Just another branch of Liberal Fascism – in this instance, trying to stop fishing. Yes, including recreational fishing:

The Obama administration will accept no more public input for a federal strategy that could prohibit U.S. citizens from fishing the nation’s oceans, coastal areas, Great Lakes, and even inland waters.

This announcement comes at the time when the situation supposedly still is “fluid” and the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force still hasn’t issued its final report on zoning uses of these waters.

That’s a disappointment, but not really a surprise for fishing industry insiders who have negotiated for months with officials at the Council on Environmental Quality and bureaucrats on the task force. These angling advocates have come to suspect that public input into the process was a charade from the beginning…

The wilderness, you see, is for the elite – they can afford to the extra charges necessary to be “green” by definition of environmentalists. The wilderness is not, however, for you and me – us knuckle dragging Bible- and gun-clingers are actually a nuisance out there. How can the fabulously wealthy be expected to enjoy, say, Lake Tahoe if a bunch of middle class cretins are there fishing and hunting and driving boats around the lake?

I doubt much that Obama is even aware of what is going on – sure, in the general sense he’ll always mouth whatever is fashionable at the moment vis a vis the environment, but the real drivers of this are the screwball leftists he’s appointed lower down in the bureaucracy. They are determined to reshape environmental policy and they will not shape it towards the benefit of the majority of Americans (if the majority of Americans benefit from it, the environmentalists will feel they’ve failed).

Whether its something as simple as a weekend angler, or something major like grabbing millions of acres and setting them off limits, the whole thrust of these Enviro-Fascists is to “protect” America from Americans. If they can make it more expensive, more difficult or downright impossible for Americans to use our common lands, they’ll do it. They know best, you see?

We won’t be able to undo this until we beat Obama in 2012 – but once we do we have to be sure that the next Republican President rescinds Obama’s regulations and executive orders whole sale…better to be safe than sorry, and as we don’t know what bits of liberal fascism will be inserted in the fine print, our best defense will be to get rid of them all.

Then we pass a law requiring a 2/3 vote in Congress before public lands can be placed off limits to public use and development…

This is what you get:

Church leaders are defending the last remaining Catholic adoption agency in England and Wales against homosexual equality laws that will force it to close. They say children in the agency’s care will suffer, charging that the government is trying to force the agency to disregard Church teaching.

Last Sunday, three bishops said that they were taking the case of the Catholic Care adoption agency to the High Court, the Catholic Herald reports. The agency finds homes for about 20 hard-to-place children each year.

Bishop Arthur Roche of Leeds, Bishop John Rawsthorne of Hallam and Bishop Terry Drainey of Middlesbrough, said in a letter read at Masses that the government is trying to force the agency to operate “with disregard to the Church’s teaching on marriage and family life.”

Its not that they hate children, but that they love gay activism, more – with the added “benefit” of being able to attack the Catholic Church (always a favorite liberal past time). This is insanity.

No one is arguing that an adoption agency can’t adopt out to gay couples – all that is happening here is that a group which has worked for nearly a century at helping hard-to-place children find homes cannot, in good conscience, place those children in homes which inherently violate the group’s teachings. But that isn’t ok with liberals – no, they have to go all fascist about such things and demand either a surrender of conscience, or a surrender of charity.

Hopefully there is some rationality remaining in Britain – and it is additionally hoped that we’ll never come to this in the United States.

They just can’t help themselves, it would seem:

The Department of Homeland Security admitted today that it improperly conducted a threat assessment on pro-life and pro-abortion groups in Wisconsin. The assessment came before an expected rally last year in response to the University of Wisconsin Hospital board decided to allow abortions.

In February 2009, pro-life advocates planned to protest the hospital’s decision to open up a new Madison Surgery Center doing abortions.

The Associated Press reported today that the department said in a memo that it “destroyed all of the copies of the assessment after an internal review found it violated intelligence gathering guidelines about ‘protest groups which posed no threat to homeland security.’”

AP indicated the assessment was reportedly only shared with the director of Wisconsin’s intelligence-sharing center and local police in Middleton, Wisconsin, the site of the rally.

Today, a pro-life organization in Wisconsin informed LifeNews.com of its concerns.

In response to an open records request by the Alliance Defense Fund and Pro-Life Wisconsin, the Middleton Police Department and the Wisconsin Department of Justice, along with the Department of Homeland Security all refused on February 4 to release copies of the threat assessment.

Probably because they don’t want to look like a bunch of fools. I really don’t blame the cops on this – it was probably liberal, political higher ups who ordered it done. Because you know how we gap toothed, knuckle dragging Bible-clingers are ready to go off on a violent rampage at a moment’s notice.

We simply must return to the Constitutional order of things – this is getting entirely out of hand.

More and more fun stuff about 2010:

..Fox has the list of donors, which comprises a set of interlocking slush-type funds that pay for the anti–Tea Party campaign. The largest of these is the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME,) which has kicked in a total of $9.9M in a single year to two funds that provide the cash for the non-grassroots movement. Yes — government workers’ money is being used to fend off Tea Party protesters.–

It seems that the Tea Party movement, once defamed and derided, now poses a threat to the liberal establishment, so much so that they are collecting millions to undermine it. Conservatives shouldn’t object to political speech — which this is. But there is certainly grounds to object to the chicanery, the lack of transparency, and the pretense that the opponents of the Tea Parties are themselves grassroots activists. They aren’t — this is Big Labor and assorted liberal-interest groups once again doing the bidding of the Democratic party. And if not for Fox, no one would be any the wiser.

In defense of our liberals, this is what constitutes “grassroots” in liberal-land. Being completely servile in mentality as well as rather lazy in effort (you think that the AFSCME employees of government are wellsprings of innovation and efficiency?), it takes uber-liberals to set things up so that liberal rank-and-file people can get going. There never has been a liberal movement which sprang spontaneously from the people – all liberal movements have always been the result of careful planning and lavish funding (where do you think the concept of “walking around money” comes from?).

As for conservative movements – well, there have been only two and the one led directly to the other, with a slight interruption. Buckley fueled the first conservative movement in the 50’s which culminated with Reagan while the likes of Rush, Hannity and TEA Party activists have created the second movement (yes, there have been conservatives long before – but prior to Buckley, conservatism was all about what you’re against; with Buckley, it started to be about what you’re for. Big difference; to counter-act liberal fascism, we now have conservative revolutionaries. Strange world, indeed).

We’ll see how this plays out – this is Liberaldom gearing up for the battle. They mean to smash the TEA Party and, at the least, hold Democrat losses to a bare minimum in November – confident that liberalism will eventually become the default position once they get 50% plus one dependent on government.

And we, of course, mean to smash them – to me, this is where we draw the line. We’ve let things slide – we’ve now got people actually advocating for government-funded sex-change operations: at this point, we either totally destroy liberalism or be destroyed, ourselves. And by “destroy”, I mean just that – we roll it all back and restore the Constitution and undo all the liberal idiocy…or lose it all, for good.

Great battle; well worth fighting – and I intend to be in the thick of it.

Seems that Jonah Goldberg’s book – two years after publication – is gaining traction and, thus, starting to take a lot of flack. Read here for more.

My view: Goldberg gets it exactly right. This is especially true in light of my own assertion that all non-conservative views ultimately stem from the same, flawed source. Liberalism, as I’ve said, rests upon the falsehood that Man is perfectible by men. That our problems stem not from our fallen nature, but from the unjust systems and that if we can just change the system, we’ll change ourselves. Heaven on earth will result.

From that initial folly has stemmed all the rest – and thus liberalism, socialism, communism, fascism and Nazism are branches of the same, poisoned tree. Of course, to point any of this out – especially in a best-selling book – is to irk the liberals to no end. They insist that things like Nazism and fascism have nothing to do with liberalism – in spite of the obviousness of the relationship.

I think – for justice and for the sheer fun of it – that once we gain a commanding majority in the Senate, we should void the censure of Joe McCarthy (arguably liberal fascism’s most prominent American victim) and have him set up with a Presidential Medal of Freedom. It’ll get the dogs off Goldberg and provide us hours of entertainment.

Interesting:

Folks at Public Citizen, the Ralph Nader group that has supported litigation to limit freedom of speech through campaign finance laws, are so outraged by today’s Citizens United Supreme Court decision that they are calling for a constitutional amendment to limit freedom of speech.

In their statement responding to the decision, Public Citizen demanded public financing of congressional elections, then added its call for an amendment, saying:

“Public Citizen will aggressively work in support of a constitutional amendment specifying that for-profit corporations are not entitled to First Amendment protections, except for freedom of the press. We do not lightly call for a constitutional amendment. But today’s decision so imperils our democratic well-being, and so severely distorts the rightful purpose of the First Amendment, that a constitutional corrective is demanded.

“We are formulating language for possible amendments, asking members of the public to sign a petition to affirm their support for the idea of constitutional change, and planning to convene leading thinkers in the areas of constitutional law and corporate accountability to begin a series of in-depth conversations about winning a constitutional amendment.”

This is just all too typical of liberal-fascism. You see, what they are doing is identifying an enemy who has no rights (in their view), in this case “for profit corporations”, and demanding that the laws be changed to reflect their view on whom the enemy is. Why do they do this? Because they believe that the enemy may deceive the people and thus prevent the electoral victory of liberalism, which always has the public interest at heart, in their view.

Now, I ask: anyone out there want to differentiate between the morality of the Big Three auto makers donating to politics and the UAW doing ditto? To the liberals, its ok for the UAW to donate – they are not “for profit”, and thus their purity cannot be questioned…the regular indictments and sundry corruptions we see in unions notwithstanding. This is one of the most monumentally stupid ways to look at the world imaginable – but it is based in the fundamental flaw of liberalism: that Man is perfectible by the actions of men.

Because liberals believe that we can fix ourselves, they believe they have been fixed – by being liberals, they have proven themselves to be rescued from the benighted bigotry of the non-liberals. Not-for-profit organizations, run by liberals, are thus organizations which simply cannot get it wrong. They’ve been cured, you see? The UAW, a not-for-profit organization, not only can get involved in politics, but must do so because liberals must be able to propagandize for their views in a relentless manner in order to get those hill-ape morons, the non-liberals, to vote the right way. Allowing wicked, evil for-profit organizations to do so might confuse the liberal message, and thus can’t be allowed (of course, those wicked, evil, smelly corporations can donate zillions of dollars to other liberal organizations to use in politics – that is ok: once the money is filtered through liberal hands, it ceases to be blood money sweated from the poor).

But, of course, liberals haven’t been fixed – they are just as apt to greed, lust, laziness, etc as the rest of us. A union boss can look at the pension fund as a personal piggy bank and live as swank a life as a CEO – and be just as indifferent to the lives of the workers as the CEO is. To forbid one person to donate because he is for-profit and to allow another to do so because he’s non-profit is to allow one sinner an unfair advantage over another. Such a action is both immoral and, of course, un-American.

Thus it commends itself to liberal-fascists.

A nasty, anti-American hate-fest comes to a well-deserved ending:

It is with the greatest regret, on behalf of our Board, that we must announce that Air America Media is ceasing its live programming operations as of this afternoon, and that the Company will file soon under Chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code to carry out an orderly winding-down of the business.

Geesh:

Rep. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.), prone for throwing his own political bombs at Republicans, has threatened a local critic with five years in jail for creating the website “mycongressmanisnuts.com,”

The Orlando Sentinel reports that Grayson wrote a letter this week to Attorney General Eric Holder demanding that the federal government imprison Republican activist Angie Langley for five years because of her website criticizing him.

The website, designed to raise money against Grayson, catalogues videos and news clippings that portray the provocative congressman in an unfavorable light. It courts donors to donate money to help elect his Republican challenger next year – collecting $3,725 to date.

Grayson’s contention is that the owner of the site is not a constituent and presents herself as such. Presumptively, it is the “mycongressman” part of the title which offends Grayson, as the website doesn’t say “I, Jane Doe, am Graysons constituent and I think he’s nuts”. To Grayson, only people who he directly represents can call him nuts, I guess.

But, the fact remains, Grayson is nuts and thus the website is accurate – and Grayson has now become an insane fascist over it. I recommend that someone else set up www.mycongressmanisafascist.com to complement this fine website.

This is “justice” under Obama:

The Justice Department has told the federal attorneys who filed a civil complaint against the New Black Panther Party for disrupting a Philadelphia polling place last year not to cooperate with an investigation of the incident by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

The commission last week subpoenaed at least two Justice Department lawyers and sought documents from the department to explain why the complaint was dismissed just as a federal judge was about to punish the New Black Panther Party and three of its members for intimidating voters.

Why do they do this? Because when a leftist says “community organizer” he doesn’t mean someone like Obama but, actually, someone like these Panthers who intimidated voters. A well organized community, for the left, is a community which votes the right way – and no better way to ensure the “correct” vote than to put bully boys out in front of the polling place to scare away anyone who might want to vote the wrong way. The left has never allowed a fair vote unless it absolutely had to – because the other side had enough force on its side to keep things fair. Absent proper counter-force, the left will cheat at election time in a grand manner as as a matter of course.

The Department of Justice is supposed to act as the counter-force to those who would attempt to hijack or intimidate the vote. They are supposed to on the look out for thugs at polling places and scams to stuff ballot boxes. Unfortunately, Justice has often been absent, especially in liberal areas of the country…and now, under Holder, Justice might be nowhere to be found. In the end, in order to protect our right to vote, we might have to post patriots at every polling place in sufficient force to intimidate the intimidators.

It’d be better if we could avoid this – but I don’t hold out much hope that Obama’s Justice Department will be at all interested in doing the right thing.

According to an Obama nominee, it does:

Does “sexual liberty” trump the Constitutional right to religious liberty? Chai Feldblum, President Obama’s choice for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, believes so. This week a senate committee will vote on her nomination to this important commission that rules on issues of “discrimination” in America’s workplaces.

Feldblum is the primary author of the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), a bill designed to give preferential consideration to homosexuals in the workplace. She noted, “We want to change the American workforce and revolutionize social norms. … Our current public policies undermine the moral and political unit of same-sex couples and families and that’s a moral wrong that needs to be rectified.”

She also said, “Marriage is not the only worthy form of family or relationship, and it should not be legally and economically privileged above all others.”

Wendy Wright, President of Concerned Women for America Legislative Action Committee (CWALAC), sent a letter to senators today opposing Chai Feldblum’s appointment. It notes:

“Chai Feldblum has a long history of radical ideology which would negatively shape the EEOC and its decisions. She flagrantly disregards the Constitutional right of religious liberty and attempts to replace this foundational freedom with her bizarre view of ‘sexual liberty.’

The worry is that the EEOC will go after religious employers – most notably places like Catholic hospitals and religious schools, though you can bet they’ll turn a blind eye to Moslem institutions; PC has its odd rules, ya know? – and force them to accommodate actions held to be immoral. No one disputes the right of a gay person to do as he wishes in the privacy of his own home – but if a gay person wishes to do that, and make it public, then religious institutions must be allowed to discriminate based solely upon theological grounds.

In other words, if the organization is headed up by, run by, supported by a religious group and that religion holds that homosexual sex is immoral, then that organization must have the right to deny employment – and all other forms of access – to homosexuals. Or, for that matter, adulterous heterosexuals or, indeed, for pretty much any reason a religious body decides. In our faith we must have no government oversight – that is the true meaning of separation of Church and State: that the State may not interfere with the religion (though, sorry liberals, the religion may interfere with the State…as all parts of the body politic may do).

As for me, I’ve had quite enough of liberal attempts to denigrate and attack my religion: we must have a religious liberty restoration amendment to the Constitution which clearly spells out that the First Amendment prohibits government restrictions on religious practice, in the private as well as in public.

Entirely unsurprising:

Politics in Law Firm and Law School Hiring: Time for some Tit for Tat?

The following question was posed to the NY Times‘ resident ethics expert:

While interviewing law students for jobs as paid summer interns and full-time associates for my firm, I noticed several had résumés listing their activities in the Federalist Society. Some of my partners have conservative views similar to those of the society, but I do not. These students’ politics would not affect their professional function, but my review is meant to consider their judgment and personality (though I don’t need to give reasons for the assessments given). May I recommend not hiring someone solely because of his or her politics?

To his credit, Randy Cohen of the Times answered that you cannot discriminate – but the larger issue is: how could anyone even ask such a question? Only in a politicized society in which people are to be judged on ideological purity as opposed to competence. Remember, we’re not asking here if we should hire the crazed, Islamist zealot as security guard for our nuclear weapons – we’re talking about a law firm. As far as Federalist views go, plus or minus, they have no effect on a lawyer representing his client – the law is what the law is. The lawyer with a Federalist background might be offended at any one of a hundred laws currently on the books – so might a lawyer with an ACLU background – but as long as a lawyer can do his job, that doesn’t matter. Not hiring based on ideology is a reflection of hatred, pure and simple.

The person who asked the question just doesn’t want people of the “wrong” view to have, well, anything – its the sort of attitude which informs the socialist elites in totalitarian societies. There they divvy up the people between “socially friendly” and “socially hostile” elements, and woe to those who are rated “hostile”. This is what we’re in for if we don’t win this battle against the left – eventually, we’ll be forced out, everywhere, simply because we don’t toe the leftist line.

Hey, if you can’t get it done via democratic means, it doesn’t mean you don’t get it done, right?

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will formally declare that greenhouse gases endanger human health on Monday, allowing President Barack Obama to show action as a major climate change summit opened in Copenhagen.

The EPA finding will allow it to regulate planet-warming gases even without legislation in the U.S. Congress, and will inject some optimism into the two-week global meeting on controlling climate change in the Danish capital.

Keep in mind that “greenhouse gasses” include the stuff you exhale a zillion times a day – you, my friend, are a threat to the earth! The EPA has decided that controlling your breathing is so important that they’ll act outside the law. Cool, huh? All it takes is a collection of pinheads in government who haven’t the faintest notion of what a law is. Oh, and you have to continue to believe that human beings are causing global warming…or, at least, pretend you believe it because its such a handy tool to gain control of peoples’ lives.

UPDATE: 1,200 limos and 140 private planes transport global warming fascists and dupes to conference

Well, we might want to start calling it a putsch, I guess:

The Obama administration will propose that the federal government take over safety regulation of the nation’s subway and light-rail systems, responding to what it says is haphazard and ineffective oversight by state agencies.

Under the proposal, the U.S. Department of Transportation would do for transit what it does for airlines and Amtrak: set and enforce federal regulations to ensure that millions of passengers get to their destinations safely. Administration officials said the plan will be presented in coming weeks to Congress, which must approve a change in the law.

The proposal would affect every subway and light-rail system in the country, including large systems in Washington, New York, Boston, Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Now your local bus route will come under the supervision of the same people who did such a bang up job with H1N1…feel safe?

From the Office of Personnel Management:

Beginning January 1, 2010, agencies must seek prior approval from OPM before they can appoint a current or recent political appointee to a competitive or non-political excepted service position at any level under the provisions of title 5, United States Code. OPM will review these proposed appointments to ensure they comply with merit system principles and applicable civil service laws. I have delegated decisionmaking authority over these matters to career Senior Executives at OPM to avoid any hint of political influence.

But, what this is for is to weed out anyone in the bureaucracy who worked for President Bush.

Now, when we come back in to power on January 20th, 2013, I do hope that every liberal hired or promoted under the Obama Administration has his or her bags packed…

Haven’t seen it better explained than this:

To say that antipoverty programs in the United States are perverted may be an understatement. When you take into account the loss of means-tested benefits (e.g., cash assistance, food stamps, housing subsidies, and health insurance), and the taxes that people pay on earned income, the return to working is essentially zero for those in the lower two quintiles of the income distribution.

For many of the working poor, the implicit marginal tax rate is greater than 100 percent. The long-run consequence of undermining the positive incentive to work is, of course, the creation of an underclass acclimated to not working; the supplement of cash and noncash benefits with income from crime and the underground economy; and the government resorting to negative incentives such as mandatory work programs.

And ObamaCare is perfectly designed to bring the 3rd quintile in to this system. Not by entirely destroying our incentive to work (that was necessary to create a poor, dependent underclass), but by taking so much of our money that we can’t live without government subsidies. By the time Obama and his Democrats are done, those of us in the middle class who work will be taxed at rate which makes it impossible for us to give up the government benefits – we’ll be mortgaged to the liberal super-State. And, my friends, that is precisely what they want.

Our liberals are tired of dealing with us – they hate the fact that we are clinging to God, guns and the Founder’s vision of the United States. All we’re doing is getting in the way – they are astounded that they still have to argue over such entirely settled (in liberal minds) issues such as global warming, gay marriage and federally funded abortion on demand. To them, such things are the mere basics of a normal society, as liberals define it. And so they press hard for ObamaCare…because that is the lynchpin of making us dependent with increasing dependence generation after generation until we’re entirely servile, as a majority of the European population is.

This is the crucial time – this is the crucial battle. We win this, and we’ll restore the America our Founders intended and our grandfathers lived in. Lose this, and our nation will be as set on a course to death as the European nations are today.

But will it pass the Senate?

Hours after President Obama exhorted Democratic lawmakers to “answer the call of history,” the House hit an unprecedented milestone on the path to health-care reform, approving a trillion-dollar package late Saturday that seeks to overhaul private insurance practices and guarantee comprehensive and affordable coverage to almost every American.

After months of acrimonious partisanship, Democrats closed ranks on a 220-215 vote that included 39 defections, mostly from the party’s conservative ranks. But the bill attracted a surprise Republican convert: Rep. Anh “Joseph” Cao of Louisiana, who represents the Democratic-leaning district of New Orleans and had been the target of a last-minute White House lobbying campaign. GOP House leaders had predicted their members would unanimously oppose the bill.

We’ll have to have a talk with Cao – but my bet is that since the Stupak amendment passed, he felt it was ok to vote for the bill as it didn’t do the morally reprehensible thing if having taxpayer funded abortion. Its still horrible policy, however, and Cao voted the wrong way.

I like how the MSM says Democrats “closed ranks” – 39 of them broke ranks and joined the GOP. That is a fractured party being ruled by ideologues – and we’re going to whack ‘em hard next year.

Now – anyone want to guess on whether or not they’ll get 60 votes for cloture in the Senate? I think Harry will try by passing the most watered-down bill possible and then using the trick of the conference committee to ram through Obama-care, Pelosi-style.

Hmmm…

Democratic Louisiana Sen. Mary Landrieu is out as keynote speaker for the Palm Beach County Democratic Party’s annual fund-raising dinner next week because party leaders dislike her stance on health care reform, county Democratic Chairman Mark Alan Siegel said today.

Landrieu, a moderate who recently described herself as “extremely concerned about a government-run, taxpayer-funded, national public plan,” has not committed to voting to cut off a likely Republican filibuster and forcing a vote on the legislation.

Democrats need 60 votes to invoke “cloture” and force a vote.

“We just didn’t want to have a keynote speaker who’s not committed to cloture. It would have just been wrong,” said Siegel…

Well, Senator, you can always join Lieberman as an Independent.

Its like they’re just determined to be stupid and hateful:

The Vatican expressed “astonishment” and “regret” at Tuesday’s decision from the European Court of Human Rights that crucifixes in public school classrooms are a violation of freedom.

Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, director of the Vatican press office, gave a brief statement today to Vatican Radio in response to the decision.

“The crucifix has always been a sign of God’s offer of love, of union and of welcome for the whole of humanity,” the spokesman said. “It is to be regretted that it has come to be considered as a sign of division, of exclusion and of limitation of liberty. It is not this, and it is not so in the common feeling of our people.”

The Italian government protested the ruling, having contended that crucifixes — often hung in Italian public schools — are national symbol of culture and history.

Father Lombardi echoed this idea.

He called particularly grave “the desire to set aside from the educational world a fundamental sign of the importance of religious values in Italian history and culture.”

The Jesuit added that “religion makes a precious contribution to a person’s formation and moral growth, and is an essential component of our civilization. It is mistaken and myopic to want to exclude it from the educational realm.”

“It is astonishing then that a European court should intervene weightily in a matter profoundly linked to the historical, cultural and spiritual identity of the Italian people,” the Vatican spokesman stated.

What’s next? Tear down the Gothic cathedrals? After all, hard to escape the Christian imagery there, ya know?

This is just more liberal/left stupidity – the sooner these cretins die out and are replaced by the residual, but growing, Christian population of Europe, the better.

This is getting common enough for us to get very worried about it:

President Obama isn’t taking kindly to a television ad that criticizes his opposition to a popular scholarship program for poor children, and his administration wants the ad pulled.

Former D.C. Councilmember Kevin Chavous of D.C. Children First said October 16 that U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder had recently approached him and told him to kill the ad.

The 30-second ad, which has been airing on FOX News, CNN, MSNBC, and News Channel 8 to viewers in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia, urges the president to reauthorize the federally-funded D.C. Opportunity Scholarship Program that provides vouchers of up to $7,500 for D.C. students to attend private schools.

The ad features Chavous and a young boy–one of 216 students whose scholarships were rescinded by the Department of Education earlier this year when the agency announced no new students would be allowed into the program. The ad also includes an excerpt taken from one of Obama’s campaign statements.

“I saw [Holder] at an event,” said Chavous. “He did ask me in front of others to pull the ad. My response was, ‘No, and I tell you what, if the president does the right thing, not only will we pull it but we will celebrate him.’ ”

Alas! To do the right thing would anger powerful, well-heeled special interests. In this case, the teacher’s unions – Obama might very much want poor, DC kids to get a good education, but not at the cost of campaign donations. I mean, come on – there’s a limit to a liberal’s bleeding heart, ya know?

More worrisome than Obama’s devotion to corrupt, special interests is the fact that his people have repeatedly tried to get anti-Obama messages off the air. I don’t think its because they are afraid of dissent so much as they just don’t want to deal with it. Its much better, for the Obamaniacs, if they can just ram everything through without any pesky dissidents mucking up the works, you see?

If any of you liberals still wonder why we’re more and more often calling you fascists, here is your answer.

Now its Obama’s “Manufacturing Czar” – telling us that the free market is nonsense and that he agrees with Mao about power growing out of the barrel of a gun. Do any of these twits have even a cursory understanding of what they’re saying? Or are they just regurgitating what professors shoved down their throats in school?