Why the Tea Party is female

RT notices something:

Is it just my imagination, or is the Tea party dominated by women? I have always regarded the Republican party as the masculine side of the equation, and the Democrat Party as the feminine. The Tea party, which threatens to supplant the Republican party seems to be dominated by rough, opinionated, conservative women. It certainly is where I live, and even in my state, and I get the impression that’s the case nationally. The impetus seems to be coming from women who hold the limelight and get all the work done. Is that because men are abandoning politics, or is it because they have become feminized?

The Tea Party is mostly female because it is a mass entry into politics by a portion of the electorate that has historically been politically ignorant and inert. It is mostly middle class and female because it is made up of people who have the time and resources to get involved with political activism; these are the wives of the middle class men whose economic interests have suffered and are less likely to be able to put in the time and effort involved.

Since it is a female-driven movement, we can be confident that it will quickly lose its focus and be seduced away from its nominal purpose by callous and cold-hearted men, as Karl Denninger has already noted. This assumption is supported by the fact that Sarah Palin is the current darling of the Tea Party, the very woman who suspended her campaign for vice-president in order to permit John McCain to rush back to Washington and help the Bush administration and the Congressional Democrats hold down the American taxpayer for their financial raping by the banking industry. The idea that a woman who supported TARP and the bank bailouts and believes that government inaction is not an option during times of economic difficulty will not turn around and betray a movement of political neophytes at the first opportunity defies belief.

The other reason, of course, is that men are much more skeptical than women. I have said from the beginning that the Tea Party will prove ineffectual and have seen no evidence to alter my thinking in the least. (Remember, I predicted that the Republicans would regain the House and Senate months ago; the Tea Party is a consequential factor, not a causal one.) While many women are finally cognizant of the cancerous state of America, they are still ignorant enough to believe that politics can be the cure. But while it’s not impossible, it is highly improbable.

The fact that many, if not most, Tea Partiers still support The Global Struggle Against Violent Extremism after nine years of near-total futility tells you all you need to know about their eventual effectiveness. Hell, half of them are probably concerned about defending the banks from Obama.

In conclusion, I quote Britain’s finest politician, Daniel Hannan: “[T]he reason there is a Tea Party here is not because of some perverse American characteristic of being anti-tax. It’s that people think that they can do something about it through the ballot box.”

It sounds inspiring. It is inspiring. But the key word there is “think”.


Muslim is the new black

I have to admit, I do find the latest employment incident to be moderately amusing. I mean, it’s not exactly news that NPR is Ground Zero for SWPL political correctness, so its actions are educational in certain regards:

National Public Radio terminated the contract of commentator Juan Williams after he said on Fox’s “The O’Reilly Factor” that people wearing Muslim garb on airplanes made him “worried” and “nervous.”

Of course, people wearing Muslim garb on airplanes make everyone, including other Muslims, nervous everywhere from Moscow to New Dehli. This is most likely because Muslims, unlike every other religious group, have been known to blow up airplanes upon which they are flying. And it’s not as if the SWPL management at NPR doesn’t know this, but they would literally rather die than face the cognitive dissonance between reality and their progressive ideology.

It is interesting to learn that Muslims now outrank blacks in the progressive hierarchy, though. It wasn’t all that long ago when blacks were at the top of the pyramid; I wonder if Jesse Jackson could survive his “Hymietown” remark if he made it today. We know from l’affaire de Sanchez that Jews still outrank Hispanics, but the Williams firing calls into question who is presently SWPL America’s Most Favored Minority.


Obama is behind the curve

His adminstration is still tap-dancing around the central issue of the mortgage frauds despite the fact that everyone who is paying attention now knows that the foreclosure fraud is only the tip of the iceberg. Notice how the PR communique from his U.S. Secretary for Housing and Urban Development completely ignores everything but the foreclosure aspect and tries to portray illegal banking actions as “a bank mistake”:

No one should lose their home as a result of a bank mistake. No one. That is why the Obama Administration has a comprehensive review of the situation underway and will respond with the full force of the law where problems are found. The Financial Fraud Enforcement Task Force that President Obama established last November has made this issue priority number one. Bringing together more than 20 federal agencies, 94 US Attorney’s Offices and dozens of state and local partners to form the broadest coalition of law enforcement, investigatory and regulatory agencies ever assembled to combat fraud, the Task Force is examining this issue and the Attorney General has said publicly that if it finds any wrongdoing the members of the task force will take the appropriate action. The Federal Housing Administration and Federal Housing Finance Agency have launched reviews to make sure servicers are in full compliance with the law. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency has directed seven of the nation’s largest servicers to review their foreclosure processes, fix the processing problems and determine whether there is specific harm that has been caused in individual cases.

The message all these institutions are sending is the same: banks must follow the law — and those that haven’t should immediately fix what is wrong.

What an unsurprising and incompetent PR-driven response. But it’s informative to note that a top administration official is willing to come right out and state that banks that have broken the law will not be prosecuted, but have merely to “fix what is wrong” in order to escape punishment. As I posted yesterday, there is absolutely no Rule of Law in the United States anymore. There is not even a serious pretense of it.

If a member of the non-favored classes breaks the law, he is arrested, prosecuted, and tried if he is lucky. If he is not, (in which case he may not have even broken a law, but merely been targeted by a bureaucratic agent), he is subjected to a non-judicial procedure and asset-stripped. If, however, a bank does not “follow the law”, it is expected to merely “fix the mistake”. Moreover, it is an explicit announcement that the Obama administration fully intends for foreclosures to continue less only those that are most PR-damaging to the banks.

It certainly settles the issue regarding Obama’s political intelligence. Like McCain in 2008, he has sent a very public message that he is taking Wall Street’s side against the rest of America.


Mailvox: In which a solution is proposed

The prophetic tale of the Great Home Distribution:

“The house next door has stood empty for four months now, ever since our neighbors were foreclosed on and evicted. The bank isn’t even trying to sell it. Instead, a week or
two ago they sent over a crew to blow out the waterlines, fill ’em with antifreeze, and basically winterize the place, as you would do if you had a cabin in the deep north woods and were planning to close it up for the winter.

The kicker: the bank involved is one of those “evil” banks that’s currently in the news for possible mortgage fraud.

So here is my question for you: how soon do you think it will be before the fed.gov starts seizing such houses (since the title trails are hopelessly f*cked-up anyway), declaring them Affordable Housing, and redistributing them to the Deserving Poor?

After all, it’s worked so well in Zimbabwe and Venezuela. If you can seize the property of wealthy landowners and redistribute it to the peasants, you can count on the loyal support of the peasants in the next election — or riot.

Can’t you just see The Chosen One and his teleprompter up there on the podium? Thundering, “If we lose this election, the Republicans will take away your home!” (Because after all, once the gov’t has given it to you, it’s yours, right? Even if you didn’t work for it, don’t deserve it, and they had to steal it from someone else to give it to you?)

Interesting times, indeed. Figure the first couple such houses will go, with great fanfare, to the widows and families of Iraq and Afghan war casualties, or to a few wheelchair-bound disabled vets themselves. After all, who could object to giving extravagant gov largesse to widows, orphans, and cripples?

Then, once it becomes old news, the Great Redistribution begins…”


Captain Underoos is back!

Because the lesson that the Republican leadership has taken from the growth of the Tea Party and the implosion of the Obama administration is that what the party really needs is an Obamacare neo-Democrat with good hair and granny underpants who couldn’t beat the corpse of John McCain in 2008.

Mitt Romney’s political operation raised $1.7 million from July through September, again pacing the field of prospective 2012 GOP presidential hopefuls.

The former Massachusetts governor, who lost a bid for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination and is widely believed to be preparing another run, has built a robust political operation including political action committees at the federal level and in five states with strategic significance in the pending battle for the Republican nomination: Iowa, New Hampshire, Alabama, South Carolina and Michigan.

Sweet Lincoln, but the Republican elite really are a determinedly self-destructive lot, aren’t they! Even moderate Democrats are howling for less government, so naturally the Republicans are trying to figure out how to put forward yet another Big Government RINO.


A noble opportunity to contribute

I am confident that the American people, being staunchly committed to their hallowed and time-honored principles of diversity, social justice, and the sanctity of public union contracts, will welcome this opportunity to ensure that no retired government employee is denied the right to live large while not working at home instead of not working at the office:

Democrats in the Senate on Thursday held a recess hearing covering a taxpayer bailout of union pensions and a plan to seize private 401(k) plans to more “fairly” distribute taxpayer-funded pensions to everyone.

This is precisely why I never contributed a dime to any 401(k) plan. Even in my misspent youth, I understood that which Congress gives, Congress will take away the moment it decides it wants to do so. Fortunately for those who have been diligently salting away their retirement money in these plans, since 2008 we have repeatedly been shown that Congress is much more prone to listen to the voice of the outraged masses than to a statistically insignificant but wealthy and politically influential special interest group that is demanding large sums of money.

Wait a minute….


The Lizard Queen returns

I warned you she wasn’t finished. But Obama is:

Some called a Barack Obama-Hillary Clinton pairing the “Dream Ticket” in 2008. It didn’t happen. But what about 2012? “It’s on the table,” veteran Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward told CNN’s John King in an interview Tuesday on John King, USA. “Some of Hillary Clinton’s advisers see it as a real possibility in 2012.”

Hillary is not going after Biden, she’s going after Obama. This is just a strategic ploy to get her name back in play. Then, after the Democrats lose both the House and Senate in November – and probably even if they just lose the House in an embarrasing manners – Team Clinton will begin playing upon the fears of the surviving politicos that they will lose their jobs in 2012 if they are forced to run with the weight of the Obama administration dragging them down.

Forget 2016. She wants to run in 2012. But she can’t do so without pushing Obama aside. And given what a vindictive bitch she is, the thought of humiliating the man who robbed her of what would have been a historic presidency, and more importantly, an easy walk to a historic presidency, has great appeal to her. The main problem with this scenario is that even if Rodham-Clinton successfully convinces the Democratic superdelegates to dump Obama, she can’t seriously hope to win unless the Republican leadership provokes the Tea Party into supporting a third-party candidate by arranging the nomination of another Dole/McCain RINO.

And they would never be dumb enough to do that, would they?


NRO clings to sanity

Apparently they haven’t gotten completely blitzed on the Neocon-spiked Kool-aid:

The Awlaki case speaks to something even more fundamental than law: Decent nations do not permit their governments to assassinate their own citizens. I am willing to give the intelligence community, the covert-operations guys, and the military proper a pretty free hand when it comes to dealing with dispersed terrorist organizations such as al-Qaeda and its affiliates. But citizenship, even when applied to a Grade-A certified rat like Awlaki, presents an important demarcation, a bright-line distinction in our politics.

If Awlaki were to be killed on a battlefield, I’d shed no tears. But ordering the premeditated, extrajudicial killing of an American citizen in Yemen or Pakistan is no different from ordering the premeditated, extrajudicial killing of an American citizen in New York or Washington or Topeka — American citizens are American citizens, wherever they go. I’m an old-fashioned limited-government guy, and I am not willing to grant Washington the power to assassinate U.S. citizens, even rotten ones. The three most powerful people in government at this moment are Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, and Harry Reid, a fact that should give pause even to the most hawkish conservative. I would hope that other conservatives see this at least as a matter of prudence, if not a burning moral question.

We’ve reached a very problematic state of affairs when the so-called “liberals” have endorsed a policy of the federal government intentionally murdering American citizens and most of the so-called “conservative” media is kind of maybe okay with it.


Democrats knew Obama was ineligible

Which is why the Hawaiian Democratic Party changed its statement regarding Mr. Soetoro/Soebarkah’s Constitutional qualifications:

In choosing Al Gore and Joe Lieberman in 2000, this was their statement:

“THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice-President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the United States Constitution and are the duly chosen candidates of both the state and the national Democratic Parties by balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held March 7, 2000 in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 14-17, 2000 in Los Angeles, California.”

The wording was almost identical on behalf of John Kerry and John Edwards in 2004:

But in 2008, the words missing include “the provisions of the United States Constitution.” It states, “THIS IS TO CERTIFY that the following candidates for President and Vice President of the United States are legally qualified to serve under the provisions of the national Democratic Parties balloting at the Presidential Preference Poll and Caucus held on February 19th, 2008, in the State of Hawaii and by acclamation at the National Democratic Convention held August 27, 2009, in Denver, Colorado.”

Correct me if I’m wrong, but “the provisions of the United States Constitution” are not synonymous with “the provisions of the National Democratic Parties balloting”. In other words, the Hawaiian Democrats were covering their posteriors in the event, as is gradually coming to pass, that it was discovered Obama is Constitutionally ineligible to hold the office of president. At this point, there can be little doubt that Obama is not hiding his records due to any grand strategery “to make his opponents look foolish” – his abysmal approval ratings show the absurdity of that defense – but because they will reveal his Constitutional ineligibility for the office he is illegally and illegitimately holding. It is worth noting, too, that the Democratic National Committee did not certify Obama’s eligibility in any other state despite the false ex posto facto claims of Nancy Pelosi.

Given that this is arguably the greatest political scandal in American history, it is remarkable that the mainstream media is so loathe to touch it. Especially considering that it’s already made a #1 New York Times-selling bestseller for Jerome Corsi.


WND column

The Pledge of Irrelevance

Sensing victory this fall, the Republicans have released a Pledge to America in imitation of the Contract With America that helped trigger the 1994 congressional landslide. Although Obama’s unpopularity is such that a blind and flatulent wombat with a criminal record could probably win election so long as it was running as a Republican, the Republican leadership clearly wants to set the stage for claiming some sort of mandate should they take control of both the House and Senate, as appears likely.

But the mandate they are seeking is not exactly the one that the nation is demanding. Consider what they claim to be their first and most urgent domestic priority, which presumably is not their most urgent priority or it would not require the disclaimer. Is it addressing the staggering amount of public debt owed by the U.S. government? Is it dealing with the crippling $40 trillion in private debt that has millions of homes underwater on their mortgages? Is it combating the mass invasion of Central and South Americans that has altered the very socio-political structure of the nation?

No. What is on offer is nothing more than a promise for even more federal micromanagement of the economy that we witnessed during the course of the Bush and Obama administrations. Only this time, they’re going to do it righ