Mitt Romney Heckled in Iowa

This gets pretty heated, especially after 2:00 minutes at the clip:

See Legal Insurrection, "Obama campaign tactics against Romney already surface."



More at London's Daily Mail for the details, "Mitt Romney shouts at heckler as he remains in pole position for president nomination ahead of GOP head-to-head debate."



EXTRA: Robert Stacy McCain's on the ground in Iowa, "Mitt-Mania In Des Moines." Also at Memeorandum.

Prime Minister David Cameron Vows Crackdown on Rioters

Cameron wants to go after street thug anonymity, "Social Media, and Facemasks, Are Targets After British Riots." The full text of the prime minister's speech at BBC, "Riots: David Cameron's Commons statement in full."



Social media's not the problem. And amazingly, some folks are still debating the causes of the rioting, as if sheer hooliganism and evil needed further explanation. More at London's Daily Mail, "Unmask the thugs! Looters will no longer be able to cover up, says PM as he also promises a crackdown on social media AND cash for the rioters' victims."

'Descent Into Evil'

I had this at the blog-item finder, and now it's an essay at New York Post, from John Hinderaker:

What makes the present such a frightening time is that a number of nightmarish phenomena that we had thought consigned to the dustbin of history are reappearing. Rioters in the streets. Burning buildings. Plunging markets and the threat of depression. The scent of socialism in the air.



Who, as of, say, 1989, could have imagined that in barely 20 years, what was then known as the Free World could sink so far?



What we are seeing in London and other English cities is an outpouring of evil. To try to explain evil as the result of something else is almost always a mistake.

'I don't call it a riot... I call it an insurrection of the masses of the people...'

When the riots first broke out I checked over at a couple of the anarchist "occupy everything" blogs and it seems like a lot of them are silent, apparently frustrated at the slow development of revolutionary consciousness. But one needn't look too hard to find deep sympathy for the hooligans (at Comment is Free, for example). Hard-left progressives see in the micreants' criminal thuggery some long needed blows against the capitalist state, even if those were mostly just some deviant losers robbing the shelves blind of goods for which they actually had enough money to purchase. It's not deprivation driving unrest, but hatred of conventional goodness, nurtured by decades of socialist progressivism, manifest in the left's deliberate breakdown of the common family structure, which has left generations of "yobbers" free to destroy property and the sense of sanity in society. Jawa Report posted this video, of Darcus Howe, in which he calls the unrest some kind of dialectical historical moment, "London's Thuggery, Murder, Neo-Marxist, Socialist, etc., etc. Mahem + USDayofRage."

Not surprisingly, BBC is now apologizing for suggesting that the bloke might have been involved. See Telegraph UK, "London riots: BBC apologises for accusing Darcus Howe."



We are witnesses the Mad Maxification of society in the early 21st century.

More Mark Steyn Mania!

At Pundit & Pundette, "After Great Britain."



And at American Glob, "VIDEO: Mark Steyn Explains the UK Riots and More On Hannity."



BONUS: I've meant to post on Melanie Phillips as well, but Blazing Cat Fur beat me to it: "Melanie Phillips on the UK Riots."

Belladonna Rogers: 'Conservatives and Gay Marriage'

The piece is from a couple of weeks ago, and it's very well done, "Conservatives and Gay Marriage: A Guide for the Perplexed." That said, a lot of this is straw man argumentation, with a bit of hopeless defeatism thrown in. Also interesting is her endorsement of Jennifer Chrisler, of Family Equality Council. She's articulate and attractive, and has honed fear-calming to high art. Yet as I pointed out yesterday, these "nice" people are hunkered down inside the Trojan horse driving a radical LGBT agenda that would horrify a majority of Americans if the truth were known. It turns out Chrisler's spouse is Cheryl Jacques, the former Executive Director of Human Rights Campaign, the extremist gay rights organization that rejects the morality and goodness of a majority of the American people. Here's an interesting tidbit from the comments at Popehat:

The radical LBGT agenda is best defined by such a person as President Obama’s Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings program intended to sexualize school chidren. Kevin Jennings agenda would be held in high regard by the NAMBLA pedophiles. Closer to home Scott Brown replaced Lesbian Senator Cheryl Jacques who went to Washington to head up the LBGT Human Rights Campaign. The mission of the Human Rights campaign is to ram gay rights down the throat of the American people. Scott Brown in turn defeated Cheryl Jacques chief of staff Chief of Staff, and openly homosexual Angus, McQuilken. He is also the Chief of Staff of Planned Partenhood League of Mass. Funny how much of this ties together. I believe that we may be on the eve of a new revolution.

Chrisler's spouse is also discussed here: "The FISTGATE Report." No one is saying gays can't make a family. It's a lie though to entertain the notion the gay family values are mainstream. They're not. And gays activists must use subterfuge and thuggery to ram that agenda home.

Related: At Nampion, "Please Don’t Hurt The Gerbil – New And Improved 2011 Version."

Norway, Free Speech, and the Counter-Jihad

From Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer, at American Thinker.

And fro Pamela's introduction at Atlas Shrugs:

Please read the rebuttal that Robert Spencer and I wrote in response to the scurrilous Norway blood libel made against us by media shills and Islamic supremacists. We submitted our piece to publications that damned us and others -- the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Washington Times, the New York Post, National Review, the American Spectator, the London Spectator, the Guardian, and the Wall Street Journal. Nyet. The notorious Guardian, the New York Times, and the Washington Post have published any number of articles smearing us, but would sooner strap on a homicide bomb than let us challenge their lies.



Allow me to extend my deep thanks to the one fine and decent editor who had the integrity to run it, Thomas Lifson of the singular American Thinker.

W. James Casper H8® — Was That Wrong?

The jokes write themselves. After years of fully-documented and systematic stalking and harassment, hatemonger white supremacist W. James Casper H8® has written yet another comedy manifesto attempting to slither out from under his programmatic campaign of hatred and harassment: "Workplace Harassment - (btdt FAQ files)."



And actually, no need to even read the whole thing. Laughingstock Racist = Repsac3 is the blogosphere's George Costanza: "Was That Wrong?"



Stalking, sponsoring workplace intimidation, recruiting attackers against my economic livelihood, posting my college administration's contact information with directions to harass, and hosting commenters spiking the football after workplace contacts: Was that wrong? Oh no, not at all, if you've got the situational ethics of the progressive nihilists. ASFLs. These are the exact same kind of people who'll strip you to your shorts and rob you blind. Fuckers. Don't ever knuckle under to these asshats. Never submit to the mob.

Re-Education Camps

Progressives are calling for the camps. I kid you not. See Matt Welch, "If Only Americans Weren't So Goddamned Stupid We Wouldn't Have to Send Them to Re-Education Camps."



The camps. Progressives love the camps. The world knows what happens in the camps. And the left wants you to forget why they need the camps. Kevin Robbins ASFL wants you to turn away from the camps. Socialism kills. Now time for your reeducation:

Hat Tip: LCR.

London Riots Day 4: Manchester and Midlands on Fire

Criminal unrest continues in Britain as the government struggles to regain control. See Independent UK, "Riots spread north as London cools." And at Daily Mail, "Now it's Manchester and the Midlands' turn as London braces for FOURTH night of rioting." And also Telegraph UK, "London riots spread to Midlands and north-west on fourth night of trouble."

See also Amusing Bunni, "Save Our Streets," Daley Gator, "Would I be wrong to ask just one question concerning the UK riots?," JammieWearingFool, "Heroes of London: 'It Was Like Being in a War'," Right Wing News, "There’s Nothing Wrong With The Government Shooting Looters & Rioters Down Like Dogs In The Street," and Saberpoint, "Massive Rioting in the U.K., Black on White Violence: What's the Solution?"

Also, at New York Times, "Cameron Deploys 10,000 More Officers to Riots," and "London Riots Put Spotlight on Troubled, Unemployed Youths in Britain." (At Memeorandum.)

Joseph Fein Defends Pamela Geller

My friend Joseph Fein, who regrettably I haven't linked here in a while, made a very shrewd argument the other day in his post standing up for Pamela Geller, "History Will Look Kindly on Pamela Geller Not Glenn Greenwald." I'm not so focused on the commentary on Glenn Greenwald, who while I've slammed mercilessly in the past (he's a genuine asshole, frankly), I've also commended him for avoiding the herd Obama cult mentality (I recognize consistency when I see it). What caught my eye about Joseph's essay was this passage on ideological rationalization:

Glenn Greenwald wanted Gay marriage to be the norm in the United States. As a Social libertarian, I see no issue here. As a partisan, I see a weak person who won't even stay in his own country and fight for what he believes in. He expects others to do the heavy lifting. Speaking to partisans who think the same way you do on TV, radio and the Internet does not expand converts. (nor does sock-puppeting).



I voted No on 8; I support any two consenting adults to be happy. But every time Andrew Sullivan attacks Palin's family, I always have to rethink that vote.



Now, compare Greenwald to Pam Geller.

I've highlighted in bold the key sentence, but check the whole post for the context. I'd have to talk to Joseph in person to see how he'd vote on a gay marriage proposition next time around (if it's not decided at the U.S. Supreme Court beforehand), but the key is that Joseph would consider changing his position because of the ideological and political violence of the progressive left's pro-gay marriage ayatollahs. I cringed the other day when Andrew Breitbart announced he'd boycott CPAC over the organization's exclusion of GOProud. It's not so much that GOProud is either in or out at CPAC (I think the group's a Trojan horse but I'd let them compete in the marketplace of ideas rather than exclude them). It's that for all of Andrew Breitbart's super aggressive battles against the institutional left, he obviously doesn't get it on this issue. My sense is that he's got friends who are gay. Fine. So do I. But that doesn't mean one has to capitulate to the progressive barebacking agenda. It's bears repeating and repeating again: Gay activists are the most venal, vicious, and unprincipled political organizers going. It's like Rick Santorum noted the other day, when he suggested that gays enjoy "super rights." Progressive gay activists are the left's ultimate bullies. They are in your face, attacking anyone with the slightest inclination toward tradition as a "homophobe" and "racist." They browbeat, intimidate, and harass to get their way. They've threatened to destroy livelihoods over the simple act of voting on a proposition. They's lied and cheated in public forums, for example, with the mock judicial process that reviewed Prop. 8 in Federal District Court. Basically, they've raped the political process to leverage a disgusting and morally reprobate barebacking, rim-station sexual agenda that majorities of voters have consistently rejected nationwide. Fully thirty states continue to prohibit gay marriage across the country, but the tentacles of deathly progressivism have worked their subterfuge in the more left-leaning states, using all manner of deceit and duplicity to carry the day. Most of all is the sickening progressive discrimination that is the centerpiece of folks like the disgusting perv Dan Savage. I wrote recently on his sick bigotry and hatred of regular people: "Gay Sexual Abandon and the Perverse Inversion of Values by Same-Sex Extremists." The gay progressive program of ideological bigotry works because society has been beaten down by political correctness. No one wants to appear intolerant. No one wants to be attacked as anti "civil rights." The problem of course, is that gay marriage isn't a civil right, although regular people have been so brainwashed by progressive Orwellianism they don't know what is good and moral, and to even speak up for something decent is to be viciously attacked, with people's very lives being threatened. So this is why I think Joseph's rethinking of his vote on Prop. 8 is such an incisive opening on this issue. If it were me I'd leave it to the states, and if the voters choose full gay marriage rights so be it. But the process is hijacked by extremists and thugs, and it's not likely those rights would come around through a free and fair democratic process. And thus those folks so happy to call themselves libertarian on the issue just end up being fellow soldiers in the left's campaign to destroy decency in this country.

Stock Market Plunges

At USA Today, "Crisis of confidence leads to fears of bear market," and New York Times, "Stocks Plunge in Worst Day in Two Years." Also, at Wall Street Journal, "Downgrade Ignites a Global Selloff: Dow's Plunge Worst Since '08":

The downgrade of the U.S.'s credit rating sparked a global selloff on Monday, pushing the Dow Jones Industrial Average to its sharpest one-day decline since the financial crisis in 2008.



In scenes reminiscent of three years ago, selling accelerated as the day went on, and investors were forced to sell to meet margin calls from lenders demanding more collateral. The Dow ended the day down 634.76 points, or 5.5%, at 10809.85, its lowest close since last October. Trading volume of stocks listed on the New York Stock Exchange hit the fourth-highest level in history.



It was the Dow's biggest percentage drop since December 2008 and its sixth-largest point decline ever. Other major stock indexes also fell heavily. Traders also dumped corporate bonds and industrial commodities.



Investors fled to the traditional refuges: gold, currencies of safe-seeming countries such as Switzerland, and, ironically, the very securities that Standard & Poor's downgraded on Friday, U.S. Treasury bonds. For most investors, Treasurys seemed a lot safer than stocks.



Tuesday morning in Asia, Tokyo shares opened lower, falling 3.4% in the first minutes of trading.



The Financial Stability Oversight Council, a group of U.S. regulators led by Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, held an emergency conference call Monday afternoon to discuss the financial-market volatility, a person familiar with the call said.



"There's probably as much uncertainty as we've seen since 2008," said Eric Pellicciaro of asset manager BlackRock's Fundamental Fixed Income division, which has $612.5 billion in assets under management. "There's a general feeling that policy options are few and far between. There's a feeling that fiscal austerity is coming at the worst possible time."

Interesting how Treasury securities remained a safe haven. That can't go on forever.



I'll have more on this tonight.

Newsweek Publishes 'Queen of Rage' Hit-Piece Cover Shot of Michele Bachmann

Go check Michelle Malkin's report, "The Conservative Crazy Eyes Cliche & Other Stupid MSM Photo Tricks."

She's got a larger image of this wild --- and wildly inappropriate --- cover photograph of Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann. The key passage:

Rep. Bachmann is unabashedly conservative, willing to take both parties’ leaders to task, passionate about her work, popular with grass-roots activists on the Right, committed to reining in the size, scope, and power of government, and yes, expressive. For all this, she must be destroyed.

Also:

Disseminating unflattering photos of conservatives isn’t journalism. It’s Alinskyite narrative-shaping.

This comes of course as Michele Bachmann has rocketed to frontrunner status in Iowa. See Rasmussen Reports, "Iowa Caucus: Bachmann, Romney and Paul on Top." The poll samples likely causcus participants and has a 4-point margin of error. It's looking good for Bachmann.



RELATED: At the Other McCain, "Liberal Head-Explosion Warning VIDEO: Michele Bachmann Testifies for Jesus."

America Gets Downgraded

At Wall Street Journal, "A spend and tax policy mix always leads to economic decline":

... is there anything that S&P said on Friday that everyone else doesn't already know? S&P essentially declared that on present trend the U.S. debt burden is unsustainable, and that the American political system seems unable to reverse that trend.

This is not news.

In that context, the Obama Administration's attempt to discredit S&P only makes the U.S. look worse—like the Europeans who also want to blame the raters for noticing the obvious. Treasury officials and chief White House economic adviser Gene Sperling denounced S&P for relying on a Congressional Budget Office scenario that overestimated the U.S. discretionary spending baseline by $300 billion through 2015 and $2 trillion through 2021.

But even adjusting for that $2 trillion would only reduce U.S. publicly held debt to 85% or so of GDP—still dangerously high. And that assumes that recently agreed upon spending caps are sustained over a decade, something which rarely happens.

We think the larger problem with S&P, Moody's and Fitch is that they make no distinction over how a nation balances its books—whether through tax increases or spending reductions. Like the International Monetary Fund, the raters care only about balance.

This takes too little account of the need for faster economic growth, which is the only real path out of a debt crisis. Britain's government has earned rater approval for its fiscal consolidation, but its increases in VAT and income tax rates are hurting its tepid recovery. Letting the credit raters dictate tax increases is the road to an austerity trap.

The real reason for White House fury at S&P is that it realizes how symbolically damaging this downgrade is to President Obama's economic record. Democrats can rail all they want about the tea party, but Republicans have controlled the House for a mere seven months. The entire GOP emphasis in those seven months—backed by the tea party—has been on reversing the historic spending damage of Mr. Obama's first two years.

Continue reading.

IMAGE CREDIT: The Astute Bloggers.

The Progressive-Left's Communist Holocaust Denial

Judson Phillips, leader of Tea Party Nation, is trending at Memeorandum for his statement that...

I detest and despise everything the left stands for. How anybody can endorse and embrace an ideology that has killed a billion people in the last century is beyond me...

Actually, the numbers of those killed under communist totalitarianism probably don't reach one billion for the 20th century, but certainly hundreds of millions were killed during the rule of the Soviets to Communist China, with a turn at genocide in the "paradise" of Cambodia. One commenter at Alan Colmes' "Liberaland" compares the history of left-wing genocide to U.S. support for "death squads in El Salvador." That's the kind of moral equivalence that allows the left's search for ideological utopia to continue and thrive. Jamie Glazov wrote on this specifically, "Cold War Revelations and 'Progressive' Holocaust Denial":

The Western "progressive" milieu's refusal to acknowledge Communist crimes is, of course, rooted in that disease with which we have become all too familiar in the second half of the twentieth century: anti-Americanism. It explains well why not one Revisionist historian, including Gabriel Kolko, has come forward to apologize for his errors. However, the refusal to acknowledge grievous faults on the Cold War, and to seek refuge in other politically correct orthodoxies, is all part of a larger phenomenon: Holocaust denial. A clear analogy can be made between the neo-Nazi Holocaust denial and the Left's refusal to acknowledge Communist Holocaust. In denying that the genocide of Jews occurred, Holocaust denial perpetuates anti-Semitism and keeps it alive. By erasing historical memory, Holocaust denial gives birth to moral relativism, which, in turn, instills a mindset that facilitates the possibility of yet another Holocaust. Holocaust denial, in other words, is the craving for another Holocaust.

This is precisely the case in the Western Left's refusal to acknowledge the genocidal consequences of the socialist idea in the twentieth century. The causes of this Holocaust denial are directly rooted in the Holocaust itself. The Nazi Holocaust, for instance, was the logical outcome of anti-Semitism, but anti-Semites need to keep anti-Semitism alive. Thus, anti-Semitism's existence is kept alive easier if its darkest consequences are supported but simultaneously denied. So too, if Stalinism was the inevitable result of the pursuit of equality, then the belief in the possibility of equality must be kept alive by the socialist milieu. The historical memory and significance of the Gulag, however, must be wiped out.

It's the progressive-left's Communist Holocaust denial. It's alive. And it's deadly.

PHOTO CREDITS: Wikipedia Commons.

The Debt Downgrade Blame Game

I was up in time for the Sunday news shows. I flipped back and forth for a minute between ABC and NBC and finally settled on "Meet the Press." John Kerry and John McCain were interviewed, forgettably, with the exception of McCain's comments on Afghanistan. But the roundtable discussion was a keeper. Former Federal Reserve Chairman Allan Greenspan stole the show (a bit of which can be seen here). But frankly the reason I didn't channel surf further was Rachel Maddow. Maddow is maddening. The S&P downgrade dominated the discussion, and Maddow's entire shtick was political. David Gregory asked her about economic implications and she segued into an attack on "Republican intransigence." Check it out:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Maddow was sticking like glue to S&P's press release, which claimed that the downgrade was a comment on political gridlock in Washington. But Maddow's fascinating because she perfectly encapsulates all that's wrong with the Beltway media mindset: She blames Bush for the crisis, citing the revised GDP numbers to argue that "the hole we've been getting out of is even deeper than we thought." Well, I guess if you're in a hole you stop digging, but the Obama-Dems 2012 budget was pegged to add $7.2 trillion in new debt over the next decade, and that's after racking up $1.7 trillion after the administration's first year in office. Congressional Republicans stood up to this, and that fortitude so enraged the progressive political class that "tea party terrorists" were claimed to be the greatest threat to national security since Nazi Germany. But Maddow goes on. And bless his heart, but Alex Castellanos fails to get a smackdown rebuttal until much later in the broadcast. I reported on Janet Daley's essential piece earlier, "A Capitalist Economy Can't Support a Socialist Welfare State." The GOP talking point has to focus on the unsustainability of big-government entitlements. Republicans won the day by standing firm, and the S&P downgrade ultimately will damage Democrat reelection prospects next fall, hence Maddow's desperate efforts to spin this as not an economic issue at all, but one of tea party "intransigence."

In any case, see Karl at Patterico's Pontifications, "For Whom the Downgrade Tolls":

In sum, the S&P downgrade marks a post on the road where progressive demagogy loses its power. The downgrade marks a post on the road to extinction for 19th-20th century progressivism. That’s why the Obama administration — and true progressive ideologues — made S&P their first target, however futile the gesture.

RTWT.

I wouldn't separate the partisan left from the ideological left so much (Maddow is both, for example), but it's a really perceptive essay otherwise.

UPDATE: Linked at Atlas Shrugs and Yid With Lid. Thanks! Also linked at Blazing Cat Fur!

A Capitalist Economy Can't Support a Socialist Welfare State

The obvious realities are the ones people most desperately resist, especially progressives, who live in a utopian world where higher taxes and endless spending are held to promise a classless, want-free society, which is impossible.

See Janet Daley, "If we are to survive the looming catastrophe, we need to face the truth" (via Memeorandum):

Contrary to what the Obama Democrats claimed, the face-off in Congress did not mean that the nation’s politics were “dysfunctional”. The politics of the US were functioning precisely as the Founding Fathers intended: the legislature was acting as a check on the power of the executive.

The Tea Party faction within the Republican party was demanding that, before any further steps were taken, there must be a debate about where all this was going. They had seen the future toward which they were being pushed, and it didn’t work. They were convinced that the entitlement culture and benefits programmes which the Democrats were determined to preserve and extend with tax rises could only lead to the diminution of that robust economic freedom that had created the American historical miracle.

And, again contrary to prevailing wisdom, their view is not naive and parochial: it is corroborated by the European experience. By rights, it should be Europe that is immersed in this debate, but its leaders are so steeped in the sacred texts of social democracy that they cannot admit the force of the contradictions which they are now hopelessly trying to evade.

I discussed the political angle previously, "Time for Institutional Reform? Well, Only When Democrats Are Losing." But read Daley all the way through. Progressives argue that "politics is broken" when the people revolt against the socialist political class. If folks want to fix what's broken they need to look at what we're spending. Are we going to cut spending and reduce the size of government? It'll take a helluva lot more than downsizing defense. But America's Obama-Democrat-Socialists are impervious to reality. The reckoning is coming in 2012. Folks always say this election is "the most important election in my lifetime." I usually don't, but with the credit downgrade and America's military abusively stretched thin around the globe, my normal optimism is found wanting.

More on this in upcoming posts.

IMAGE CREDIT: The People's Cube.

Joseph Nocera Apologizes

It takes a while to get around to it, but he's sincere, which is unusual for progressives. See, "The Tea Party, Take Two." (Via Astute Bloggers.)

Progressive Shouts 'Sic Semper Tyrannis' at Scott Walker

It's the "new civility," remember?

Via Althouse:

The Debt Deal and the Progressive Crack-Up

From Peter Berkowitz, at Wall Street Journal (also Google or Sankei Digital):

In the congressional elections of 2010, the electorate, led by the tea party movement and disaffected independents, rendered its judgment on the president's priorities. The people dealt him and his party a historic midterm defeat, producing large Republican gains in the Senate and a comfortable majority in the House, including 87 freshmen.

The voters' message was clear: Cut spending, compel the government to live within its means, and put Americans back to work. In short, the president and his party badly overreached in 2009 and 2010; and in 2011 the Republicans, to the extent their numbers in Congress allowed, have effectively pushed back.

But that's not how progressives have tended to see things. They have ferociously attacked congressional Republicans, particularly those closely associated with the tea party movement, with something approaching hysteria ...

The use of crude and violent language to condemn conservatives as enemies of the state, the gross manipulation of law to make the Constitution say whatever is politically expedient, and indifference to the actual arguments made by their political opponents—these are all-too-familiar progressive vices. They were exercised with abandon in the fury with which progressives responded to the complex questions raised by the Supreme Court's decision in Bush v. Gore, the detention of enemy combatants at Guantanamo Bay, and the invasion of Iraq. Tea party hatred is the successor of and stems from the same sources as Bush hatred.

Of course, a good bit of progressive vituperation can be chalked up to the ordinary passions of democratic politics, which can be high stakes and is a contact sport. But in the debt-limit crisis, the hypocrisy of progressives reached truly breathtaking proportions ...

The progressive mind is on a collision course with itself. The clash between its democratic pretensions and its authoritarian predilections has generated within its ranks seething resentment for, and rage at, conservatives. Unless progressives cultivate the enlightened virtues they publicly profess and free themselves from the dogmatic beliefs that undergird their political ambitions, we can expect even more harrowing outbursts to come.

Be sure to read it all.

We seem to have the same general dynamic every so often of late, during the Gabrielle Giffords shooting, for example, and more recently with Anders Breivik and now the debt ceiling debate. Berkowitz pretty much nails it, and of course James Taranto consistently hammers progressive idiocy and the media's hopeless partisanship. This is why I keep blogging. Progressivism is destroying this country. We need to pushback and continue the fight. 2012 is looking good too, so there's hope!