ترول ایرانی

گالری عکس

Posts tagged with “Liberal Hypocrisy”

When It’s For Their Causes, Liberals Love Free-Spending Contributors

Interesting insight from this editorial in the Wall Street Journal.

Self-congratulation is rampant in New York after last week’s adoption of the state’s gay marriage statute. Among those who are the new toast of the town is the “group of super-rich Republican donors” (in the words of a certain Manhattan broadsheet) without whose financial backing the bill might not have passed.

It turns out that hedge fund operator Paul Singer, a prominent supporter of conservative causes, lent his checkbook and prestige to the gay marriage battle. He was joined by financiers Daniel Loeb and Cliff Asness. They underwrote a campaign that cost over $1 million to persuade four GOP state Senators to assure passage. A similar bill failed in 2009.

This news led our wry friends at the New York Sun to suggest a “thought experiment”: “How would the liberals have felt had there been a law in place requiring the taxpayers of New York to underwrite a campaign against the same-gender marriage law?” The question is rhetorical.

The Sun’s point is that the political left has spent years—no, decades—trying to impose limits on political campaign donations by the wealthy. Liberals prefer taxpayer financing of political campaigns. The left has been raging in particular against the Supreme Court for ruling last year in the Citizens United case that corporations and unions could donate to independent expenditure campaigns. There was more liberal outrage Monday as the Court struck down an Arizona law that provided matching funds to publicly financed candidates if their privately financed opponents exceeded a fund-raising limit.

Yet in New York, liberals are celebrating the huge independent political expenditures of Wall Street financiers because they support one of their favorite causes. Somehow in this case, the left has concluded that these big donors are contributing to democracy, not “hijacking” it. We welcome these liberals to the view that unlimited donations are a form of political free speech.

Russ Feingold must be unavailable for comment on this predicament.

Leave a Comment

Since He Keeps Asking…

The Chief, over there in Oshkosh has a series — now in its 6th part — asking “When are Wisconsin Conservative Bloggers Going to Finally Admonish Reince Priebus for the Way He’s Captaining the U.S.S. Micheal Steele?”  I’ll save him the time and trouble by simply saying:

Likely Never.

Here’s why.

Mr. Priebus and Mr. Steele are two different individuals, only one is RNC Chairman and only he can be responsible for his actions.  What you, “Mr Chief,” are asking would be akin to a conservative blogger in Wisconsin asking the liberal bloggers to admonish Mike Tate for all the dumb things he’s said in his term so far.  Or another liberal, like say this one…

On page 37, a remark, said “privately” by Sen. Harry Reid, about Barack Obama’s racial appeal. Though Reid would later say that he was neutral in the presidential race, the truth, the authors write, was that his

encouragement of Obama was unequivocal. He was wowed by Obama’s oratorical gifts and believed that the country was ready to embrace a black presidential candidate, especially one such as Obama — a “light-skinned” African American “with no Negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one,” as he said privately.  Reid was convinced, in fact, that Obama’s race would help him more than hurt him in a bid for the Democratic nomination.

Reid has since apologized and doing all he can to put the fire out on a Saturday (There’s even a statement from Al Sharpton telling us that saying all is forgiven.).  No word on if he’s said that Strom Thurmond would have made a good President.

I hear that sort of thing will cause a guy to resign his Senate Majority Leadership.

Though in all seriousness “JB,” you’re in Oshkosh, could you ask my brother’s old roommate  (That’d be Democratic Party of Wisconsin Vice Chairman Jef Hall in case you didn’t know) what he or DPW are going to say about the Reid remarks?

Comments (7)

That is a Great Question

My friend Stephen Green, otherwise known as “The Vodkapundit,” points out from the high plains of Colorado something rather hypocritical about many universal health care advocates.

If it’s wrong to draft people into the armed forces — and I believe it is — then where’s the right in drafting people into the insurance system?

An insurance “mandate” is an insurance industry draft, plain and simple. But there’s no deferment, the certainly no 4F, and running off to Canada would only make things worse.

The same question could be asked about Social Security and Medicare.

Comments (2)

Cartoon of the Day


Leave a Comment

We’ve Found the One Man Feingold Won’t Call Out (Apparently)

Remember when Russ Feingold was pushing this in February?

Ninety-six years ago, voters won the constitutional right to choose their own senators. But in all but four states, the governor decides who will fill the seat after a vacancy. Now, there’s a drive in Congress for a constitutional amendment requiring a special election to fill a Senate vacancy.

The push comes in the wake of several recent Senate shake-ups — most prominently, the controversy surrounding President Obama’s vacant Senate seat.

In December, federal authorities arrested Rod Blagojevich, then-governor of Illinois, and accused him of trying to sell Obama’s former Senate seat to the highest bidder. At a news conference the same day, Dick Durbin, Illinois’ other senator, declared there was only one way out: “I think the Illinois General Assembly should enact a law as quickly as possible calling for a special election.”

Here’s why a new law would be needed: The assembly, like 45 other state legislatures, long ago gave its governor the exclusive power to fill Senate vacancies. The option to bestow such power is part of the 17th Amendment, the same one that provides for the direct election of senators.

Illinois lawmakers did not pass a special election law, but they did impeach Blagojevich — though not before he appointed Roland Burris to the Senate. Burris is now struggling to hang on to his new job; earlier this week, he pleaded in Chicago for understanding after admitting he tried to raise money for Blagojevich while seeking the Senate appointment.

“I ask you … to stop the rush to judgment,” he said. “You know the real Roland. I’ve done nothing wrong, and I have absolutely nothing to hide.”

Wisconsin Democratic Sen. Russ Feingold says “enough is enough.” He wants every state to do as Wisconsin has done: fill Senate vacancies only by special election.

“It’s time to put the power to replace senators where it belongs — with the people,” he says. “That’s the way it’s been for the House since the Constitution was written, and I don’t think the Senate should be any different.”

To make special elections the law of the land, Feingold is proposing what would be the Constitution’s 28th Amendment. Joining him are several prominent House Republicans, including the former chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Wisconsin’s James Sensenbrenner.

“Elected senators have a mandate from the people,” Sensenbrenner says. “Appointed senators have a mandate from one person: the governor. And in terms of effective representation in the Senate, you’ve got a lot more clout if you were sent there by the people, rather than having a friend who happened to be governor at the time.”

It appears, the news yesterday of Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) asking the Massachuestts State Legislature to change his states laws (currently now a special election after Democratic worries in 2004 Republican Governor Mitt Romney was going to replace Sen. John Kerry with a member of the GOP if he was elected President) from a special election back to a governor’s replacement pick has seen no such statement from Feingold.

Senator Edward M. Kennedy of Massachusetts, terminally ill with brain cancer, has asked state legislative leaders to change the law and let Gov. Deval Patrick appoint a temporary replacement upon the senator’s death.

Under current law, the seat would be vacant until a special election could be held 145 to 160 days later. But Senator Kennedy, a 77-year-old Democrat, wrote in a letter to the governor and leaders of the legislature that he wanted Massachusetts to have full representation in the Senate during that five-month period.


Until 2004, state law called for the governor to appoint a temporary replacement if a Senate seat became vacant. But when Senator John Kerry, a Democrat, was running for president that year, the Democratic-controlled state legislature wanted to deny the governor at the time — Mitt Romney, a Republican — the power to name a successor if Mr. Kerry won.

In his letter, Mr. Kennedy wrote that he supported the 2004 law, but he added, “I also believe it is vital for this Commonwealth to have two voices speaking for the needs of its citizens and two votes in the Senate during the approximately five months between a vacancy and an election.”

Mr. Kennedy also asked that Mr. Patrick “obtain, as a condition of appointment of the interim Senator, an explicit personal commitment not to become a candidate in the special election.”

Anyone else think of the name “Benjamin A. Smith” when Kennedy asked for the place-holder specifically not become a candidate in the special election?  Historical buffs will remember him as JFK’s roommate at Harvard he had as his successor to his Senate seat when he was elected President in 1960.  Ted, then 28 or 29, was too young to serve in the Senate and had to wait for the 1962 Special Election to win the seat outright.

History has reduced Smith to the butt of jokes as “the Kennedy Brothers’ Seat-Warmer.”

Kennedy is no doubt creating another scenario in which the Massachusetts Senate seat will have another “Seat-Warmer” until the Kennedy-family approved candidate — likely Ted’s own wife Victoria — can win the seat in the 2010 or 2012 election.

The reason why I raise this question is that Feingold is notorious for not letting his pet-projects die, let alone get railroaded in the process.  Is Russ Feingold — a notorious caucus bickerer — going to just let Ted Kennedy’s own personal demands that his Senate seat become some sort of “family heirloom” only he can pick and choose should fill it?

Who knows, but this was one heck of a floor speech by Feingold in February.  Hate to see it go to waste.

Comments (4)

Cindy Sheehan Wonders Where Her Friends Are

This week, Byron York of the Washington Examiner’s been doing a series of expose columns on “Where did the Anti-war Movement Go?”  In short, he finds what you’d expect to find liberals doing when one of their own is in the White House — silencing their decent because the anti-war movement wasn’t about Iraq, it was about George W. Bush.

Oh, there are still a few pockets of resistance out there.  The biggest being Wisconsin’s Junior Senator Russ Feingold who’s fighting a one-Senator fight to end American involvement in Afghanistan — once seen as “The Right War at this Time” by the anti-war left.

The columns got York an interesting response from an interesting area: Cindy Sheehan, the woman who just three and four years ago, was the face of the anti-war movement for her protests of the President outside his Crawford Ranch.  She told York, he was dead on.

I read your column about the “anti-war” movement and I can’t believe I am saying this, but I mostly agree with you.

The “anti-war” “left” was used by the Democratic Party. I like to call it the “anti-Republican War” movement.

While I agree with you about the hypocrisy of such sites as the DailyKos, I have known for a long time that the Democrats are equally responsible with the Republicans. That’s why I left the party in May 2007 and that’s why I ran for Congress against Nancy Pelosi in 2008.

I have my own radio show, “Cindy Sheehan’s Soapbox,” and I was out on a four-month book tour promoting the fact that it’s not about Democrats or Republicans, but it’s about the system.

Even if I am surrounded by a thousand, or no one, I am still working for peace.

Cindy Sheehan

York then writes he followed up with Sheehan to confirm she wrote the email, she did, and then goes on to say the following:

After receiving the email, I asked Sheehan to give me a call, so I could verify that the note in fact came from her.  She did, and we discussed her plans to protest next week in Martha’s Vineyard, where President Obama will be vacationing.  “I think people are starting to wake up to the fact that even if they supported Obama, he doesn’t represent much change,” Sheehan said.  “There are people still out here who oppose the war and Obama’s policies, but it seems like the big organizations with the big lists aren’t here.”

I asked Sheehan about the fact that the press seems to have lost interest in her and her cause.  “It’s strange to me that you mention it,” she said.  “I haven’t stopped working.  I’ve been protesting every time I can, and it’s not covered.  But the one time I did get a lot of coverage was when I protested in front of George Bush’s house in Dallas in June.  I don’t know what to make of it.  Is the press having a honeymoon with Obama?  I know the Left is.”

I recalling saying when the whole Sheehan-Media phenomenon started that she was being used by the press, the Democratic Party, and a whole mess of others.  I’d gloat on being right, but I still feel sorry for the woman.

She did lose a son in war after all.

Leave a Comment

See, There is a Time a Democrat Wants an ID Check

(H/T Newsbuster)

To avoid any people from outside his Congressional District from attending his August Town Halls, Texas Democrat Eugene Green is asking that all who attend prove residency by showing a photo ID.  One supposes, that is within the boundaries of his events.

TexasRepGreenReTownHallPhotoID0809Hey, I get to use a left-wing argument…What is someone’s a recent new resident to the District, lived in Texas, and their driver’s license is still vaild, but has their old address?  Will they be turned away?

On that issue, we don’t know.

Oh, and in case you were wondering…Yes. Congressman Green of the 29th District of Texas has long opposed Voter ID.


Comments (2)