In this video, we see a SWAT team has been called in to preserve order in the face of a tea part protest. Note the reaction from the protesters–peaceful compliance.

On the other hand, here is video of protest against the new, strict immigration law recently signed by the governor of Arizona, Jan Brewer. Note the man being escorted away by police. He is a counter-protester whose life was threatened. Note the violence being enacted against the police for protecting the man’s right to life, which these protesters refuse to recognize.

In this second video, we see how liberals, progressives, and socialists treat conservatives. Why the great difference? Because liberals, progressives, and socialists don’t believe in equal rights. They believe only in their own “rights,” which includes the right to take the property of others by violence, as demonstrated by the two losers that stole a backpack from one of the tea party protesters.

Update: my favorite part of the above video is where the communists and liberals are shouting at the conservatives to “get educated,” while holding up a very large sign with word the “immigrant” misspelled (no, people, it’s not spelled “immagrant”). HA! Too much.

Here is another example of the major differences between these two movements (this one was in LA). I guess the Left wouldn’t be the Left if they weren’t looking for excuses to destroy things.

The article mentions that anarchist infiltrators may have been responsible for the damage. Ok…but the Tea Parties also had infiltrators, who were quickly sent packing. The immigration protesters didn’t stop the damage when they could and should have.

Well, he doesn’t hold a candle to Obama’s spendfest in the face of the single largest one-year drop in tax revenues since the Great Depression.

At this rate, Social Security is on track to collapse by 2037, earlier than previous estimates.

Associated Press Image

An excellent point he makes in the essay is that the Declaration of Independence asserts that our Rights (a political term) originate not from our political relationship to a State, but from our religious relationship to the Creator, God.

He points out that the Left has been busy for decades trying to convince people that there is a wall of separation between Religion and the State, and that we should never mingle them.

The old aphorisms, “Religion and Politics Don’t Mix,” and “You can’t Legislate morality” are both products of what Alexander says is a dumbing down of American culture. I would agree. I remember my parents repeating the idea that you can’t legislate morality. It was something they learned in their youth, which was originally passed down from the Progressive movement in America.

If the 60′s did have a silver lining, it was that we learned to question everything. For the Left, it was about questioning the remnants of the Old Authority. For today’s generation, the tables have turned. Now it’s about questioning the authority of the established Left, whose chickens are, indeed, coming home to roost.

If it were up to me, ACORN would be outlawed, for no other reason than the fact that they hired this Mafia mouthpiece from Chicago. The guy is a horrible liar–completely unbelievable.

Then, he has the gall to tell Glenn, “You’re just afraid of Black people.” Glenn tosses the guy out on his butt.

My favorite part is the classic, liberal double-speak (paraphrasing): “We didn’t commit voter fraud, our employees did.”

HELLO!?!

Sen. Arlen Specter

Specter’s move would give the Democrats a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, provided Al Franken wins his bid for the Senate in Minnesota against incumbent Norm Coleman. At this point, it is up to the Supreme Court of Minnesota to determine the outcome. Their ruling will affect the national political landscape.

I am left to wonder what Harry Reid promised Specter in return for his allegiance. Specter complained that the Republican Party has shifted far to the right in recent years. But a closer look reveals that to be a poor excuse. Conservatives across the nation are up in arms right now because the Republicans have ignored them for the most part, governing like Democrats in the last several years. If  Specter really wanted to leave the party because of a shift to the right, why didn’t he do it in 1994 at the pinnacle of Conservative influence in the Republican Party?

This is about Liberal Leftists in government taking more and more power by usurpation, rather than by election. They couldn’t care less what the people want. Pennsylvania didn’t elect a Democrat.

I am anxious to see what effect this has on the electorate. It will give the Liberals in the Senate carte blanche to move their agenda, and shift America even further to the Left. Are we ready to have nationalized health forced down our throats? How about nationalization of the auto industry? The coal industry?

There may be some hope in this, when all is said and done. The Liberal Democrats will be so carried away in the euphoria of their newly acquired power, that they will charge ahead undaunted and unafraid. To borrow a quote from Jeff Goldblum’s character in Jurassic Park, they will be so caught up in whether they can do a thing, they won’t stop to consider whether or not they should. The result may be historic landslide victories for Conservative Republicans in the next three or four elections, as the remaining Liberal Senators are all weeded out.

Patience and Faith, my friends.

Planned Economy or Planned Destruction?

We are apparently pursuing the same, stupid policies that the Progressives did during the Great Depression. Is there anyone out there who believes it will end up differently?

It’s really kind of sad–their positions are so out of touch with Main Street, America that the people would not choose Liberalism if given a real choice.

So, the Liberals begin campaigns of disinformation about Conservatives in an attempt to demonize them, thinking that the people, left with no other choice, will choose Liberalism. They will hold up this most recent election as evidence of that.

The problem is that their efforts work on people who aren’t familiar with the real Conservative movement, those people who only know Conservatism by what the Media shows them on TV.

There are four major Liberal sites (The Huffington Post, Daily Kos, Media Matters, and Gawker) that are carrying an account of what is allegedly a Conservative advocating the burning of college text books at a 9/12 Project gathering. The truth is easily discovered with a little footwork.

There are also plans by Liberal groups to try to infiltrate the Tea Party events and disrupt them, or present themselves as Conservatives with outrageous signs or speech. Their aim is to discredit the Tea Party Movement. Don’t underestimate their cunning and subtlety; they have been doing this for decades.

These people love lying. They believe it gives them power. And, as long as the Move-On Media gives them air time, it will continue to seem that way. Their methods come straight out of Saul Alinsky’s book, Rules for Radicals. Alinsky was a Marxist and a Community Organizer. Sound familiar? It should. Many of Obama’s campigns tactics were borrowed from Alinsky.

The best way to overcome their lies is with the irrefutable truth. So, bring your cameras to the Tea Party events. For every camera they bring to try to discredit us, we want 10 cameras showing the truth. We want to show the world where the truth is.

It demonstrates something we already know–that Obama hasn’t got a clue about running an economy and should simply let the market work. Of course we also already know he can’t do that, for two main reasons: 1) he’s a socialist and, therefore, 2) he is far too committed to his position, and his arrogance will not permit him to admit he’s wrong.

My wife picked up on that attitude in his press conference the other day. Did you notice how he said they were going to try new things, and if they don’t work, they’ll just keep trying? Rather than just leaving things alone to be worked out by the people.

Socialism and Environmentalism are a dangerous mix. Socialists think they can plan the economy, which is bad enough. But when you add overzealous obsession with the environment to the planning, you get all kinds of mischief, poor planning, and failed policies.

I read a story on KSL’s web site dealing with the economy. The comments were a mix of conservative, liberal and moderate posts. The most troubling posts were by rabid liberals who refuse to see what is so obviously right in front of them every day in the news.

Barak Obama is now being criticized for his economic policies by people who were once his supporters, people who see what is happening to the economy, and who rightly understand that this is not solely the fault of George W. Bush.

But some of the comments were written by people who hate George W. Bush, Republicans, and Conservatives so deeply that they refuse to see how Obama has not only failed to turn back the economic policies that began this debacle, but he has actually enhanced and enlarged the scope of the damage with his own socialist policies.

One poster in particular caught my attention. He was posting anonymously, of course, so I don’t know who he was, which is very convenient when you want to avoid criticism.

This person insisted that Obama’s policies were not affecting the economy that badly, that it was Pres. Bush’s fault for not putting a stop to the problem when he had the chance, and attempted to disguise the truth by focusing on the definitions of “deficit” and “debt.” More specifically, he claimed that Obama had not added to the debt, but instead had introduced a larger deficit which would eventually lower the debt. He mentioned that he was an accountant, which he relied upon as his expertise.

Now, if I had an accountant like that, I’d fire him. According to Michael Boskin, an economics professor at Stanford University, Barak Obama has added more to America’s debt than all former U.S. Presidents combined. Those are demonstrable facts, facts Mr. Anonymous Accountant refuses to acknowledge.

While this is admittedly an anecdotal example, it is the rule rather than the exception. Across these message boards, Liberals are in denial about the effects that “Obamanomics” will have on America now and in the future. And some are even embracing the possibilities. Sadly, I don’t think this is accidental. There is a quote commonly attributed to FDR, “In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens you can bet it was planned that way.” Whether he actually said that or not, the principle rings true. Americans have been groomed by the Media and by Liberal educuational institutions to accept and follow a leader like Obama, even if it means the end of America as we now know it. And I believe that has been the hope and the aim of the American Left for a long time.

So far, these people have proven themselves to be irrational, violent, hypocrites who resort to vandalism and book-burning–all the things they have always claimed to hate–when they don’t get their way.

They live in a free society where they are protected by more special legislation, more than any other group in America. But they will not accept the rules of that society and resort to sedition. They don’t deserve the blessings of a free society.