Saturday, April 18, 2009

I am a rightwing extremist

This week a Department Of Homeland Security internal memo - intended for law enforcement only - leaked to the public. The contents have caused quite the firestorm for Janet Napolitano, prompting her to apologize to veterans for the broad smears the memo paints of them. If you have not read the memo, I encourage you to do so here: It's a quick 10 minute or so read, and it speaks volumes about how the government perceives those who disagree with their vision. It essentially reads like a liberal-progressive manifesto. For example, from page 2:

"Rightwing extremeism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements and adherents that are primarily hate oriented(based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups) and those that are mainly anti-government, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration."

I'm certainly glad it specified the definition was broad. To put it in context, if you do not believe in abortion Janet Napolitano now puts you in the same category as neo-nazis and Timothy McVeigh. How about the nineteen states (including Colorado) that have passed or are debating bills enforcing a state's sovereignty? Are they now considered right wing extremist states?

Under this definition, who isn't a right wing extremist? Well, it sounds like if you shut up, nod your head in agreement to everything the Ministry of Truth - I mean, NBC - puts on the air and give up all your rights to free speech, assembly, and arms (you know, the stuff we're granted by that pesky thing called the Constitution) then you may not make the list. But, look at the bright least with DOHS monitoring internet chatter, you know that someone, at least, is reading your blog!

What are your thoughts?

Wednesday, April 15, 2009

Before the liberals attack the TEA parties...

I want to go on record now, before I've read any of the liberal responses, about how I think the liberals will respond to the TEA parties taking place today. Here, in no specific order, are their likely responses:
  1. "Small numbers of right wing extremists don't speak for the majority of the nation." No matter how many thousands turn out (taking the day off from work no less) the libs will call it a "small number" and of course, since it is anti-big government, they are all "right wing extremists." The same number of left wing fringe ideologues, however, would represent significant bi-partisan public support for the Savior-in-chief.
  2. "People who just say no are only obstructionists, and therefore do not matter." Expect this one because, no matter the reason, if one is against Obama's big government, one is "only saying no." Does it matter that much of the discussion is centering on the Fairtax, which has been gaining momentum for years, has been introduced as a bill in the last three sessions of congress, and is an alternative to the punitive progressive tax we have today? No, that matters not to the liberal horde. Alternatives do not matter to them because they don't jive with their ideology, and an ideologue isn't open to alternatives.
  3. "It's all part of the right-wing conspiracy and smear machine." When all else fails, just blame the RWC&SM. Whenever possible, work in a comment about big oil, Halliburton, links to the Saudis and comparisons to Hitler.
Anyway, you can gauge the effectiveness of the TEA movement by the amount of denial of it's relevance. The more the left says it's irrelevant, the more it's getting to our elected officials, who crave re-election above everything else. And that is where we hurt them.

Follow up: check here for a Fox article where ACORN reps hit all three of my predictions!

And here's something just for fun: