Tea Party Cartoons


Time To Choose: Sacrifice Power For Principles Or Sacrifice Principles For Power?

That is the question after Christine O’Donnell’s huge upset win over GOP establishment candidate Mike Castle in Delaware yesterday. There are many lessons to be drawn from that contest and many new questions as a result.

The first lesson is that the Tea Party is not just a movement, it is a revolution. Remember what Tommy Lee Jones said in the movie Under Siege?

“Hence the name: movement. It moves a certain distance, then it stops, you see? A revolution gets its name by always coming back around in your face.”

The RNC and RNSC haven’t gotten the message yet. The Tea Party Revolution is upon them and they need to get with the program or commit political suicide.

The question now becomes: “Will the GOP sacrifice power for principles or principles for power?”

Take, for instance, what Karl Rove did on Hannity when he attacked Christine O’Donnell. According to the American Spectator:

Mere minutes after Fox News had reported the victory of conservative activist Christine O’Donnell over Establishment Congressman Mike Castle in the Delaware GOP U.S. Senate primary, former Bush Deputy Chief of Staff and Fox News consultant Karl Rove was in place on Sean Hannity’s TV show to analyze.

Or…well…something.

The normally rational and analytical Mr. Rove had vanished. In his place was someone who looked like Karl Rove, sounded like Karl Rove…but spoke like the last guy out of the hoped-for-victory-party of the landslide losing candidate for Register of Deeds in NoPlaceville, Texas.

What on earth was Rove thinking? He was bitter, angry, cutting, demeaning, mean-spirited…and those were the nice things he had to say about O’Donnell.

Even former Bush White House Press Secretary Dana Perrino stuck to the old GOP establishment talking points by constantly referring to candidates who “could win.”

Rove and Perrino, like most establishment GOPers, were hoping to get that Senate seat in Delaware even if it meant abandoning Conservative principles to get it. In other words, they are more than willing to sacrifice principles for power.

But the Tea Party Revolution is going in the opposite direction. We value principles over power because without strong, consistent principles, power becomes corrupt.

Well, it also turns out that the National Republican Senatorial Committee is also deaf to the call of the Tea Party:

Carl Cameron of Fox News is reporting the National Republican Senatorial Committee will not be helping the official nominee of the Delaware Republican Party for the United States Senate in her Senate campaign.

Apparently, if there is no chance of getting the power, supporting the principles means nothing to the RNSC. This is yet another reason why they don’t get any money from me.

Since the RNC and RNSC have abandoned princples for power, I suggest to everyone who was thinking of donating to either of those organizations to hold on to your money and instead donate it directly to candidates that will hold on to their principles regardless of whether or not such faithfulness will translate into power.

Rove Attack, NRSC Refusal, Will Aid O’Donnell
Jeffrey Lord
American Spectator
September 14, 2010

UPDATE: Apparently, the NRSC has had a change of heart:

NRSC Chairman Cornyn’s Statement On Delaware Senate Race
National Republican Senatorial Committee
September 15, 2010

James Freeman: Glenn Beck’s ‘Happy Warriors’

Despite all the claims by leftists like Chris Matthews, Keith Olbermann, et. al., the Restoring Honor rally was the most peacful and good-mannered that D.C. has seen since, well, has ever seen period.

There was no hate. And the claims of it being an all-white crowd were quashed with the presence of a large number of African-Americans and their families, including Harry R. Jackson. (I know Rev. Jackson was there because I saw him in a video of the event, a video that Keith Olbermann either never knew existed or, more likely, deliberately chose to ignore.)

Anyway, James Freeman of the Wall Street Journal has a fantastic summary of what he saw and heard at the rally.

From his column:

This army of well-mannered folks that marched into Washington seemed comprised mainly of people who had once marched in the U.S. Army or other military branch, or at least had a family member who had. Perhaps that’s not surprising, given that the event was a fund-raiser for the Special Operations Warrior Foundation, which provides scholarships to the children of elite troops killed in the performance of their duty. The day was largely devoted to expressions of gratitude for the sacrifices of U.S. soldiers, for great men of American history like the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., and for God.

But it didn’t end there. Dave Roever, a Vietnam veteran, offered a closing prayer in which he thanked the Lord for the president and for the Congress. Despite the unpopularity of the latter two, no booing or catcalls could be heard.

Perhaps feeling defensive about how they would be portrayed in media reports, various attendees wore t-shirts noting that they were “Not violent” or “Non-violent.” For other participants, there was no need for an explicit message. Relaxed young parents felt comfortable enough to push toddlers in strollers through the crowded areas along the memorial’s reflecting pool.

If Olbermann, Matthews and the other members of the hate-filled left would actually take the time see reality, they might not look so foolish when they make their outlandish claims.

One aspect of the event made it undeniably superior to other rallies of comparable size: the area was cleaner when they were done than it was before they started.

Not only was the rally akin to a “huge church picnic” (in one Journal reporter’s description), but one had to wonder if the over-achievers in this crowd actually left the area in better shape than they found it.

After the event, walking from the Lincoln Memorial’s reflecting pool through Constitution Gardens, this reporter scanned 360 degrees and could not see a scrap of trash anywhere. Participants and volunteers had collected all their refuse and left it piled neatly in bags around the public garbage cans. Near Constitution Avenue, I did encounter one stray piece of paper—but too old and faded to have been left that day.

Contrast that with how Obama supporters left the mall after they were done so rudely singing “Na-na-na-na. Hey! Hey! Goodbye!” to George W. Bush:

Here is a video showing how the participants of the Restoring Honor cleaned up in a way that Obama’s supporters didn’t even dream of doing:

And although Glenn Beck himself claimed to disagree with the final two paragraphs, they are relevent:

The conservative Mr. Beck’s ability to draw this many people to Washington may suggest enormous gains for Republicans come the fall. But the GOP shouldn’t expect voters to simply hand them a congressional majority without making them earn it. If pregame chatter and off-season optimism translated into victory, the New York Jets and the Washington Redskins would meet in the Super Bowl every year.

Between Saturday’s crowd in Washington and the tea partiers agitating for limited government, we may be witnessing the rebuilding of the Reagan coalition, the “fusion” of religious and economic conservatives that political theorist Frank Meyer once endorsed. Reagan always believed that the Republican Party was the natural home for this movement, but GOP leaders in Washington need to prove they are worthy of it.

Yes, they do.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

Glenn Beck’s ‘Happy Warriors’
James Freeman
Wall Street Journal
August 31, 2010

The White House War On Jobs

If Joeseph Goebbels were re-incarnated and alive today, he would be somewhere in the Obama administration writing press releases about how jobs were being created or had been thus far saved. Those proclamations from the Obama White House are certainly strange, especially when the concurrent news stories are about how jobless claims are increasing on a monthly basis.

I don’t think that Baghdad Bob would approve of such efforts at misleading propaganda.

But, Obama still has trouble accepting responsibility for the failed stimulus package and preferes to continue assigning blame to George W. Bush, who has been out of office for over a year-and-a-half now. Joe Biden is loathe to go back to the “good old days” when people had stable jobs and steady paychecks.

Michelle Malkin has a great article regarding the jobs being lost, even as Obama and family enjoy an upper-class vacation at Martha’s Vineyard when most Americans can barely afford to take any kind of vacation at all.

From her column:

These are not the wealthy fat cats and Big Business titans Democrats love to demonize.

They’re employees of companies like Assurant Health, which announced last week that it would slash 130 jobs at its offices in Milwaukee and Plymouth, Minn., to prepare for costly Obamacare mandates.

They’re employees of medical device firms in Massachusetts, where officials say they’ll be forced to cut back on operational costs and jobs thanks to a little-noticed Obamacare tax on their products that goes into effect in 2013.

They’re employees of restaurants like White Castle and International House of Pancakes, whose executives say they will be forced into layoffs and premium hikes to cope with the federal law’s $3,000-per-employee penalty on companies whose workers pay more than 9.5 percent of household income in premiums for company-provided insurance.

They’re mom-and-pop enterprises across the country that must now deal with Obamacare’s onerous Section 9006 tax-filing mandate. It requires them to file 1099 forms with the IRS for every vendor from whom they purchase $600 or more in goods. Nebraska GOP Sen. Mike Johanns calls it one of many “job-crushing provisions” that will bury small business in paperwork and legal costs.

They’re the estimated 23,000 workers in the deepwater drilling industry whom the White House deliberately wrote off in pursuit of its junk science-based drilling moratorium.

They’re the estimated tens of thousands of workers employed by car dealers that were shut down by Obama’s auto czars at a time, as the TARP inspector general pointed out last month, “when the country was experiencing the worst economic downturn in generations and the government was asking its taxpayers to support a $787 billion stimulus package designed primarily to preserve jobs… — all based on a theory and without sufficient consideration of the decisions’ broader economic impact.”

They’re employees of Utah oil and gas companies whose leases have been pulled without cause by Interior Secretary Ken Salazar. The Interior Department’s own Inspector General rejected Salazar’s explanation that the Bush administration had rushed the leases through. The Deseret News reports that “rescinding these leases has likely cost the state millions already. Officials in Uintah county estimate the county lost 3,000 jobs in 2009, and Duchesne lost 1,000 jobs.”

They’re employees of commercial and recreational fishing businesses in New England, who have organized a flotilla on Martha’s Vineyard on Thursday to protest the Obama administration’s restrictive environmental policies and stealth regulatory ocean grab.

It’s no wonder that Democrats up for re-election this year are stampeding as fast as they can away from the White House and its current occupant.

You can access the complete article on-line here:

The White House War on Jobs
Michelle Malkin
TownHall.com
August 25, 2010

Black Panther Advocated Killing White Babies

And this is the same Black Panther (King Shamir Shabazz) who was standing out in front of a polling place in Philadelphia intimidating voters.

From Hot Air:

When Attorney General Eric Holder suddenly reversed course and had the DoJ dismiss the voter-intimidation case against two New Black Panther Party activists stemming from an incident in 2008 in Philadelphia, many questioned why the DoJ would quit a case it had already won. Attorneys within the DoJ wondered why the federal government had suddenly become disinterested in voter intimidation. Some, like Christian Adams, Asheesh Agarwal, and Mark Corallo have gone public with their outrage, and also wonder where the hell Congress has gone in its duty to oversee the executive branch and its enforcement of laws Congress passed.

Well, look, maybe this was just a bad day for the defendants. Maybe they were just nice young men who took civic engagement to a momentary extreme of enthusiasm. They’re probably just nice guys caught in a single instance of bad judgment … right?

Let’s look at the video:

All that racial hatred from these people and yet Obama wanted to be the post-racial President. If he was so post-racial, why did he allow the Department of Justice to drop the case against such a racist scumbag as Shabazz?

You can access the original blog entry on-line here:

Video: The Nice Young Man Eric Holder Let Off The Hook
Ed Morrisey
HotAir.com
July 6, 2010

NRA To Endorse Anti-Gun Harry Reid In Nevada?

I guess no organization is safe from committing political suicide. What has gotten into Wayne LaPierre? Why is he playing footsie with politicians who want to trample on the 2nd Amendment?

Erick Erickson over at RedState.com is wondering why the NRA would even consider endorsing leftist Harry Reid (who endorsed every single anti-gun judicial nominee) over the pro-gun Sharron Angle? Here is Reid’s record on gun-control votes:

June 28, 1991. Vote No. 115. Voted for a 5 day waiting period for handgun purchases.

October 21, 1993. Vote 325. Voted to eliminate the Army Civilian Marksmanship Program. Only the most fringe anti-gun Senators voted for the amendment.

November 19, 1993. Vote 385. Allow states to impose waiting periods over and above the 5 days waiting period required under the Brady Bill.

November 19, 1993. Vote 386. Voted to eliminate he 5-year sunset in the Brady Bill.

November 19, 1993. Vote 387. Voted to close off debate on the Brady Bill.

November 19, 1993. Vote 390. Voted to close off debate on the Brady Bill.

November 20, 1993. Vote 394. Voted for the Brady Bill, which imposed a 5-business-day waiting period before purchasing a handgun.

August 25, 1994. Vote 294. Voted to close off debate on the Clinton Crime Bill, which contained the ban on so-called “assault weapons.”

August 25, 1994. Vote 295. Voted for the Clinton Crime Bill, which contained the ban on so-called “assault weapons.”

April 17, 1996. Vote 64. Voted to expand the statute of limitations for paperwork violations in National Firearms Act from 3 years to 5 years.

June 27, 1996. Vote 178. Voting to destroy 176,000 M-1 Garand rifles from World War II, and 150 million rounds of 30 caliber ammunition, rather than giving them to the Federal Civilian Marksmanship program.

September 12, 1996. Vote 287. Voted to spend $21.5 million for a study on putting “taggants” in black and smokeless gunpowder.

September 12, 1996. Vote 290. Voted to make it a Federal crime to possess a gun within 1,000 yards of a school.

May 12, 1999. Vote 111. Voted to give the Treasury Department expansive new authority to regulate and keep records on gun shows and their participants, and criminalize many intrastate firearms transactions.

May 13, 1999. Vote 116. Voted to ban the importation of ammunition clips that can hold more than 10 rounds.

May 14, 1999. Vote 119. Voted to criminalize internet advertisements to sell legal firearms in a legal manner.

May 18, 1999. Vote 122. Voted to for Mandatory triggerlocks.

May 20, 1999. Vote 133. Voted to create new Federal regulation of pawn shops handling of guns.

May 20, 1999. Vote 134. Voted to give the Treasury Department expansive new authority to regulate and keep records on gun shows and their participants, and criminalize many intrastate firearms transactions. The vote was 50-50, with Vice President Gore casting the tie-breaking vote.

May 20, 1999. Vote 140. Voted for the Clinton Juvenile Justice bill, which contained a package of gun control measures.

July 29, 1999. Vote 224. Voted to close debate on the Clinton Juvenile Justice bill, which contained a package of gun control measures.

February 2, 2000. Vote 4. Voted to make firearms manufacturers and distributors’ debts nondischargeable in bankruptcy if they were sued because they unknowingly sold guns to individuals who used the gun in a crime. 68 Senators voted against Reid’s position, including 17 Democrats including Bryan of Nevada.

March 2, 2000. Vote 27. Voted to say that school violence was due to the fact that Congress “failed to pass reasonable, common-sense gun control measures” and call for new gun ownership restrictions on the anniversary of the Columbine shootings.

March 2, 2000. Vote 28. Voted to say that school violence was due to the fact that Congress “failed to pass reasonable, common-sense gun control measures” and call for new gun ownership restrictions on the anniversary of the Columbine shootings (reconsideration of vote 27).

March 2, 2000. Vote 32. Voted to use Federal taxpayer funds to hand out anti-gun literature in schools and to run anti-gun public service announcements.

April 6, 2000. Vote 64. Voted for a gun control package including new onerous restrictions on gun shows.

April 7, 2000. Vote 74. Voted against an amendment to provide for the enforcement of existing gun laws in lieu of new burdensome gun control mandates.

May 16, 2000. Vote 100. Voted to commend the participants of the so-called “Million Mom March” for their demand for more Federal restrictions on firearms ownership, and to urge the passage of strict gun control measures.

May 17, 2000. Vote 102. Vote to overturn the ruling of the chair that the Daschle amendment (commending the participants of the so-called “Million Mom March” for their demand for more Federal restrictions on firearms ownership, and to urge the passage of strict gun control measures) was out of order.

May 17, 2000. Vote 103. Voted against an amendment stating “the right of each law-abiding United States citizen to own a firearm for any legitimate purpose, including self-defense or recreation, should not be infringed.”

May 17, 2000. Vote 104. Voted for an amendment commending the participants of the so-called “Million Mom March” for their demand for more Federal restrictions on firearms ownership, and to urge the passage of strict gun control measures.

February 26, 2004. Vote 17. Voted for mandatory triggerlocks.

March 2, 2004. Vote 25. Voted for Federal regulation of gun shows.

July 28, 2005. Vote 207. Voted for mandatory triggerlocks.

March 5, 2009. Vote 83. Voted against a ban on the United Nations imposing taxes on American citizens after France and other world leaders proposed a global tax on firearms.

If LaPierre does end up endorsing the gun-grabbing Harry Reid, then I and hundreds of thousands of others will immediately cancel our memberships and the NRA will cease to exist. If that happens, look for me to join Gun Owners of America instead.

You can access the complete story on-line here:

NRA Now Leans Toward Endorsing Harry Reid
Erick Erickson
RedState.com
July 1, 2010

Democrat Bob Etheridge (D-NC) Assaults Student On Street

Uh-oh! The Dems are really getting nervous now as November approaches and the mid-term elections are now being billed as a referendum on Obama’s radical agenda.

So, it is no surprise that a Democrat Congressman from North Carolina would react in such a vile and uncivil manner to being asked a simple question by a couple of students on the street. However, this does not make his act any less illegal than it was. Etheridge assaulted and illegally detained a young man. (He grabbed the student by the arm thereby arresting his movements and then grabbed him around the neck.)

I doubt you will see this on ABC, NBC, CBS or CNN nor will it be on the front page of either the Washington Post or New York Times. You see, Etheridge isn’t a Conservative Republican.