I think Rep. Weiner may have lost any remaining defenders with this latest emission.
I like to relax by reading up on sports and fitness; my wife, celebrity gossip. (This may be a gender trend, though of course there is no clear demarcation on this one, as she also knows sports as well as I do, she just ran a half-marathon, and she certainly could manage the bullpen better than Girardi.)
She’s pointed out a more disquieting trend to me today: Whenever Hollywood blogs mention Jews, or Israel, or anti-Semitism, or in this specific instance, Hitler, it’s just a matter of time before a commenter accuses the Jews of genocide.
“Miley to perform at Bar Mitzvah?” Comment 37: “Sharon was a butcher, nuff said”
“Amare Stoudamire exploring his Jewish heritage”? Comment 43: “Israel just acts like they can do whatev they want because of Holocost, it’s f***d up.”
Today we’ve got “Banned Cannes director Lars Von Trier explains his Nazi rant“, and it only takes until comment 15 this time, so I’m going to have to run the math by William Briggs for probabilities. But I think we have an amendment to Godwin’s Law here.
Yesterday, utilizing my intelligence acquisition expertise — the kind of competence one can only accrue via being alive since the year 2000 — I searched the background of Jesse Lee, the newly hired White House Director of Progressive Media & Online Response/Woodrow Wilson Comes Alive! Laser Light Show Project.
I typed “Jesse Lee” into Google. Thirty seconds later, I knew that not only did Lee once sound like a navel-gazing twit at an undergraduate philosophy conference a decade ago, but that he recently married a woman named Nita Choudhary. Choudhary is a prominent figure at MoveOn.org, was the leader of MoveOn.org’s anti-Iraq war campaign, and also may have once made a tiny error in judgment, nothing to speak of really, but for the sake of transparency, she may have purchased a full-page ad in a national newspaper dubbing General Petraeus “Betray Us,” and then suffering from Crime and Punishment-level pangs of guilt, or the opposite of that, she went on C-SPAN and ardently defended the ad.
As Lee is now responsible for defending the administration from damaging PR, and as Petraeus is a member of the administration whom Lee might be asked to defend, you might identify this as a showstopper conflict of interest. The NSA, or whoever is in charge of WH employee background checks — let’s say Al Franken — did as well, which is why, at an elaborate State dinner, Valerie Jarrett went out of her way to create the perfect opportunity for Lee to propose marriage to Choudhary. Don’t question Franken. (Hat tip: Dan Riehl.)
It’s not necessary to bother Petraeus’ office for comment regarding how the very person who slandered him received special treatment by the White House, we won’t be doing that.
What you should take from this story: the most anti-American, anti-military elements of our society are not simply tolerated by the Obama administration; they are not simply, and cynically, welcomed as potential voters.
This administration is more comfortable around people like Nita Choudhary then around people who disagree with her. Lee’s relationship with Choudhary was not a negative for his White House career. I’ll posit it was a plus.
UPDATE: Lee is married to Nita Chaudary. Here is a CSPAN transcript from Sep. 10, 2007, wherein Chaudary represents — and ardently defends — MoveOn.org for publishing the Petraeus smear ad prior to Petraeus speaking a word before Congress.
We want to make sure the truth gets out there in advance of this testimony.
I found the following bio for Chaudary from 2008:
Nita Chaudhary, Campaign Director at MoveOn.org Political Action: Nita leads MoveOn’s campaigns on the Iraq War, Constitutional Liberties as well as running the fundraising program for MoveOn’s 2008 electoral effort. In the past she was the Director of Online organizing for the DNC. She’s also held several positions at People for the American Way, including Media Research Analyst, Web Editor, and Online Organizer.
I think it fairly safe to hypothesize that Chaudary may own that ad: as the leader of MoveOn’s campaigns regarding the Iraq war, the ad as conceived may be her work.
As Bryan reported yesterday, the Obama White House has hired a man named Jesse Lee to be its new Director of Progressive Media & Online Response or something. This is believed to imply that when people such as, say, Christian Adams say negative things about the administration that are provably true, Lee will “Respond” somehow on Twitter. And Facebook. And there will be links.
Anyway, I just performed a 30-second background check on Lee. And while I feel that most people shouldn’t be held accountable for anything political they say before the age of 25, a couple of wacky things authored by him shortly after college do turn up, probably best considered, if at all, as an example of the narcissism cultured by our developing higher education bubble.
From the SUNY Oneonta 2001 Undergraduate Philosophy Conference:
I sure hope the current GOP hopefuls/Paul Ryan understood the larger message of Netanyahu’s speech today: logic, reason, clarity, and uncompromising commitment to the values of the West aren’t simply the current wave of contemporary politics: they are essential to liberty’s survival.
Forget Rovian tactics; we want statesmen. Be like Netanyahu and you will be the next president.
Ever seen the 12th Imam and Santorum in the same place? Just sayin’.
… is an anagram for Dominique Strauss-Khan.
Maid Squashes Oink Runt
S*** Aroma, Squid Sunken
Shadier Anus Monk Quits
Monied S*** Quasar Sunk
A Unkind Risque Moth Ass
Inn Ass Muskier, Quoth D.A.
And, for his socialist supporters:
Asshead Quits, Kin Mourn
Let’s call this an overnight thread.
Paul’s conspiracy-theory laced history of isolationism has American Jews agreeing about something, which is good.
Anything to limit the appearance of those Ron Paul “Revolution” signs with “love” spelled backwards, which always made think of Paul as a guy who may, without warning, get a little handsy.
Walker in the Senate sounds good to me. And please, nobody bother Paul Ryan, as we need him elsewhere.
UPDATE: Nevermind the below gasket-blowing: it wasn’t Obama, it was GOP’er Mike Rogers. Well, don’t ignore it, instead redirect your ire.
Yes, Obama just made a moral equivalency between our soldiers and bin Laden.
And yes, he just insinuated that Americans would go shootin’ some imams or something if al-Qaeda were to kill an American and post photos of it on the internet — WHICH THEY HAVE DONE EVERY DAY, including videos of the towers collapsing, Daniel Pearl, and Nick Berg, and Mogadishu, and IED videos, WHICH ARE ALL OVER THE DAMNED INTERNET, and which have never resulted in even a damned bloody nose doled out to an innocent Muslim by an American.
Cowboy up, America, and tell the president what you think of this.
May 11, 2010:
May 2, 2011:
Ahhhh. But really, they had me at “buried at sea according to Islamic tradition.”
(And seriously: Did we also take pains to shoot him in the face according to Islamic tradition? Was it a culturally sensitive face-shooting?)
He’s blue today. It would have been nice to be asked, is all:
Former Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf on Monday said the United States had violated Pakistan’s sovereignty by sending in Special Forces to kill Al-Qaeda chief Osama bin Laden.
US President Barack Obama had ordered the raid by a small team of US Special Forces, which found Laden, who had evaded capture for a decade, in a home in a fortified compound in Abbottabad city, located 50 kilometres northeast of Islamabad and 150 kilometres east of Peshawar.
“America coming to our territory and taking action is a violation of our sovereignty. Handling and execution of the operation (by US forces) is not correct. The Pakistani government should have been kept in the loop,” Musharraf told an Indian news channel.
“Foreign troops crossing the border into Pakistan will not be liked by the people of Pakistan. US forces should not have crossed over into Pakistan,” he added.
Take a moment today to remember Todd Beamer and the other heroes of September 11 who fought al-Qaeda with their bare hands. Their fighting spirit hasn’t diminished and never will:
It can also raise physical ability and bring about expertise and accomplishment, which PJM readers should already know from this piece I wrote a while back.
(Do bear my futurist capabilities in mind while considering my Paul Ryan 2012 prediction. Also, that I always can figure out who the bad guy is on The Mentalist.)
Paul Ryan will be the GOP nominee and the next president. He may not really want the job, but he’s a “call of duty” guy.
I’ve always been entertained at how Free Mumia! became such an eco, leftist, utopian cause, like releasing a cop killer could prevent acid rain or something.
Anyway, he gets a new hearing.
In the manner Obama says it, a novice English-speaker might assume “to speculate” means something like “to consume the deceased carcass of a human for nourishment”, and I’m not sure his intent with that word is metaphorically far off.
It makes one specu — wonder: Has Obama ever committed speculation? Says Merriam-Webster:
1 a : to meditate on or ponder a subject : reflect b : to review something idly or casually and often inconclusively
I’ve never read a more fitting definition of “liberal arts college”; I’m gonna assume Obama was a big speculator at Occidental and Harvard.
2: to assume a business risk in hope of gain; especially : to buy or sell in expectation of profiting from market fluctuations
Yup! That sounds like what he has previously referred to as “stimulus.”
1: to take to be true on the basis of insufficient evidence : theorize
Ding Ding Ding!!!
2: to be curious or doubtful about
So he’s guilty of three of these.
Get yourself over to the front page at PJM, where Hans A. von Spakovsky has posted a leaked PDF of Obama’s draft copy of an executive order to … implement portions of the DISCLOSE act.
I’ve been a diehard since Nadav Henefeld, Chris Smith, and Tate George brought the team to the Elite 8 in 1990 — I remember sneaking away to call an 800 number for score updates (this was pre-internet) from a phone in the synagogue closet.
Ugly, hideous championship game tonight, but … woohoo! I always call my Dad at the end of a big game — if we aren’t already watching it together — and this is the first one I get to share with my son.
He’s asleep of course, being 14 months old, but my wife and I put him to bed in his little UConn sweatpants.
This man fled from a … vote. Just like our soldiers, except they don’t flee trouble, they confront, and they aren’t facing votes, but fiery death. And they’d love to have the chance to, you know, vote — if Eric Holder would actually protect their rights.
Send Dave Cheatham a piece of your mind.
A fourteen-year-old Bangladeshi girl has been lashed to death for the crime of being raped. Remember this is not a perversion of Sharia law — it is Sharia justice being properly meted out.
(Hat tip– Mrs. Steinberg)
Mark Levin and Peter Wehner have been having a back-and-forth on this topic, and if you’ve ever listened to an hour of Levin’s show you know which side he’s taking.
Wehner’s last parry claims Bush is more conservative on immigration because he never proposed an actual amnesty. Dan Riehl picks up the discussion, declaring Levin the winner, and most importantly landing an extra jab at Karl Rove. Take a look, and read Riehl links to the earlier parts of the discussion.
I’ll always be grateful to Bush for his 9/11 response and leading us into the Mideast with a stiff jaw, but any conservative knows which one understood the Constitution properly.
This MP is none other than Justin Trudeau, the son of Pierre. Apparently the Candian government releases a guide titled “Discover Canada” that is used as official preparation material for the citizenship test. The guide includes the following passage:
Canada’s openness and generosity do not extend to barbaric cultural practices that tolerate spousal abuse, “honour killings”, female genital mutilation, forced marriage or other gender-based violence.
Me? I would have pressed them to include a word like, say, “Islamic,” as this sentence is not included for the sake of incoming Buddhists. Trudeau zigged where reality zags, however — he didn’t like “barbaric,” and would have preferred “completely unacceptable.”
Mark Steyn weighs in:
I suppose one should be relieved that he absolutely accepts that it’s absolutely unacceptable. The trouble is, as your average honor killer or clitoridectomist around the planet well understands, “absolutely unacceptable” is Liberal Weeniepants-speak for “we entirely accept it”.
Trudeau later backtracked with a bunch of tweets. But not until after he wrote this one:
My problem with the use of the word barbaric is that it was chosen to reassure Canadians rather than actually change unacceptable behaviours.
Leftism: confronting barbarism with a thesaurus.
A kid from Sydney, apparently a frequent target of bullying, decided he’d had enough just as a cellphone cam happened to be rolling. Here’s hoping this bodyslam marks the end of his problems:
Forwarding this over to Linda McMahon. This kid is RAW.
From the Jerusalem Post:
The IDF seized a freighter ship with dozens of tons of weaponry from Iran headed for Hamas in the Gaza Strip on Tuesday.
The ship, known as Victoria, was flying a Liberian flag, and was seized by the navy in the Mediterranean Sea, 200 miles off of Israel’s coast.
UPDATED: Well, it sounds like it was premature. C’mon, Meade.
Althouse says it’s all over, and the good guys won.
Liberal WaPo columnist Ruth Marcus defended the King hearings in her latest column, which is notable. But my favorite passage in her piece was this:
Yes, there are other sources of terrorism. Radical Islam is the biggest and most dangerous. And, yes, King is a flawed questioner. But the question he poses is an appropriate — and important — one.
“King is a flawed questioner.” Presumably he’s a racist or something.
Expect to see plenty more of the “I’m not conservative, only my opinions are” stance presented, or perhaps the “conservatives are right, but for the wrong reason” parry, as more lefties look to save their jobs/actually consider the flaws inherent in their arguments. This allows them to appear open-minded and reasonable without having to actually declare adherence to an undoubtedly conservative opinion, and thus never get invited to another dinner party.