, “[A] slew of late polls show key races tightening around the country” and there were “indications of a slight Democratic comeback last week.”

Hotline reported “recent polls showing Dems even or leading in generic ballot questions” and asked Bill Kristol for comment. Kristol said, “Republicans have not gotten as many votes across the nation as Democrats in a Congressional race in 40 years.”

Margaret Carlson is on television saying of the GOP’s insurgency, “The corks were popped a little early.”

David Lauter, writing in the Los Angeles Times, reports

Asked which party can do a better job on the country’s major problems, 36% favored Republicans, 29% chose Democrats and 15% said neither party….

The GOP holds similar edges on individual issues, including crime, welfare reform, the economy and the federal budget deficit. Even on health care, where the Democrats once enjoyed a large margin, the two sides are now even, at 38%, with 14% saying that neither party is up to the job.

The GOP edge generally has not come about because Republicans have won major improvements in their ratings as problem-solvers. Instead, respondents turned away from the Democrats, dropping their ratings. Moreover, the percentage saying they think that neither party can handle the nation’s problems has risen.

Yes, yes, the nation hates the GOP, but wants the GOP in charge.

Now, here’s the catch — all of those stories were from October of 1994 ranging from 4 weeks to a week before the November 8, 1994, sweep of the GOP.

The polls were tightening. The Democrats were again neck and neck with the GOP in 1994. Not only that, but the economy had improved. The recession was not only declared over, but employment was significantly on the rise.

The President was on the campaign trail in October of 1994 trying to rev up black voters and telling people not to go back to the era of George Bush. Same this year.

On October 9, 1994, a month out from the November 8, 1994 election, the Washington Post’s Kevin Merida wrote, “One matchup pits William Frist (R), a wealthy heart-lung transplant surgeon from Nashville, against Sen. Jim Sasser (D), an 18-year veteran who chairs the Budget Committee and is making a strong bid to be the next Senate majority leader. Though some polls have showed the race tightening, several independent analysts doubt that Frist has enough to knock Sasser out. But he is trying.”

Bill Frist won the race 56% to 42%.

Read more Erick Erickson here.

Saturday, October 2, 2010


As the November 2010 mid-term elections approach, it is more and more apparent they will be the most critical elections in modern times. For decades, our Constitution has been under attack [ironically] by our court system, led by statist administrations.

If America is to "keep" the republic that Ben Franklin warned us about, we must learn and understand our founding documents. We should learn that it is not a living document, but rather a legal document to preserve individual justice -- not social justice. Its genius is its simplicity.

Obama is chomping at the bit to "fundamentally transform" our founding documents through the courts, as he believes they are a "charter of negative liberties". This is where the 'transformation' of our country will happen -- through liberal far left judicial appointments, and a weak Republican party afraid to stop this assault.

Eagle Forum has put together their "Court Watch", and will have continuing presentations and tools to help us fight and revive our Constitution. Sign up for their updates and join the fight.

Our Dying Constitution - and How To Revive It, III
by Phyllis Schlafly - October 1, 2010

With barely one month remaining before the pivotal elections of 2010, economic policy continues to attract more attention than any other issue area. But the most critical issue in this election — as in American politics and law in general — is the continuous dying process of our venerable Constitution and how we can — MUST — revive it. This issue of constitutional health and survival is gaining more prominence in the public eye, and Court Watch shall continue to focus on Reviving the Constitution! in this series of "Court Watch Briefings."

While our current constitutional miasma is perceived by many Americans as the pernicious product of a Democrat-controlled Presidency and Congress, the court system has actually been for decades leading the battle against the Constitution. Our current deplorable condition was described most forcefully by former U. S. Senator Sam Ervin (D-NC), whose words bear repeating here, as in recent "Court Watch Briefings" on "Our Dying Constitution. In 1981, Ervin wrote that

The usurpation of this power [to amend the Constitution] by Supreme Court Justices does not prove that the Constitution is a living instrument of government. On the contrary, it proves that the Constitution is dead, and that the people of our land are being ruled by the transitory personal notions of Justices who occupy for a fleeting moment of history seats on the Supreme Court bench rather than by the enduring precepts of the Constitution. [emphasis added]
In order to revive the Constitution, we must understand as much as possible about the nature and exercise of the "enduring precepts of the Constitution" and how they are being tossed aside like straw in a windstorm by the "transitory notions of Justices who occupy for a fleeting moment of history seats on the Supreme Court Bench." A firm foundation for our understanding is provided by the preeminent British legal scholar, H.L.A. Hart of Oxford University (Hart is known as the "Father of Neo-analytic" or "Linguistic" "Jurisprudence," and has been cited in at least three different U. S. Supreme Court cases).

In the mid-Twentieth Century, Hart designed a model of a "legal system"; and this model can be applied by us to guide us in our fight to revive our American constitution. In the simplest terms, Hart's model reveals that there are critical characteristics which any legal system must embody if it is necessary to survive and thrive. These critical characteristics we can describe as the "three Cs" — certainty, consistency, and continuity. These three Cs are the focus of Talking Point #1 of the "Fundamental Four" facts which we described in our last "Court Watch Briefing" as truth statements essential to reviving our Constitution.

"Certainty" means that laws (or court decisions) can be objectively and clearly understood. If a body of court decisions considered authoritative at any one point in time contains uncertain decisions, "chaos," not "certainty," marks the system.

"Consistency" means that no individual judicial decision should contain one portion that conflicts with another portion. Similarly, judicial decisions at a particular point in time should not contradict one another. If either condition exists, "contradiction," not "consistency" plagues the legal system.

The critical characteristic of "continuity" requires that a legal system must consist of continuous judicial decisions. That is, current decisions must be consistent with past decisions unless there is authoritative, compelling reason for change in the decisions (the most important reasons being that the U. S. Constitution demands the change). If continuity is not maintained, the legal system will suffer from "convolution."

In upcoming issues of our "Court Watch Briefings," we shall examine the judicial attack on the three Cs and the Constitution. And in the immediate future, we should use these three markers as additional means of evaluating the views and actions of candidates in the 2010 elections. If our Constitution suffers long enough and badly enough from a loss of the three Cs, we will, to use Professor Hart's terms, deteriorate from a mature/healthy system to a primitive/moribund system. The long-term result? Daniel Webster prophesied the sad but predictable result:

. . . if these columns [of American constitutional liberty] fall, they will be raised not again. Like the Colosseum and Parthenon, they will be destined to a mournful and melancholy immortality. bitterer tears, however, will flow over them than ever were shed over the monuments of Roman or Grecian art; for they will be the monuments of a more glorious edifice than Greece or Rome ever was — the edifice of constitutional American liberty.
EVERY AMERICAN PATRIOT SHOULD — AND CAN — UNDERSTAND AND EFFECTIVELY FIGHT TO REVIVE THE CONSTITUTION. SOUND INTIMIDATING? THE BLACKSTONE INSTITUTE CAN HELP! Available online or directly from Blackstone are educational weapons to start you on your mission. (Each of the following can be studied individually or in groups.) These weapons include:
  • "Courting Justice Blitz": a spectacular 45" multi-media DVD and printed materials overviewing the battle to Revive the Constitution and the RTC Plan "Blackstone Blitz": two 55-minute "whiz-bang" multi-media online presentations with printed materials arming you to attack Reconstructionism and defend Constitutionalism
  • The "Basic Blackstone": our "must-read" piece, included in each of the Blitzes (and available separately), and containing the new second edition of our premier "Constitutionalist Manifesto" and "Constitutionalist Papers"
  • Our bombshell "Mega-Blitz": created by combining two Blitzes into a single study to be covered in four separate sessions, a four-hour workshop/seminar, etc.


Friday, October 1, 2010

TIMES, NEWSWEEK Hit O'Donnell, Skip Coons Record

As the onslaught of dirty politics rears its ugly head roughly 30 days from Election Day, there's a battle between the biased mainstream media and the truth. This is a battle conservatives have been fighting for decades, but since the arrival of The Chosen One, it has become blatantly open.

Since the new millennium, the internet has opened doors the mainstream media is wishing never happened. Because of their blatant bias, people are starved for other resources which the internet provides worldwide. There is a wealth of information conveniently at our fingertips, and the mainstream media has lost its followers to the point of near extinction.

Buckle up, Voters -- it's going to be a bumpy [sic] ride. Stay strong, stay informed, and above all -- stay engaged!

Jeffrey Lord writes a brilliant analogy in great American Spector:

Times, Newsweek Hit O'Donnell, Skip Coons Record
by Jeffrey Lord - September 30, 2010

So here they come. Again.


The Left Wing Media Machinus Maximus once more trundles the old rusty guns into place and starts firing…sort of. These old cannons date back to at least the late 1940s. Let's run the list.

1948: Congressman Richard Nixon becomes famous as the man who helped Time magazine editor Whittaker Chambers reveal Alger Hiss, a Harvard Law grad and ex-aide to FDR and Truman, was in fact a Soviet spy. The accusation turns out to be true and Hiss goes to jail.

RESPONSE: Media smears both Nixon and Chambers. Nixon, nominated for VP on Eisenhower's ticket in 1952, is accused of unethical behavior in a "scandal" that involves a fund in which wealthy supporters pay for travel expenses. Nixon is forced to defend himself on television. Opponent Adlai Stevenson has same kind of fund, media doesn't care.

1951: William F. Buckley, Jr.'s first book, God and Man at Yale, is published.

RESPONSE: Among a list of of charges, Buckley is accused of being a Nazi, a Fascist, a Stalinist and…oh yes…simply obnoxious.

1964: Barry Goldwater is nominated for president by the GOP, beginning of the modern conservative movement success in presidential politics.

RESPONSE: Goldwater is accused of wanting to drop nuclear weapons on Vietnam, racism, mental instability, in need of a psychiatrist, supporting violence, and being a Nazi sympathizer.

1966: Ronald Reagan runs for Governor of California.

RESPONSE: Reagan is accused of being an extremist, a nut, a member of the John Birch Society, an idiot, stupid, dumb a Fascist and a racist.

1988: Dan Quayle is nominated for vice president by the GOP.

RESPONSE: Quayle is accused of being not very bright, dumb, an air-head, a fool, a draft-dodger.

2000: George W. Bush is nominated for president to run against Al Gore.

RESPONSE: Bush is accused of being dumb, stupid, a hopeless drunk, a fascist, a fundamentalist Christian extremist.

2004: Dick Cheney is re-nominated for vice-president.

RESPONSE: Cheney is accused of being a right-wing fanatic who wants to blow up the world, evil, a habitual liar, a Fascist, a Nazi and a racist.

2008: Sarah Palin is nominated for vice president.

RESPONSE: Palin is accused of being dumb, stupid, a right-wing crazy, and idiot and a fool.

2010: Sharron Angle, Rand Paul, Marco Rubio, Mike Lee, Joe Miller, and now Christine O'Donnell are all nominated in upsets of conservatives over the GOP Establishment.

RESPONSE: All are accused of being wackos, idiots, extremists, dumb, crazy and more.

Today, the New York Times runs a hit piece on Christine O'Donnell painting her as a "perennial protest candidate" and "provocateur," and slams her for not catering to the national media (hmmm.) Newsweek discusses her "notoriety."

This after a campaign in which Ms. O'Donnell has been pictured as…you guessed it…a nut, a slut, an idiot, dumb, a witch, a fool, crazy as a bedbug etc.

And…oh yes… Bill Maher openly tries to blackmail O'Donnell with a threat to run old clips from a failed TV show unless she does what he wants -- come on his show.

Does anyone notice something peculiar here?

When did this kind of thing begin?

That's right -- the late 1940s. Just as the Cold War began with what proved to be a fifty-year-plus death struggle between the Communist Soviet Union and the United States. And what has been the compelling issue in American political life from that time to this very day?

Let's let William F. Buckley sum it up: "I believe that the duel between Christianity and atheism is the most important in the world. I further believe that the struggle between individualism and collectivism is the same struggle reproduced on another level."

Today the collectivist media crowd swipes yet again. From Nixon to Chambers to Buckley, Goldwater, Reagan, Quayle, Bush. Palin and today's O'Donnell, Angle, Miller, Paul, Lee and Rubio -- and conservative media from Fox News to talk radio -- the song is always the same. Only the verse is different.

And the opponents? The liberal in-crowd? The liberal media Double-Standard is always, always in play. From Alger Hiss to Chris Coons they have gotten press that makes them everything from demi-Gods to just swell happy-go-lucky Joe averages. The Times presents Coons today as "happy to tick off events" he's attended, just a determined hard-worker busily engaged in "retail politics." And so forth. Nary a word about Coons stonewalling on controversial Yale Divinity School courses from which he says he draws his values that he will take to Washington. Zero on Coons bringing his social justice theories to New Castle, Delaware public policy. Less than zero on his devotion to liberation theology. Nothing. Nada. Zip.

Everybody gets the game. And the game is over.

Read more great Jeffrey Lord here.