Freudian slip, or liberalism’s true color? We report, you decide:

From Palin’s Facebook page:

Adversaries who have been trying to silence Dr. Laura for years seized on her recent use of the n-word on her show as she subsequently suggested that rap “artists” and other creative types like those producing HBO shows who regularly use the n-word could be questioned for doing so. Her intention in discussing the issue with a caller seeking advice was not to be hateful or bigoted. Though she did not mean to insult the caller, she did, and she apologized for it. Still, those who oppose her seized upon her mistake in using the word (though she didn’t call anyone the derogatory term) to paint her as something that she’s not. I can understand how she could feel “shackled” by those who would parse a single word out of decades of on-air commentary. I understand what she meant when she declared that she was “taking back my First Amendment rights” by turning to a new venue that will not allow others the ability to silence her by going after her stations, sponsors, and supporters.

I, and obviously many others, have been “shackled” too by people who play games with false accusations, threats, frivolous lawsuits, misreporting, etc., in an effort to silence those with whom they disagree. That’s why I tend to defend people who call it like they see it while others stop at nothing to shut them up…

And they do want us to shut up – which is why they do what they do. Liberals don’t want debate – they don’t want, at the end of the day, to live in a free society where we debate the merits of an issue. Liberals prefer a fascist society where everyone has to toe the party line and anyone who strays from the liberal narrative is hounded out of public life.

The basis for this is, of course, the liberals lack of understanding of truth – to them, there is no truth; everything is a social construct and they believe they’ve developed a superior construct to everyone else. To liberals, Dr. Laura subscribes to the wrong view and thus she must be silenced – her use of the “N-word” could be a lot of things, but it isn’t evidence that she’s secretly in the KKK or harbors racist views about black people. A lifetime spent helping people with their personal and social problems is reduced, by liberals, to the fact that she used the word. That is the act of hate, not the fact that Dr. Laura spoke the word.

But, liberals, your hour has struck. The political and economic system you have crafted over the past 80 years is coming apart at the seams. We’re going to first clear you out of DC, then out of those “commanding heights” of culture from whence you have destroyed lives and liberty. America will be restored – and, guess what?, you’ll like it better…freedom will be scary for you, but only for a while until you get used to it.

Unbelievable:

“There is no question there is a concerted effort to make this a political issue by some. And I join those who have called for looking into how … this opposition to the mosque is being funded,” she said. “How is this being ginned up that here we are talking about Treasure Island, something we’ve been working on for decades, something of great interest to our community, as we go forward to an election about the future of our country and two of the first three questions are about a zoning issue in New York City?”

It doesn’t matter, Nancy – its not for you, as Speaker, to ask in to the background or motivations of those who are asking questions…you job, as servant of the people, is to just answer the dratted question.

But that is how they view us – servants of the Ruling Class; people who are not to dare question the Rulers.

November can’t come fast enough.

Because if its a choice between academic freedom and indulging in continued hatred of President Bush, its really no contest:

Anti-war activists are protesting at the University of California, Berkeley to demand the removal of a law professor who used to craft legal theories for the Bush administration on waterboarding and other harsh interrogation techniques.

Monday is the first day of classes at UC Berkeley’s School of Law. The target of the protest there is John Yoo, who worked for President Bush’s Office of Legal Counsel in 2001-03. The demonstators want Yoo to be prosecuted for war crimes…

Of course, these same demonstrators will never call for, say, Fidel Castro to be prosecuted – after all, he really did commit war crimes, but because he’s a socialist, its all ok. Be a Republican who merely offers some legal advice to a President you hate – up against the wall, you SOB!

If you’re going to be a fanatic, I guess you might as well go all the way:

…He doesn’t even want his ruling — which ignores Supreme Court precedent and imposes gay marriage against the expressed wishes of the electorate — appealed to the Ninth Circuit. Walker feels that only the state politicians who were against Proposition 8 have standing to appeal, while the over 7 million California voters who supported Proposition 8 shouldn’t be able to even present their position to a higher court. It’s outrageous. The people are supposed to be sovereign, not the politicians. This stay order will be appealed to the Ninth Circuit and if necessary to Justice Anthony Kennedy, and I think it is a tactical mistake on Judge Walker’s part to display his injudicious zeal — once again — before Kennedy’s eyes.

It seems that Walker prefers to be the hero of the gay rights movement to being a judge – it is the only way to read this: he wants gay marriage and is determined to impose it on his own hook. He doesn’t care about the risk of over-turn on appeal – he’s got his fame among his ideological friends, and that is what he values more than anything else.

While the 9th circuit will probably flub its task – staying Walker’s ruling is the only rational course of action – it does seem that the Supreme Court, even if it wants to impose gay marriage, will not be pleased at the way Walker is going about his business.

UPDATE: How Glenn Beck gets it wrong on gay marriage.

UPDATE II: From Time, of all places – Walker might have sabotaged his own agenda:

And to add another twist, at least one constitutional-law scholar in California is suggesting that by trumpeting the issue of standing, Walker has opened a hornet’s nest he may have been better off leaving undisturbed. “If the proponents don’t have standing to appeal, then it’s entirely plausible that the courts will rule that they did not properly have standing to go to trial,” Vikram Amar, a law professor at the University of California at Davis, told TIME Thursday evening. “This is an issue he glossed over when he allowed them to intervene in the trial.”

Amar says that if the Ninth Circuit agrees with Walker that the proponents don’t have standing to appeal, the judges may well decide they shouldn’t have been allowed to intervene in the case at all. If they do, he says, they could decide to vacate the trial entirely, sending it back to Walker to start over. The governor and attorney general would be unlikely to intervene — but on the other hand, come November, voters will choose new candidates for both of those offices…

It was flat out wrong for CA AG Brown to not go in to the case – for that, alone, he should have been removed from office in California (if you’re AG, you defend the laws – even if you don’t like them. Period.). Walker wanted a “legal” ruling so he allowed standing to a group of people, and then said they didn’t have standing because he knows darned well his ruling will be over turned on appeal…but if they don’t have standing now, then they didn’t have standing then. Can’t have it both ways, “judge”.

This just points out even more strongly the nature of this trial and ruling – what was wanted was a certain ruling, and Walker was determined to get it. Impeachment is a necessity – simply to defend the judicial system of the United States.

American Papist brings to our attention part of the Prop 8 ruling which goes says:

Religious beliefs that gay and lesbian relationships are sinful or inferior to heterosexual relationships harm gays and lesbians.

It was hard to believe that a judicial ruling in the United States of America could say such a thing. This is the sort of opinion a gay rights activist might assert, but in the context of a judicial ruling, it is a statement of fact. The judge is saying, for sure, that religious beliefs regarding sexual morality harm gay people. This is as stupid as saying that religious injunctions against adultery or lying harm cheaters and con artists.

But that is the nature of the ruling (you can read it all here). It isn’t a ruling on law, it is an assertion that the position of the gay rights movement is the one and only correct opinion, and everyone opposed is wicked. If you go through the ruling, it is clearly asserted that whatever does not go the way gay rights advocates wish is the result of a horrific conspiracy of evil religions. And, furthermore, those who oppose gay rights do so because they want to feel superior to homosexuals.

The judge, Vaughn Walker, has essentially ruled that the religion I practice – a religion I believe was founded by God, Himself, while he lived on earth as a man; and which has been faithfully transmitted since Our Lord ascended in to heaven – is engaged in an illegal conspiracy to deny equal rights. The mere fact that my faith holds that homosexual sex is intrinsically disordered is considered evidence of this – no credence is lent to the possibility that my faith might be right and gay activists might be wrong. It is taken as a given that homosexual sex is morally equal to heterosexual sex and thus any failure to accord homosexuality the same privileges as heterosexuality is wrong.

My religion, in a sense, has been ruled illegal by judge Vaughn Walker.

It is clear to me that one or the other will have to go – and as I’m not about to lay down for this, it is the judge who will have to go. In the nation my grand-father and father fought for, and which I served in my turn, I will not have it that a judge can declare my religious beliefs to be evidence of evil intent. Judge Vaughn Walker must be impeached – he is free to hold to his absurd, gay rights beliefs all he wishes, and I’ll never say that he harms me by the mere fact of holding those beliefs, but he has no business being a judge. While he sits on the bench, no Christian in his jurisdiction can obtain justice, and so he must go.

UPDATE: Matthew Franck says it much better than I do:

Perhaps here, in this nadir of absurdity, we have found the real fundament of the judge’s thinking. Citizens who wish to defend the institution of marriage as they and their families have known it all their lives, and for countless generations, are irrational bigots. Worse still, if they are moved to act because of the union of their faith with their moral opinions, they are crazy religious folk, bent only on harming others whom they merely “dislike” on grounds that cannot possibly be defended before a tribunal of right-thinking people. And those others, the same-sex-couple plaintiffs? They must be rescued from the “harm” to their feelings that results from their exclusion from a historic civil and moral institution that has never hitherto been thought to have been built for them.

Pretty much expected, but still an outrage:

A federal judge overturned California’s gay-marriage ban Wednesday in a landmark case that could eventually force the U.S. Supreme Court to confront the question of whether same-sex couples have a constitutional right to wed.

The ruling by Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker touched off a celebration outside the courthouse. Gay couples waved rainbow and American flags and erupted with cheers in the city that has long been a magnet for gays…

This is just liberalism determined to win, regardless. The people pass a law banning gay marriage, a judge invalidates it. The people then pass a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, a judge invalidates it. Now it goes up further in to the courts – where this judges absurd ruling should fall on 9th and 10th amendment grounds.

Bottom line, however, is that now the gay marriage proponents are putting our backs against the wall – we must now fully press for a US constitutional amendment banning gay marriage. I don’t want to do it, but I will not tolerate a judge usurping the right of the people to decide their laws.

UPDATE: The Judge’s conclusion is a monument to liberal idiocy:

Proposition 8 fails to advance any rational basis in singling out gay men and lesbians for denial of a marriage license. Indeed, the evidence shows Proposition 8 does nothing more than enshrine in the California Constitution the notion that opposite- sex couples are superior to same-sex couples. Because California has no interest in discriminating against gay men and lesbians, and because Proposition 8 prevents California from fulfilling its constitutional obligation to provide marriages on an equal basis, the court concludes that Proposition 8 is unconstitutional.

That is sheer opinion dressed up as a legal ruling – the judge clearly is personally offended that the people of California have dared to recognize that men and women are different and that marriage and family hold a special place in society. The judge here is just mad that gay people can’t have a pretty wedding like straight people do – as if the wedding, itself, is what marriage is all about; or that people get married just for the heck of it and so everyone should be able to have a marriage in any manner they like.

We’ll have to see how this goes through the Courts – the judge may later rule that California has to start issuing marriage licenses right away, but that would be to tread on dangerous ground. Gay marriage in theory and awaiting a SC review is one thing – it actually happening and then people taking their CA licenses to other States demanding “full faith and credit” is quite another. So, the judge may hold fire – but, given his clearly irrational view, he might also be in for a dime, in for a dollar.

UPDATE II: A Conclusion Not Anchored in Reality.

UPDATE III: K-Lo over at NRO:

Actual quote from the ruling today: “Gender no longer forms an essential part of marriage.”

This is a court ruling, not an academic seminar at Berkeley.

This isn’t about equality. This is about recreating our fundamental institutions.

Yep.

Nauseating:

CBS President Nina Tassler has apologized for the network’s low rating on the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation’s (GLAAD) recent “Network Responsibility Index,” which ranked broadcast and cable networks by the percentage of “LGBT-inclusive” hours in their original prime time programming.

“We’re very disappointed in our track record so far,” said Tassler at the Television Critics Association fall previews. “We’ll try to do better.”…

Here’s a little kicker to the tale – ABC Family came in 2nd in the pro-gay television sweepstakes.

This is very much akin to the sort of kangaroo-court sessions of the old, Stalinist left. People of the left who strayed from the party line were taken to task and forced to pour garbage all over themselves in order to stay in the left’s good graces. Its not like CBS – or, indeed, any MSM outfit – is being anti-gay; the complaint is that they should be even more pro-gay than they have been. Naturally, the moral ciphers who run CBS, and other MSM groups, immediately drop to their knees and beg forgiveness when called out by these fascist, leftwing pressure groups.

Meanwhile, things go on the MSM which are directly insulting to Christianity and we’re lucky if they even acknowledge that we’ve got a problem. If only there were 1/10th the positive portrayals of Christians as there are homosexuals in the MSM – we’d leap for joy and offer a prayer of thanksgiving.

But, we won’t get that – not, at least, until we can force a series of MSM companies out of business. That, my friends, will take some conservative money to start up some alternative broadcast and cable media. We’ll have to see if we can start finding such out there – it won’t be impossible; if centrist Fox News can blow MSM news out of the water, then centrist television and movies can do it, too. All we have to do is find the will and find the people.

They don’t want to debate – the left never does. This is because the left cannot admit that non-left views might have validity. Debate and compromise would lead to a world which is not 100% governed by leftist ideology, and that is unacceptable to the left.

So, they engage in these tactics. In fact, of course, they have always engaged in these tactics. The difference between the past and today is that now we have the New Media to expose these fanatics, and thus generate the opposition which will destroy them.

Pointed out by J. Christian Adams:

Since my testimony before the Civil Rights Commission under oath on July 6 about various corrupt policies relating to enforcement of election law at the Department of Justice, the left-wing soldiers on the internet have marched into action. They have made personal attacks and made multiple factual errors in defending the dismissal. This is unfortunate, because they are harming a cause they profess to support — the right to vote. In their reflexive personal attacks and amateurish legal arguments, they fail to see they are undermining their own long-term goals, namely vigorous enforcement of voter intimidation and civil rights laws. Perhaps it is not too late for the more reasonable among them to understand their approach to the New Black Panther dismissal is suicidal…

Suicidal, indeed. The left’s defense of NBPP and attacks on Adams is un-American. To defend the NBPP is to defend criminality; to defend fascism; to defend racism. I realize that the left has a knee-jerk mentality about these things – but if you let this thing go on then there will be no defense of voter rights, at all.

The problem with left wing tactics is that they are turning elections from contests of parties and ideas in to contests of who can cheat the most. This undermines democracy and once that is completed, we will fall to tyranny – if the electoral process is muddied to the point where the people don’t accept the results as legitimate, then the government has no authority to rule. Period.

You on the left really need to think about this – and join the right in demanding that the NBPP be prosecuted.

From Allahpundit at Hot Air:

The text’s not online yet but it sounds like they scaled back the accusation from the entire movement to simply certain unspecified people within it. Which is the safe route, of course. Smearing everyone would go too far even by the standards of some liberals, including The One…

From this point on, anyone with any sense of decency should have nothing to do with the NAACP. The TEA Party is not racist – and given what we see here, it is likely there are more racists in the NAACP than in the TEA Party. I am sick to death of this – I am not racist; I do not associate with racists; I do not tolerate racism – when some liberal says groups I belong to has racist elements they are essentially saying that I am a racist. I’m furious at this sort of thing.

A once proud and useful organization has gone entirely in to the gutter. Shame on them.

UPDATE: Sarah Palin weighs in:

I am saddened by the NAACP’s claim that patriotic Americans who stand up for the United States of America’s Constitutional rights are somehow “racists.” The charge that Tea Party Americans judge people by the color of their skin is false, appalling, and is a regressive and diversionary tactic to change the subject at hand…

Agreed.

Race-based law enforcement, that is what we have. Justice is not possible from Obama’s “Justice” Department.

From the Washington Examiner:

…Case in point is Democratic Underground (aka DU), a liberal discussion forum started in 2001 that, up until recently, was united in its hatred for former president George W. Bush. But now that many Democrats have withdrawn their support of Obama, DU responded last week with regulations on how its users may express opinions about the current occupant of the Oval Office and Democrats generally.

It turns out Democratic Underground is a safe haven for all Democrats too faithful to their party to say anything beyond “constructive criticism” of Obama or other Democrats in office. The last thing they need is another voice telling them that maybe Obama should have factored hurricanes into the oil cleanup plans. Oh, and don’t you dare think about calling our president “Barry.”…

Barry would be proud – the kooks at DU now fully understand that with the Cult of Personality comes the Dictatorship of the (leftwing) Blogitariat.

DU is free to make whatever rules they like – freedom of speech does not mean that people can write whatever they want in blog comments. But I do recall the rather vile anti-Bush sentiments expressed at DU on a regular basis and it is a bit surprising that even mild criticism of Obama is being purged. You’d think they’d have tougher skins over there – I mean, once you’ve called the President a war criminal, any other sort of criticism directed at the Chief Executive becomes relatively mild. Even when we were Blogs for Bush, we allowed a wide range of criticism of President Bush to appear on the blog.

The true believers are hunkering down – getting in to mental bomb shelters, ever more disconnected from reality. It’ll make the November results all the more entertaining – always love it when liberals are shocked by election results.

From Fox News:

It seems abundantly clear to me that the Panthers were let off simply because they were the Panthers. Remember, in the liberal world view, black people can never be racist because only people with “power” can be racist…no matter who obviously racist a non-white group is, a liberal will still never call them that.

We won’t be able to obtain justice in the United States while the Obama Administration is in office – they are incapable of providing it because they don’t know what it is.

Just disgusting:

An Israeli cargo ship arriving in Oakland today was forced to sit idle and not offload its containers when longshoremen joined forces with a coalition of communist and Islamist groups who picketed the port in protest against the recent violent incident off the coast of Gaza.

The ship, owned by Zim Lines, was not carrying any controversial cargo, nor is Zim involved in politics in any way; it was targeted simply because the shipping company is based in Israel.

The Jew-hatred of the left grows apace – anything which can be done to make life miserable for Jews is being done and will continue to be done.

Now comes the time for everyone on the left to choose: do you wish to be party to the New Holocaust, advocated by the Islamo-fascists, or will you have no part in it? Pick a side, and let us know where you stand.

From CBS News:

…a senior administration official tells CBS News that the federal government will indeed formally challenge the law when Justice Department lawyers are finished building the case. The official said Justice is still working on building the case.

This is would be an egregious and unwarranted interference of a sovereign State. And to double the bad news, its all being done because the Obama Administration refuses to enforce US border security laws – rather than enforce the laws, Obama is preferring to make political hay over a State attempting to protect the liberty, lives and property of its citizens!

It is most emphatically not a violation of the United States Constitution for a State to inquire in to the residency status of persons detained in the course of normal law enforcement activities. If we allow this Obama Administration action to go forward we will be allowing the federal government to entirely usurp the powers reserved for the States and the people. Obama is, perhaps, just grand standing – but the effect of such an action would be the overthrow of the United States constitutional order.

When this case comes down we, the people, must stand with Arizona – in defense of the American system of government against an out of control federal government.

UPDATE: 56% oppose this Administration effort.

Ann Althouse notes:

“[W]hat if we could just be China for a day?… You know, I mean, where we could actually, you know, authorize the right solutions….”

“… and I do think there is a sense of that, on, on everything from the economy to environment. I don’t want to be China for a second, OK, I want my democracy to work with the same authority, focus and stick-to-itiveness. But right now we have a system that can only produce suboptimal solutions.”

So said Thomas Friedman on “Meet the Press”…

As The Anchoress additionally notes, we’ve also had Woody Allen and Andrea Mitchell chime in on the “wish we had a dictator” theme. Why? Because people of the left simply don’t like the tedious process of convincing people they are right. They already know they are, and thus they should just be able to get the job done.

A few years back I opined that liberals in America were junior-league Leninists. I caught a bit of flack for that – outraged that I would dare compare some of my fellow Americans to that inhuman beast. But, really, the only difference between Thomas Friedman and Lenin is that Lenin actually managed to obtain absolute power – had Lenin never done that, he’d be remembered today as no more than one in a long line of leftist thinkers…but he got his power and piled up millions of corpses.

For Friedman – and others – to pine for a dictator is just a natural outgrowth of the leftist world view. It is a demand that reality be forced to fit theory once it is realized that reality makes a mockery of liberal theory.

While we can laugh at such things – and we should – we must not lose sight of the fact that if they could impose a dictator on us, they would. They would strip away our liberty in an instant – because in their minds our liberties are just getting in the way of their worldview – a worldview they are convinced will make all perfect in the world.

So, be on guard – watch for these liberal fascists and oppose them at every turn. Leave no statement uncontested, no action without strong opposition – any weakness on our part will result in a redoubled leftist effort to get at whatever we have left. These people can and will be defeated – but it will take all of us, fighting hard, to do it.

Love it:

The people are riled up and not about to put up with liberal garbage any longer.

After all, we were born of rebels:

Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick, speaking at a law school forum, said that GOP opposition to the Obama program “is almost at the level of sedition.”

Patrick later said the phrase was a mere “rhetorical flourish,” but this isn’t the first — or the fifth — time a prominent liberal politico has accused conservatives of approaching sedition in opposing Obama administration policies. See, the “almost” part is key, because then it isn’t offensive, right?

And the thing is, we’re not like the liberals who call themselves rebellious. No, not like that at all – liberals are slaves who, doing their master’s bidding, think they a “speaking truth to power” or whatever catch phrase of the day it is. We, on our side, are like this:

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined. – Patrick Henry

We refuse to give up that force and we won’t be cowed by hacks like Deval Patrick. Call us seditious and we’ll wear that badge with pride – we do, indeed, seek the overthrow of the liberalism being imposed upon us. There will be no let up on our part until liberalism is consigned to the ash heap of history.

Yet more liberal fascism on the march:

…The DISCLOSE Act’s purpose, according to Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee chair Chris Van Hollen and other “reformers,” is simply to require disclosure of corporate and union political speech after the Supreme Court’s January decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission held that the government could not ban political expenditures by companies, nonprofit groups, and labor unions.

The bill, however, would radically redefine how the FEC regulates political commentary. A section of the DISCLOSE Act would exempt traditional media outlets from coordination regulations, but the exemption does not include bloggers, only “a communication appearing in a news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication…”

They really want us to go away – and, no, they don’t mean all the blogosphere. You know darn well that Daily Kos and Democrat Underground will not feel the regulatory heat. No conservative would ever complain about a liberal blogger, but liberals would launch endless complaints. We on the right would be harassed out of existence.

Which is the whole point of DISCLOSE and, indeed, of campaign finance laws in general. Power elites – including some allegedly on the right – just can’t stand it when someone asks an uncomfortable question. We’re supposed to be watching American Idol, not pestering our political leaders. The powerful want to get on with the vital work of government (enriching themselves and cronies) and don’t want to bother with the people.

And so campaign finance law after campaign finance law – all ostensibly designed to cut the power of “the rich” in politics, but after decades of new laws, does anyone want to argue that “the rich” are less influential than before? The real way to beat the power of the vested interests is to allow the people to do whatever they please – 300 million Americans, well informed, will be more than a match for any particular wire puller.

One of the things we’ll have to do, once back in power, is to re-codify American law – go through it from page one to page last and simply get rid of all the laws built up over a century to hamstring the people. A long, difficult task, but the future of American liberty depends on it.