My apologies to my Leftish friends

(HH here: Hey, I TRIED, I really did. After having a shot sent across my bow by a moderate but besieged by Leftists and too timid to piss them off friend about being too “conservative” I TRIED to find something juicy for me to rant about the Rightists regarding.

The problem is that between the Left’s determination to sanctify every barbarism of the third-world and the Obama administrations links to people and groups my dog Nikita can see are radicals the Right does not have to stick its neck out far at all to score a juicy story. Heck, right now it is too easy to be a Conservative or Moderate blogger. The stories just fall off the trees at our feet.

So, I went to WND; then I went to the Christian Coalition site (you KNOW it is not a good day for the Left when 4 out of five CC stories actually sound reasonable to a spiritual agnostic of Moderate/Liberal tendencies.) And finally on to Huffington Post hoping that the bastion of Leftishness would have at least one or two good digs at legitimate Rightist silliness.

This is just not my day. Or not my friend’s day at least. I found no stories to make her want her friends to see my work today. Instead I found another story showing that the Leftists need to drop back ten and punt, their position is hopeless and the high ground fades into the fog of moral ambiguity.

Today on the HP the lead story is a triumphant counter-attack on the vicious GOP smear campaign against the bastion of The Inner City Downtrodden, everybodies favorite Pimp advisor ACORN.

My first reaction to the headline was: Is THAT the best they can do??? Then I read the article and it just got worse. Take a deep breath and hang on to your neurons, we are taking a ride on the Radical Railroad to the Land of Lost Dreams:) Here it is, the blazing bombshell that will silence the evil Rightists once and for all!)

McCain And GOP Used To Be Supporters

(HH: My first impression was probably the same as you or any other intelligent person would have: You mean before anyone knew about their problems?)

On Monday, the Democratic-leaning group ACORN, which has been painted as a criminal enterprise by the GOP for its voter registration and housing policy efforts, pushed back against its critics by producing a photo of John McCain attending its March 2006 rally.

(HH: how is that for a loaded sentence hiding facts behind rhetoric? First they try to claim the mantle of the entire democratic party for ACORN then proceed to imply that their LEGAL voter efforts were the reason for GOP criticism despite the undisputed nature of ACORNS violations of election law and for its unethical activities relating to housing. THis noble organisation, the organization itself proclaims, has pushed back by showing a photo of McCain, a politician, at a rally also attended by ACORN. I for one am convinced, ACORN must be clean If McCain shared a room with them at a rally in ’06!)

It was a reminder that, for all their electoral histrionics, Republicans have aligned themselves with ACORN in the past.

Indeed, in addition to the McCain photo, there is a host of examples of prominent McCain surrogates attending ACORN events, signing ACORN legislation, or complimenting the group’s efforts.

Florida Gov. Charlie Crist, for example, partnered with ACORN in March 2008 for a “Homeownership Promotes The Economy” taskforce. More recently, Crist declared that — contrary to GOP outrage — he was not upset with the group’s voter registration efforts in his state. The New York Times reported that ACORN supported a law signed by Governor Crist, which “changed the rules last year to restore the voting rights of about 112,000 former convicts.”

In July 2005, meanwhile, another Republican governor, Rick Perry of Texas, signed ACORN’s Lending Law Reform Bill that changed the state’s homelending practices.

In July 2008, California Governor and McCain supporter Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a bill that ACORN helped draft aimed at California homeowners facing foreclosure.

(HH: here is something to take note of for any future political radicals. Form a group, pretend you are mainstream and take notes and pictures whenever opposition or moderate politicians of any kind have anything to do with you. THEN, when you get hauled up for your radical agenda you can ignore the actual charges and have Huffington Post prove to the world that your were always clean by your association with folks you have spent your life demonizing. Excuse me while I go wash my mouth out.)

In June 2007, Minnesota Governor and McCain VP short-lister Tim Pawlenty signed a similar bill — drafted by ACORN — that helped homeowners get fairer deals on their mortgages.

(HH: now we get into true psychotic territory. The next couple paragraphs make the argument that the legislations that the GOPers participated in with ACORN leading the way were MISTAKES and bad legislation!!!! Shame on those Righties for not seeing the con! I guess if they got away with it a few times ACORN must be clean.)

The legislation was drafted according to recommendations made by a predatory lending study group established by Swanson prior to the legislative session,” wrote the Northwestern Financial Review. “The study group contained representatives from the banking industry and the mortgage brokers association, as well as consumer advocates from organizations such as Illegal Aid and ACORN.”

As Governor of Massachusetts, Mitt Romney signed an anti-predatory lending bill that ACORN supported. In February 2006, Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman met with the ACORN Katrina Survivors Association. And back in July 2005, New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg actually got a kiss from ACORN’s state leader, according to the publication City Limits, during an announcement that the city would protect or create 65,000 affordable units in a new housing proposal. Bloomberg, it should be noted, has not endorsed a candidate.

(HH: The thesis seems to be that since ACORN did such a good job at pretending to be a real public benefit organisation that it MUST be always and forever treated that way.)

It would be, in a normal political context, highly unremarkable that Republican and Independent officials would praise and work with a group as large and influential as ACORN. But in recent days, it seems, Republicans and the McCain campaign are keen on painting the community-organizing group as something inherently corrupt. The primary target of complaint has been the organization’s voter registration efforts, which have led to numerous non-existent individuals being put on the rolls.

(HH: Gee, it is not like ACORN had over 70% false registrations now is it? Anything over 35% legit should count as a good effort!)

Recently the McCain campaign went farther, releasing a web advertisement that linked Barack Obama to ACORN, and blamed the group for helping instigate the crisis in the nation’s housing market — itself a contributor to the financial mess.

(HH: I think it would be more accurate to say an advertisement that publicized the factual, historical career-long links that Obama has had with the organization and its training and tactics. this is NOT a legitimate concern? We could be upset, and I was, about Bush and his links to the Saudis but I can’t be upset about Obama being linked to an obviously suspicious organization?)

ACORN “bull[ied] banks” and engaged in “intimidation tactics,” says the ad. “ACORN forced banks to issue risky home loans. The same types of loans that caused the financial crisis we’re in today.”

ACORN has insisted, in the wake of these and other attacks, that it has been firm in its advocacy for regulations to “protect homeowners from predatory lenders.” And certainly, they have a handful of prominent Republican officials who, at one point in time, agreed.

(HH: Over and over I hear a voice screaming in my head as I read this piece. It is filled with the kind of frustration you only find in a spoiled two-year old that can’t go outside unless they put on their shoes. The voice screams “We were THERE!!!! We had it in our HANDS. We were legit, we had FUNDING for Christ’s SAKE!!!!! Even the GOP had to talk to us. Now where is it all? IT ISN”T FAIR!!!!! We coulda been a contender! We could have had our revolution!” Frankly, I expect the entire ACORN organization to turn blue from holding their breath any minute now.
Not long ago it was the Right that would scream “not Fair” every time they were called on sillyness by their extremists, now it seems to be the Left’s turn. I would hope to see a better grade of defense though. This is just sad.)

Read more at:

Why are so many on the Left enamored with Islamism?

Romancing the Jihad
Why are so many on the Left enamored with Islamism?

By Clifford D. May

Ask those on the Left what values they champion, and they will say equality, tolerance, women’s rights, gay rights, workers’ rights, and human rights. Militant Islamists oppose all that, not infrequently through the application of lethal force. So how does one explain the burgeoning Left-Islamist alliance?

I know: There are principled individuals on the Left who do not condone terrorism or minimize the Islamist threat. The author Paul Berman, unambiguously and unashamedly a man of the Left, has been more incisive on these issues than just about anyone else. Left-of-center publications such as The New Republic have not been apologists for radical jihadists.

But The Nation has been soft on Islamism for decades. Back in 1979, editorial-board member Richard Falk welcomed the Iranian revolution, saying it “may yet provide us with a desperately-needed model of humane governance for a third-world country.” Immediately after Sept. 11, 2001, longtime Nation contributor Robert Fisk complained that “terrorism” is a “racist” term.

It is no exaggeration to call groups such as pro-appeasement. Further left on the political spectrum, the A.N.S.W.E.R. Coalition sympathizes with both Islamists and the Stalinist regime in North Korea — which is in league with Islamist Iran and its client state, Syria. Meanwhile, Hugo Chávez, the Bolivarian-socialist Venezuelan strongman, is developing a strategic alliance with Iran’s ruling mullahs and with Hezbollah, Iran’s terrorist proxy.

In a new book, United in Hate: The Left’s Romance with Tyranny and Terror, Jamie Glazov takes a hard look at this unholy alliance. A historian by training, Glazov is the son of dissidents who fled the Soviet Union only to find that, on American campuses, they were not welcomed by the liberal/Left lumpen professoriate.

Glazov’s book indicts artists and intellectuals of the Left — e.g. George Bernard Shaw, Bertolt Brecht, and Susan Sontag — for having “venerated mass murderers such as Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Castro, and Ho Chi Minh, habitually excusing their atrocities while blaming Americans and even the victims for their crimes.”

Following the fall of the Berlin Wall, the Left spent several years wandering in the wilderness. Many of them, Glazov suggests, looked upon the terrorist attacks of 9/11 less as an atrocity than as an opportunity to revive a moribund revolutionary movement.

Jimmy Carter, Michael Moore, Noam Chomsky, Ramsey Clark, Lynne Stewart, and Stanley Cohen are among the luminaries of the Left Glazov accuses of having found common ground with Islamists.

He notes that the novelist Norman Mailer called the 9/11 hijackers “brilliant” and their terrorism “understandable” because “everything wrong with America led to the point where the country built that tower of Babel which consequently had to be destroyed.”

And then there is Ilich Ramírez Sánchez, a.k.a. Carlos the Jackal, who in 2003, from his prison cell, published a book called Revolutionary Islam that urged “all revolutionaries, including those of the left, even atheists,” to accept the leadership of militant jihadists, Osama bin Laden key among them. His reasoning: “Only a coalition of Marxists and Islamists can destroy the United States.”

Glazov quotes the British lawmaker, George Galloway, elaborating on the rationale for this coalition. “Not only do I think [a Muslim-leftist alliance is] possible, but I think it is vitally necessary and I think it is happening already,” Galloway said. “It is possible because the progressive movement around the world and the Muslims have the same enemies. Their enemies are the Zionist occupation, American occupation, British occupation of poor countries, mainly Muslim countries. They have the same interest in opposing savage capitalist globalization, which is intent upon homogenizing the entire world, turning us basically into factory chickens which can be force-fed the American diet of everything from food to Coca-Cola to movies and TV culture and whose only role in life is to consume the things produced endlessly by the multinational corporations.”

And in 1979, the success of the Islamist Revolution in Iran depended, in large measure, on the support given by the Iranian Left to the Ayatollah Khomeini. Once firmly in power, the clerical regime repaid its leftist enablers with executions, assassinations, and prison sentences. Evidently, no lessons were learned.

Glazov concludes that the Left’s “romance with Islamism is just a logical continuation of the long leftist tradition of worshipping America’s foes. . . . The Left clearly continues to be inspired by its undying Marxist conviction that capitalism is evil and that forces of revolution are rising to overthrow it — and must be supported.” On that basis, militant Islamism is regarded as a “valiant form of ‘resistance’ against American imperialism and oppression.”

If such values as equality, tolerance, and human rights are crushed in the process, that’s a price many on the Left are willing to pay. Those on the Left who disagree should perhaps speak up more loudly and more often.

— Clifford D. May, a former New York Times foreign correspondent, is the president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on terrorism.

© Scripps Howard News Service