The American Standard Bearer

The defeat of Joe Lieberman by leftist darling Ned Lamont in Connecticut’s Democrat primary is a particularly high profile manifestation of the efforts of the leftist anti-American wing of the Democrat Party. The money of George Soros, the grassroots network of MoveOn.org and the political savvy and organizational skills of Harold Ickes and John Podesta have practically insured a growing chasm in the national organization.

The alliance that has formed between the American left and Islamic radicals has been largely hidden, mainly due to a complicit media, until just recently. With a war between Hezbollah terrorists and Israel however, the left has rather visibly lined up squarely on the side of Hezbollah.

But disturbingly, it’s not only the left that has signed up in the anti-America, anti-Israel, pro-Islamic camp. A faction of conservatism has been gradually distancing itself from mainstream conservatism and has lately been sounding a great deal like the Michael Moore wing of the Democrat Party.

Formerly well respected conservative Paul Craig Roberts is one of the so-called paleo-conservatives. He writes in NewsMax.com today mainly on the subject of the 9-11 attack on the World Trade Center and he disputes the accepted notion that Muslim terrorists flew passenger jets into the towers and caused their collapse.

He rejects the official version of events that day based primarily on his steadfast belief that our government’s version can’t be true because “governments lie all the time.” Then he backs up his contention with his skewed “facts” that he insists on labeling the “scientific evidence.”

For example, he states that the towers collapsed at free fall speed, which would not be possible unless there was a controlled demolition. He also claims that the fact the buildings both collapsed vertically into their own footprints is evidence of controlled demolition.

But Thomas W. Eagar and Christopher Musso of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology dispute Robert’s claims. In a lengthly analysis in JOM, the pair explain in detail the circumstances that led to the collapse and make the observations that the buildings actually collapsed considerably slower than free fall speed and that the buildings could have done nothing other than implode (collapsed in their own footprints), given the circumstances.

Robert’s viewpoints are not so much science, as he insists, but more akin to leftist  political philosophy whose tenets include: Hate America, Hate Israel (because it’s the mid-east outpost of America and/or because Jews live there), Hate Christians, Recoil in Disgust at Middle-America, Bow to Political Authoritarianism (Iran, China, Cuba, etc.) and Proselytize for Islam.

The scene is familiar – Muslim “activists” trashing American flags and Israeli flags. Today in Thailand, practitioners of Islam, often referred to as the “religion of peace,” add some interesting imagery to the home-made American flag by filling the star-field with alternating swatstikas and the Star of David. I’m not sure what the exact message is but I doubt it has anything to do with peace.

The interesting thing is that some Muslim women, who were graciously allowed to appear in public by the otherwise domineering Muslim menfolk, are sporting an uncharacteristically straightforward sign. “The Best People Hizbollah.”

It’s hard to imagine conducting a reasoned debate with people who believe that the vermin of humanity that is Hezbollah are not only worthy of symapathy and understanding but are lionized as “The Best People.”

By the way, does anyone have any doubt that the “Bush” signs have been provided by American leftists? Here’s a couple of clues. The spelling and grammar are correct and they appear to be professionally done.

P. David Hornik posts an excellent article in Frontpage Magazine today exposing how the “useful idiots” in the mass media have openly aligned themselves with Hezbollah. They will say anything, including the most outrageous lies, to support the Islamonazis without the slightest consideration for what Hezbollah terrorism stands for, simply for the dubious honor of “being anti-Western.”

In fact, it’s so uncool in leftist circles to say, or even think, anything negative about Islam or Muslims, that the notion that Islam is a violent religion and is responsible for virtually all the terrorism in the world is simply inconcievable. Instead, the buzz among the increasingly delusional left is that Bush and his cronies secretely carried out the destruction of the World Trade Center towers and now have completely fabricated the news of the foiled terrorist plot in London.

According to Lynn Samuels, who has been a fixture of leftist talk radio in New York for years, there really wasn’t any terror plot at all. Samuels thinks it’s “obvious” that in an effort to raise sagging pole numbers, Bush got on the horn with British Prime Minister Tony Blair and together, they fabricated the whole thing! Wow!

Kevin Zilis of Jackson, New Jersey, has posted a letter on the Asbury Park Press website in which he makes a suggestion for those of us who are unhappy about the outcome of the flag amendment vote.

Zilis advocates legislation forcing American flag manufacturers to certify that their flags are actually made in America. Says Zilis, “Imagine finding a label attached to a flag stating: ‘This American flag was made in the U.S. by your fellow Americans. Thank you for supporting them and for honoring our great country.’”

Here’s an update for you Kevin – U.S. flag manufacturers are not waiting for the government to enact a law. They’ve taken it upon themselves to police their own industry and have formed an association to certify that a flag is made in the U.S. Annin & Co., Valley Forge Flag and other flag makers belong to the Flag Makers Association of America and they include a label on the flag packaging that certifies not only that the flag was made in America but that the materials used to make the flag are domestic.

The government doesn’t need to get involved. Americans who are concerned about where their flags are made can easily verify that the flag is American-made before they purchase.

We just received an interesting comment this morning regarding our post of yesterday about Connecticut Senate candidate, Ned Lamont. Knowing that not all of you read the comments, I’ve decided to reprint it, along with my analysis, because it’s just so damn typical.

Repack Rider writes:

“It’s hard to understand what your point might be. Lamont’s family background has never been a secret. Pretty nearly everyone who voted for him knew he was rich, and in spite of that he volunteered and taught in schools in low-income areas.

Bottom line is that the ONLY person he was being compared to was Joe the Ho Lieberman, and by virtually any way you measure a candidate, Lamont was superior.

Lieberman is bleating about running as an independent, but by November no one in Connecticut will buy him a beer. He’s toast, and it’s morning in America.”

The point is this: as a denizen in the feverswamps of Connecticut liberalism, I have no doubt that you know all about Lamont. Like your liberal bretheren in Massachusetts who worship the Kennedys, you yearn to elect a true blue-blood with “pedigree and background.”

However, for citizens of Connecticut who did not vote for Lamont as well as people across America who were watching, television news including the dreaded Fox News portrayed Lamont as a self-made man. In fact, Fox News used those very words. There is a very big difference between a true entrepreneur who risks everything to start a business and a person who inherits a fortune and invests what he can afford to lose. Most Americans instinctively understand that distinction.

I know that as a liberal, you feel compelled to use a pejorative (Joe the Ho) when referring to Lieberman, but it was only a short time ago that you hailed him as a hero when he was nominated for the VP slot by Al Gore. Lieberman has not changed his stripes in the interim – the Democrat party has.

As for your prediction for the November election, you may be right. After all, even a broken watch is right twice a day. However, fellow Democrat Dick Morris, who is a whole lot smarter than you, holds a different opinion. Here’s what Morris had to say about the subject:

“…Lieberman has taken the lead on issues ranging from campaign-finance reform to tobacco regulation to corporate-governance reform to tough action against terrorism to the battle against global warming. He’ll look better and better, while Lamont will look like a one-issue challenger who is out of his league.

Freed of the confines of the Democratic primary, Lieberman can now appeal to independents, Republicans and mainstream Democrats who were not sufficiently motivated to participate in the primary, he can win.”

Why are these pseudo-communists so inherently dishonest? A case in point is a leftist blog with a name that alludes to the ugly memory of the Soviet communists. In the “About Us,” The 40-Year Plan’s driving force, Ken Krayeske, says very little about the “Us” but writes at great length about himself.

And contained within that monotonous screed is this beauty, “I’m sick of the lies and distortions in mass media, and think there is really too much information out there… but I owe it to myself and my own voice to run this website.”

Let’s take a guess. The “mass media” Krayeske is referring to is Fox News, and “too much information” is everything he disagrees with, so he’s decided to promote his own lies and distortions. So predictable!

And speaking of predictable, the wannabe Marxists love to use the word “manifesto.” Look for “The Laura Manifesto” at the right hand end of the top navigation bar and you’ll be treated to an unusually sophomoric peek into the head of an unusually banal Democrat.

Ned Lamont, the new poster child for the left-of-left of the Democrat Party, has been described by various TV networks as “a cable television executive,” “a self-made business man,” and similar homilies. The effect is to conjure a picture of a guy from humble beginnings who makes good and now resides in one of America’s most exclusive zipcodes.

For example, leftist blog Truthdig (they didn’t dig very far for the truth here) says of Lamont, “Ned Lamont, wealthy cable entrepreneur, public school teacher and darling of the progressive blogosphere…,” and only hint at something more when they quote “a key Democratic Party opinion-maker” gushing about Lamont, “He’s intelligent. He’s accomplished. There are no personal warts. He teaches in the Bridgeport public schools. How many people of his pedigree and background go do that?

So exactly what “pedigree and background” is our opinion maker alluding to? Dick Morris, writing for yesterday’s Drudge Report, provides the full disclosure: “In the general election, Lieberman can paint Lamont (a former client of mine) as the rich, light-weight dilettante he is (heir to the fortune of J.P. Morgan’s partner)…”

So much for the old “self-made” ruse.

D.C Watson is a former bouncer and wrestler who, following the 9/11 attacks, immersed himself in research about the extent that radical Islam has infiltrated the United States. The result is a new book entitled Truth Is Not Bigotry.

Reading Frontpage Magazine managing editor Jamie Glazov’s interview of Watson that appears in today’s issue was enough to prompt me to download the e-book. Watson has done his homework and has correctly identified the real danger we as Americans face – a calculated, gradual program to transform American society towards the ultimate goal of an Islamic state.

The very notion sounds far-fetched to a lot of Americans but Muslim organizations have already laid the foundation and they are making inroads by manipulating our legal system, aligning themselves with the political left and playing to the current trend towards tolerance.

One group that Watson has his sights on, for example, is the Council on American-Islamic Relations, more commonly known as CAIR, “In all actuality, it is my opinion that they are talking puppets for the promoters of Wahhabism (Islam’s most radical form), that all in all they are bad for this country, and that it is not the American flag that they would like to see flying all around Washington, D.C.”

The amazing thing is that while Watson has done an admirable and important work, the information he has gathered isn’t all that hard to come by. The American press simply doesn’t want to report it. They are either afraid that if they tell us that the Quran calls for the violent deaths of non-believers, they will be singled out as insensitive, or they are secretly rooting for Islam because it is dedicated to the destruction of America. In either case, thank God for real Americans like D.C. Watson.

The breaking news yesterday was the discovery of a couple of altered photos taken by Reuters photog Adnan Hajj. One photo in particular caught the attention of Little Green Footballs after it was originally distributed and was subsequently killed by Reuters. Hajj and his entire catalog have been banished from Reuters.

Hajj snapped the pic following an Israeli air attack on a building in Beirut. The doctored photo shows not only additional smoke, but a replication of buildings in conjunction with some other basic Photoshop techniques designed to make it appear as if there was much more damage than there actually was.

The issue should not be to discover the reasons behind the hideous Photoshop job. Moira Whittle of Reuters issued this insulting and pathetic alibi, “The photographer has denied deliberately attempting to manipulate the image, saying that he was trying to remove dust marks and that he made mistakes due to the bad lighting conditions he was working under.”

Nor should the issue be to see to it that Hajj is given the boot. He is obviously part of the Hezbollah propaganda effort but his photos were published by what is passed off as an objective and responsible world-wide news agency.

The fact remains that Reuters not only ran with a photograph that was so obviously doctored that only a blind person could miss it, but wrote a caption that was unverified and consequently false that included the line, “Many buildings were flattened during the attack.”

The real issue is this: Reuters ran with a photo that any rational and sane person would have rejected because they are willing accomplices of Hezbollah and any other organization that shares their hatred for America.

George Soros, Harold Ickes, John Podesta and other leaders of the leftist movement within the Democrat Party are the founders of the Center for American Progress (CAP), a “think tank” conceived to serve the far left elements in American politics and also aid in Hillary Clinton’s eventual push for the Presidency.

One of the ventures CAP has pursued, along with MoveOn.org, has been to sponsor a group of lefties who fear Fox News to such a degree that they operate a website called News Hounds with the subtitle, “We watch Fox News so you don’t have to.”

A couple of days ago, a News Hounds writer who goes by the name of “Ellen” reported on Sean Hannity’s Freedom Concert calling it a Warmongering Hatefest Waving American Flags. She went on to say, “Last night’s concert was a non-stop stream of hate – hate toward Arabs, toward Democrats, toward liberals, toward Hollywood celebrities while Sean Hannity sat in front of a sea of white faces waving American flags.”

The “hate” News Hounds apparently refers to is the belief held by the assembled conservatives that Hezbollah is a terrorist organization funded by Iran and is dedicated to the destruction of Israel and America. The striking thing about News Hounds is the incredible amount of vitriol that spills forth as they accuse conservatives of hate.

Everyone present, with the exception of lefty Alan Colmes, was referred to in, well, hateful terms. Even Democrat strategist Bob Beckel was identified as “predictably pro-Israel” as if it was his fatal flaw. As representative of the burgeoning leftist movement here in the U.S., News Hounds is contemptuous of, among other things, white people waving American flags and Israel, while being openly sympathetic of Islamic terrorism.

They frequently criticize individual proponents of the War on Terror, like Hannity for example, by pointing out a lack of military service. It should then be fair to suggest, using the same logic, that leftist supporters of Hezbollah, the PLO, Hamas, etc. should volunteer their services and go and live among these terrorist organizations for a while before speaking out in favor of them. That would change the current political dynamic in a hurry!