Fighting for the Right: The WorldNetDaily story continues

The reaction to the WorldNetDaily story has been remarkable and I appreciate those that have offered support.  I would encourage people to continue contacting me about which organizations on the Right are, or are not, working with WorldNetDaily.

[1] Let's start with good news: WorldNetDaily will not be at CPAC next year.  I exchanged emails with the CPAC organizer earlier today and she told me this:

[WorldNetDaily founder Joseph] Farah asked if he could speak on the issue (birther movement), but that isn't something we're interested in.

Rejected.  Well done.  There are a couple other demagogues who appeal to our baser instincts that I would like to see CPAC decline to host, too, but this is a very positive step.  Kudos, CPAC.

If any other organizations wish to let it be known that they also reject or renounce association with WorldNetDaily, please email me.

[2] Almost everybody seems to have a misconception about what I'm doing here. I have not called for a reader boycott of WorldNetDaily.  I don't think that would do much good, anyway.  Like Alex Jones, Joseph Farah and WND will have readers; there's a market for the bunker mentality and criticism only rallies them. (shrug) It's not my goal to persuade the true believers.  If they didn't reason their way into it, they probably won't reason their way out of it.

What I have argued is that credible organizations on the Right should not be supporting or encouraging the fevered swamps. If they do, the Right should not support them.  Most coverage seems to have misunderstood this.

[3] After my post on the RNC's non-response to my questions, I had hoped the RNC might do the right thing and provide answers - hopefully, the right answers. Integrity can be difficult in the short term, but it's important...and it's better than letting the world watch you try to hide in plain sight. Unfortunately, I have not heard a word from them. Nothing.  That is disappointing. 

[4] I very much appreciated Patrick Ruffini's thoughtful comments.  He is right.  The Joe-The-Plumberization of the Right is dangerous.  Echo chambers reinforce and magnify errors. We need more Bill Buckley and less Bill O'Reilly.

[5] I always appreciate Robert Stacy McCain's blogging - he really is a terrific writer - but he misunderstands my argument about WorldNetDaily.  I'm not calling for a "purge" of the grassroots and I certainly hope we don't have to choose between "grassroots" and "reality". If we do have to choose between the two, we lose.  William F. Buckley's rejection of the John Birch Society is a very important precedent, so it's worth remembering how Buckley responded to criticisms of his editorial.

It was precisely my desire to strengthen the ranks of conservatism that led me to publish the editorial. Our movement has got to govern. It has got to expand by bringing into our ranks those people who are, at the moment, on our immediate Left - the moderate, wishy-washy conservatives; the Nixonites… I am talking… about 20 to 30 million people… If they are being asked to join a movement whose leadership believes the drivel of [the Birch Society leadership], they will pass by crackpot alley, and will not pause until they feel the warm embrace of those way over on the other side, the Liberals."

My view is this: If Republicans don't clean up their own house, they cannot govern.  They may win elections again, but they won't be able to do anything with it; they won't know what to do with it. [See: 2001-2009]  We can't have a two-party system composed of Democrats and Not-Democrats.

Beating Democrats is not enough.  We need to actually have something worth beating them with.

[6] Conor Friedersdorf makes an important point.

One problem on the right is that loyalty to the grassroots is defined by how shamelessly one panders to them. Thus a talk radio host who crafts an inaccurate news narrative that plays to the prejudices of his audience is deemed a loyal player advancing the movement’s ends, whereas a blogger who points out how his words mislead listeners about reality is considered an obstacle to the cause who is overly concerned about playing fair.

Unlike some in the media, I don’t regard the grassroots on the right as uniquely insane. I’ve done enough reporting at that level to know that most Americans on the right and left are reasonable people acting in good faith. The right’s fringe problem at this moment in time is one that elites have created as much as any crazy fringe righty. Outfits ... deliberately play on the worst impulses of the conservative base, stoking their paranoia and misleading them about reality, all for the sake of bigger audiences and greater revenues. That ought to outrage anyone who actually respects the grassroots, and has their best interests at heart.

This is not a problem unique to the Right.  After all, "Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket."  Next, one hopes, comes regeneration.

Your rating: None Average: 3.3 (10 votes)


Cleaning House

We all have our glass houses.

I am glad you are busy tyding up yours. Once we get past this health care debate I look forward to working on ejecting a few folks from our own crystal residence.

My argument with the Right has never been about the elminating all difference of opinion. It's about not questioning the basic patriotism of those that hold them.

Good luck with the your endevour. I want a clean fight when we win in 2010.

McCainism lost last time

patriotism is following the constitution. you imply birthers are not? why? for following the rule of law? I admit that birthers are putting to much faith in bc because it ignores the true rule of law and constitutional issue-BHO is not a natural born citizen, , he is a dual citizen at birth.MSM is ignoring this issue or briefly lie equating citizen as naturalborn citizen, and covering up that polosi committed elec fraud to cerify BHO as natural born when the only doc she used was colb authentication. a doc that HI will not confirm is authentic.


SCOTUS deciding nbc issue would bring out the bc .

finally alienating the birthers is simply stupid! these are active people frustrated with MSMand government not listening to the people. people of all walks of life who see a supposedly transparent president hiding his past, appointing czar's and socializing the country and putting our children in debt. These people are naturally looking for answers and found this issue legitimate and also seeing the fire of socialistic change they cant help but notice the smoke of the hidden past of obama and they cling to the constitution to clear the air using the rule of law.

we need these active people. anyone calling birthers fringe is doing the work of the dems even though there are dem birthers because its a constitutional issue. the constitution and the founders idea of small government is conservatism

Perhaps a Federal Contractor experience should be thrown in...

Having contracted with a computer Software firm, who obtained a Federal contract to provide Services....I was advised that the Feds required me to PROVE my citizenship via Passport or Birth Certificate. Drivers license would not do.
I had 60 days to pony up the Document or else.
I was lucky to have a state where I could ask for a certified copy via the web.....if I could name City/parents and other essential information along with 30 $.
It was inconvenient.
It was somewhat stressful as my JOB depended upon my Birth Certificate.
The President can do the I think he works for the Feds also.
Why is this so difficult ?
Why does "Conspiracy" accusations have to be bandied about over this requirement ?
I did it....Obama can damn well do it also....if not...Why not ?
Its seems to be the Law of the land for sensitive Federal employment.

Perhaps a Federal Contractor...

He produced his birth certificate.  It looks like my birth certificate and I am also a natural born citizen.  It's okay to ask the question - it's not okay to listen to the answer.  Fact:  He is a natural-born citizen - focus on stopping the spread of the federal government and it's profligate spending, not the lunacy of trying to 'prove' he is not a citizen.

cart vs. horse

It's all well and good to say it's not worth winning elections until you have a coherent enough movement to do anything useful with that victory, but the flip side is that if you can't win elections, all the coherence in the world isn't going to amount to a hill of beans.  I think it's sad but true that neither party can afford to alienate its cranks.  We might could do if both parties agreed to thoroughly disavow their cranks at once, but the Dems would never agree to that since they need their cranks more than we need ours.  I'll gladly bet you $100 that come the next Republican administration, no birther, Vince-Foster-truther or North American Unionist will be the anything-czar.

I also reject the notion that 2001-2009 means Republicans can't govern when elected because their cranks are on board.  The reason we couldn't get much done between 2001 and 2009 wasn't because today's birthers supported Dubya.  It was because Dubya himself was never all that much of a conservative to begin with.  Remember, this is the guy who ran as a "compassionate conservative," not a conservative as such.  At best, that phrase suggests a conservative with an asterisk; at worst it evidences a certain antipathy toward conservatism, as if to suggest that ordinary conservatism is uncompassionate.  Either way, he ran as something short of conservative, he governed as he ran, and we the people got the government we deserved.

Bush actually had the right ideas

Don't get me wrong, I think what ultimately characterized Bush's administration was its inability to achieve its goals, but the goals themselves were what the party needed for growth. NCLB and Medicare Part D were engagements with the Dems on education and healthcare, which we needed. Immigration reform is what we need if we want to win the still-malleable Hispanic vote.

Currently, we don't have an alternative for healthcare or education, and the Bush-era willingness to talk immigration reform is now diminished. We'll probably gain in 2010, just because democrats are pussies, but we won't have long-term success, as Jon says, unless we give people something to vote for. Besides, you know, sekrit kenyan muslins.

Bush was wrong

How was expanding entitlements, maintaining open borders and creating millions of new automatic Democratic voters good for the conservative party.  How is an expansion of the government, expanding entitlements, expanding social engineering, expanding the nanny state, and creating millions of liberal voters ever goign to hlep conservatives.

If I wanted big government and high taxes, I can always vote for the Democrats.  The Republicans do not need to suply a second option for doing that.

Exactly right

I agree with superdestroyer


Why is it that everyone assumes that legal hispanics  and conservative americans that happen to be hispanic will vote Dem just so an illegal can come here to work, drive down wages while the females plop out anchor babies to get on welfare, drive up medical care cost and bleed cash to mexico reducing growth? They are Americans too and dont want our country to become like mexico and south america. I never understood that.  the only way that is a concern is if all the illegals are looking to abuse the system and if all 20 million vote!

where are the polls of legal hispanics showing they are willing to throw the usa under the bus so that cousin jose can illegally come here?

I'm an immigrant

And a legal white one at that, and I'm somewhat taken aback by your post. I wonder if a "legal hispanic" hearing the stuff you wrote would be more likely to vote for your candidate.

Also, immigration reform doesn't mean amnesty and open borders. I'd like a plan that would increase the amount of legal immigration that can happen while also increasing border security. Considering the pennies we spend on both those facets right now, we can easily make that happen. However, why think that when false dichotomies are awesome?

Who cares what liberal Hispanics want

People keep saying that Republicans need to pander to the very liberal Hispanic population of the U.S. and that anyone who points out how liberal Hispanics are, how much they support high taxes and high government spending, how much they support race based spoils systems. 

Why Republicans are saying about wanting smaller government, more freedom, less of a nanny state, and lower taxes means nothing to the 80% of Hispanics who automatically vote for the Democratic Party and love the idea of the government taxing whites at a very high level and giving the wealth transfer to them.

What really matter to the long term future of the U.S. is that as the U.S become a majority black and Hispanic country, will the government be able to maintain a high cost, high service welfare state while the average per capita in the U.S. starts going down.

Bush was Wrong

I agree with superdestroyer.  The reason McCain lost was that Bush dug him a hole too deep to climb out of.  Palin didn't help, either

Offer up a balanced budget; cut social programs, encourage churches and charities to take on that load; eliminate capital gains tax; get rid of needless defense contracts and outsourcing; create tax incentives to buy American and lets get this country back on track


Sanctomony from Constitutional Ignorants

Ah , it's so entertaining to see the earnest Republican shout from the rooftops that those who are appalled that the President is illegitmate should be quiet.


You should go visit some of the other threads

Where the responses to birther assertions go unchallenged. You guys don't seem to have a problem being quiet there.


We might could do if both parties agreed to thoroughly disavow their cranks at once, but the Dems would never agree to that since they need their cranks more than we need ours.

Utter bollocks.

Let's stipulate that ancient history, ie. the 60's no longer counts for either side. That eliminates The Black Panthers and W.F. Buckely's peans to White Citizens Councils.

In the last quarter century we had the Unibomber, a few Earth Firsters torching houses, a riot in Seattle and just recently a couple of cell towers downed.

The fringe on your team has blown up 230 people and demolished an entire Federal building, assassinated three doctors, started an entire military militia movement dedicated to riding out the apocalypse -- assuming they don't get tired of waiting to hang the traitors in Washington, and pipe bombed an Olympic event.

I'm not even counting the immolation of an entire community, strafing gunfire at the White House and for extra effort above and beyond the call of duty, crashing a plane into the White House.

Our nuts are slackers by comparison and don't even compare.

nice try

Timothy McVeigh was executed in 2001, while a Republican was President and the Republicans controlled one house of Congress.  Hardly the result one would expect if he were part of the Republican "team."  If executing a guy doesn't count as disavowing him, then with all due respect, WTF does???!!!  And how many abortion doctor assassins and militia men held key posts in the Bush Administration, or can be reasonably expected to hold such positions in any future Republican adminstration?  You seem to be counting these nuts as "our team" on the specious theory that you don't like A, and you don't like B, therefore A = B.

Note that I'm not accusing your team of adopting the Unabomber (note spelling) as their own, either.  He was rightly charged when a Democrat was in office, and probably would have gotten the death penalty had he not pleaded guilty to avoid it.  I think mainstream Democrats do a plenty good job of distancing themselves from the truly criminal element.  The problem is the ideological loons.  Van Jones is a 9/11 truther, a Mumia truther and an L.A. rioter rolled into one, so of course no respectable Democrat would appoint him to any major position in government any more than a Republican would appoint Michael Savage, right?  Oh wait, they did appoint him, didn't they.  And don't even get me started on all that caterwauling about Bush stealing the 2000 election.  That allegation has no more basis in fact than Obama being born in Kenya (less so, actually, as we were all around to know better), yet it actually passes for a mainstream position on the left.

So yes, sheer numbers dictate that your side needs its loons much more than we need ours.  If cranks on both sides of the aisle could be simultaneously disinfranchised, Republicans would run the table.  The problem is that Jon is proposing unilateral disarmament.

Team vs fringe?

Wasn't the previous poster talkng about the fringe? Isn't the converstation about needing them vs purging? I don't think he was questioning whether or not the right has sufficiently disavowed them. I think they have. No need to be so combative.

The Ab Rocket

 the responses to birther assertions go unchallenged. You guys don't seem to have a problem being quiet there.


The Ab Rocket

On the birthers

 If someone made similar claims about me, I would ignore them because I think such morons do not deserve the pleasure of being answered.

Obama has provided a legally sufficient document proving his citizenship.  Remember the document was certified by an official appointed by a Republican governor and other records, like the local newspapers, point to him being born in Hawaii.

In the end, this boils down to racism.  Being originally from western PA, I can testify to the fact that the birthers are strongest in the same areas where the racism is strill the strongest.  You see very few birthers in the suburbs, but when you enter rural racist western PA, you see birther stickers.  

Obama was right.  These people are bitter to this day over the economic and social collapse of their areas due to their blue collar notions.  The birthers are just racist hicks who cannot accept their socially inferior status in a globalized world.

Thanks for your Efforts

I do think you've bitten off more than any one person can chew. Michael Savage is the #3 radio talk-show host in America, and he basically compared Obama's speech to students an attempt to create a new "Hitler Youth."

Michelle Bachmann, an actual elected Representative, says following Obama's plans will "destroy this country." Destroy. It's hard to imagine that as anything but a claim that Obama is a traitor.

I don't mean to discourage you. I've newly found out that, most of the time anyway, I'm a Republican, after having voted Democratic my whole life. I want the party repaired. I'm not exactly sure I want Buckley to be the new voice, I'm darn certain I can't abide the extremist voices of the Libertarians, but I know it is not going to the sort of hysterical rantings of pure hogwash that represent popular Republicanism and the kind of blatant pandering that chose Palin to get Hillary voters and Steele to discount how much the GOP is still dominating the South on the race issue.

If you think I can help, email. For further information about my ideas, check out my blog


Michael Savage is not now, and never will be, a major fixture in anyone's administration.  No birther will ever hold a major post in any Republican administration.  I used to think I could say teh same about 9/11 truthers and Democrat adminstrations, but oh well.

As to Bachmann, what is so wrong about saying that a series of very bad policies have the potential to destroy this country, if that's what you really believe?  Not sure how you get from attacking one's policies to calling that person a traitor.  Have we reached the point where it's no longer acceptable to criticize policies you think are bad for the country?

Bachmann is Minnesota's Palin

Bachmann does not make sense.  She is a blue collar Republican who needs to learn to take her seat at the end of the bus. 

Bachmann has said some stuff

That is both inflammatory and wrong. Not the best combination. A list for your reading pleasure.

This Site Really Sucks

It's worse than David Frum's New Minority.Most of the posters are Democrats and RINOs and the authors are nothing more than liberal wannabes.

The enemies are Obama, Reid, Pelosi and company. Well, maybe for you they're not.



Thank you

You have confirmed both Henke's and Ruffini's theses brilliantly. Please continue to wallow in ignorance and close your mind to criticism. You do your friends proud.


I Visit Your Site

Rick -

Whenever I want to "wallow in ignorance" I just visit your site.

Another one

More evidence that Henke, et. al. are tilting at windmills.  While we have our kooks on the Left, we don't allow them to run things.  Republicanism is now permanently identified with reactionary, racist nut jobs.  Remember the Whigs!

Henke is not Frum...

but having watched real time John Cole devolve from sensible centrist to wacko lefty over a specific issue, there are similarities.  And Rick, your site is on a similar tragectory.

Please note that while I am curious as to why Obama is adamant about releasing documentation, including the long form birth certificate, that in no way motivates me.  Yet based upon your rhetoric, both you and Jon would call me a "birther,"  and have my voice stricken from participation.

Calling Obama an illigetimate president is as bogus as the "selected not elected" tripe of the past 8 years.  Obama's mother was a American citizen, therefore he is.  Fine, I'd still like to see the long form, and his records from Occidental... 

But what has many animiated against you, and Henke, and Frum, and Brooks (et al ad nauseum) is that you seem to take more interest in smacking down those with whom you are ostensibily allied.  Learn from Buckley - he resoundly rejected the kook-fringe and then moved on. 

Blinding yourself with labels

Stop labeling everyone as RINOs and enemies. If there are Democrats here, it is because they want to engage in honest dialog. What is wrong with that? I would love to see a resurgent Republican party that appeals to reason and sound policy instead of ignorant paranoid reactionaries.

Speaking of extremes....

This argument about WND is a strawman meant to do something, anything to revive this flagging website.

The people want their country back and they will not be sidetracked by nonsense of this nature. Most people have never heard of WND or TN, much less worried about their impact on the Republican Party.

Finally, at long last, the people are awakening. They don't like the elitist attitudes the Henkes and Ruffinis represent; they are mad as hell at Congress and Obama. This is a time to supply them with knowledge, not distract them with nonsense.

Watch the townhall meetings and believe. The people are not up in arms about birth certificates, they are up in arms about DC elitist thinking which seems to be well represented by the bloggers at TN. We don't need more of that.

This website has been a disappointment from the beginning and that has certainly not changed with this latest attempt to gain traction in the competitive world of blogging. WND chose one route for that, TN has chosen another, but they are the same in that WND overhypes it's stories to gain readers and TN attacks WND for the same purpose.

We are neither fooled or amused. There is more important work to be done.

Patriots are at work to expose this administration and reverse its control by changing the face of the next Congress. Join the people in this effort instead of encouraging them to fight each other.


Fake outrage

I love the term "astroturf" to describe the ranters at the town halls.  This "patriotic" outrage was all ginned up by PR firms working for Dick Armey's front groups funded largely by insurance lobbyists.  The sad part is that Americans are so gullible and they are easy prey. 


The problem is the ideological loons.  Van Jones is a 9/11 truther, a Mumia truther and an L.A. rioter rolled into one, so of course no respectable Democrat would appoint him to any major position in government any more than a Republican would appoint Michael Savage, right?

Oh noes, Van Jones signed a petition. If you've ever visited Berkeley folks are out there every few feet with something to sign. I don't happen to think Mumia is innocent, but others do, so what. Tell you what, I'll tell Obama to can Mr. Jones (which is likely to happen anyway and I'm sure the world will continue to rotate on its axis).


In reality, Van Jones was a legal observer in San Francisco, not Los Angeles, during a non-violent rally that took place after, not before the riots. Jones and hundreds of others were seized in a mass arrest. He was released within a few hours, all charges were dropped, and “the City of San Francisco ultimately compensated him financially for his unjust arrest.”

Jones also has never “accused President Bush of giving troops orders to shoot black people after Hurricane Katrina,” as the DefendGlenn site claims. Kreep’s inflammatory lie has no factual basis whatsoever.

Kreep’s unhinged attacks come as no surprise, however. He is one of the leaders of the “birther” movement, claiming that President Obama is not a citizen of the United States.


How about you spend some time condeming David Horowitz and actual ex-Marxist.


no one forced him to sign the petition

I've course I've visited Berkeley; I went to law school there.  No one ever forced me to sign any petitions I didn't agree with, and no one forced Jones too, either.  While he now maintains he was just a legal observer rather than a participant in the riots, his writings at the time suggest otherwise.  Here's a guy who openly endorsed socialism, and described the riots as " understandable, unavoidable, even necessary" if not laudable.  Yeah, that's someone we need in high government positions, just as much as we need a President who is radical enough himself to appoint someone like that in the first place.

I defy you to name a single Republican administration that has ever appointed someone as ideologically extreme as Jones to a position of that level of influence.  I'm not talking about Pat Buchanan types who serve in an administration or two and go loony years after leaving public service. That risk is inevitable with every appointment.  Appointing someone with such a checkered record at the time of his appointment is not.

While he now maintains he

While he now maintains he was just a legal observer rather than a participant in the riots, his writings at the time suggest otherwise.

Neat trick since he wasn't in LA at the time. I suppose he could have called someone and rioted at them over the phone.

I defy you to name a single Republican administration that has ever appointed someone as ideologically extreme as Jones to a position of that level of influence.

He's in charge of promoting jobs, not running the CIA. I've already stated that it's pretty obvious he'll be gone shortly. Ordinarily it would be a two or three news cycle story and something the GOP would use in ads in 2012. Nothing new there.

But since you brought it up, there is that little matter of Sarah Palin's hubby being a member of the AIP (Alaska Independence Party), a group dedicated to the secession of Alaska from America and whose founder blew himself up with his own plastic explosives.

Palin lied about her knowledge of those facts and she herself has given support to rightwing lunatics in the FIJA movement (Fully Informed Jury Association), which is really just a front for militia and Neo-Nazi activity.

In the midst of the hysteria being generated about Obama you'd think the meteor from Armageddon was on its way here. The problem with crying wolf at the top of your lungs every single day since the man took office is that on the rare occasion that the Right actually has a valid complaint, it gets buried under mountain of all the other lunatic things that have been thrown at the president.

Which is sort of the point of the OP.

how can you compare marxism

how can you compare marxism to secessionist? the states have that right and the fed gov was created by the states. regardless they still believe in the ideas of this country.

marxist do not -obama is a marxist so are his czars and his policies.

he admitted in his book reading only marxist and having only friends of that ilk.frank in HI friend and mentor communist-wright preacher black liberation marxist theology for 20 years, belonged to socialist party when he bacame illinoise senator. friend and worked for ayers a marxist--and on and on and on

Gateway Pundit: Surprise!... Obama Was Affiliated With National Socialist Party Throughout Most of the 1990's! ...Update: Proof

States do not have rights

 Can you explain to me where the states get rights?  They only have powers.  Our Constitution was ratified by the people through ratifying conventions not the state governments.  The state were completely sidestepped when it came to the US Constitution as they were still supporting the failed Articles of Confederation.

Furthermore, I do not like talking about any part of government having rights.  No government entity has rights.  Only the people have rights.  Governments have powers granted to them by the people who are the holder of all rights and powers.

10th Amendment

 Bill of Rights:

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

Granted, all gov't power is granted by the people. It's time the people took some back.

more at

Common Yes - Sense Not So Much

I don’t intend to allow my children to participate unless I’m allowed to be with them. Obama is not a teacher, so he is not the reason my sons are in school. He will be interfering with the reason they are there. I’m equally concerned about how the teachers will handle the affair. There are some conservative teachers, but academia is clearly a stronghold of liberalism. The idea that the president’s message may be innocuous and benign is not the point. If this precedent is established, that may not always be the case. This is a bad idea, and shouldn’t happen. Our schools should at least try to be propaganda free zones.

I suggest finding out if your kid’s school will be participating. If so, see if you can go with your kids. If that doesn’t work, maybe we should all find some real educational activity for our kids – away from school.


Reagan, Bush Sr., Bush Jr.

All spoke to school children.  All of this is driven by the collective nervous breakdown currently being suffered by right wing white people in this country.  He's black, he has a funny name, he has an elite education - clearly not a real Amurikun. 

Still no rights for states...

You proved my point.  There are no rights for the states, just powers that can be delegated to them by the people.

Giving a government entity rights should scare any true believer in limited government.  Monarchs claim governments have rights.   

go back to school

the first part of your post  is completely #@$#$%## wrong the states do have rights as to the fed goverment. the states ratified the fed (constitution) with enumerated powers to limit the fed.

nobody follows it  The commerce clause destroyed the states and gov handouts from payroll tax and other illegal taxes and laws keep the states from asserting themselves or they will not be able to feed from gov trough .

missing the point of your reply

Governments do not have rights

Powers is the correct term not rights.  Rights are only reserved for the people.  Apparently you have not read the Federalist Papers or even the Constitution.  Nowhere in the document do states receive rights, but there is a clear reservation of powers in the 10th Amendment.

The state governments did not ratify the Constitution.  Independent state conventions did.  To say the Federal government is a creature of the state governments is silly because the state governments had no say in its ratification seeing independent conventions carried out the task.

Maybe you should go back to school...

I find it ironic all these Confederate sympathizers cannot even get the language right.

I had a conservative (member of the Federalist Society) Constitutional Law professor in undergrad who would flip out all the time over this fine distinction.  No government has rights, but powers.

Maybe you believe governments have divine rights like a certain British monarch we told to get lost in 1776, but no government has rights.  People have rights and governments have powers granted to them by the people.

For someone who attacks others education, maybe you should read some of the Federalist Papers and other founding documents and less of the successionist BS out there.  Yet another example of consevatives not being intellectual in any sense. 


The Fully Informed Jury Association (FIJA) is one of those groups that provides a big tent for weird politics. If you support the idea that judges must tell jurors they have the right to acquit people even when the evidence clearly indicates they have broken the law, FIJA is the place for you. This concept has attracted support from across the political spectrum ranging from those who would legalize marijuana to militia leaders. But while FIJA leaders try to walk the fine line inherent in holding together a coalitions around a single issue, they seem to routinely stumble into the far right. Indiana militia leader Joe Holland blanketed Ravalli County with a mailing urging people to understand their "jury rights" after he was charged with threatening public officals in Montana. FIJA literature was disseminated broadly in Mississippi surrounding the trial of Byron De La Beckwith for the murder of civil rights leader Medgar Evers.

Larry Dodge protests that FIJA's image has suffered from misleading press coverage. "Every time a controversial movement comes along and discovers that jury nullification might be able to help its cause, they latch on to it," he explains, adding that other groups often mix FIJA literature with their own and thus compromise his organization in the public eye. That said, Dodge admits that he got the idea for jury nullification from Red Beckman, a notorious tax protester in Montana known to the ADL and others for his anti-Semitic views. And though Dodge maintains that FIJA and Beckman have since gone their separate ways, he also admits that people with explicit militia ties or right-wing fundamentalist Christian politics have worked with FIJA in the past—though he stresses that they were later asked to dissociate themselves from the group. "We have never and still do not take sides on any substantive issue," he says. "We can't afford it. We are a process-oriented group looking for the jury system to be restored to its full glory."

It is not just the commemoration of an anniversary. It represents support for the position of the Fully Informed Jury Association and opposition to current prevailing judicial practices, which attempt to control jury verdicts, especially in favor of the prosecution in criminal cases, by such methods as requiring jurors to swear to follow the "law" as given by the judge, even if the law is in dispute, and denying the right of the parties and their lawyers to argue issues of law in the presence of the jury. These judicial practices are in conflict with those that prevailed in the Founding Era, and are regarded by jury rights activists as unconstitutional. The proclamation is an indication of a tendency to adopt an originalist or constitutionalist position on constitutional issues. For more on this topic see U.S. Trial Jury Reform. Gov. Palin's office reports that she has agreed to renew the proclamation for 2008, but for obvious reasons has been a bit busy lately. It is also reported that when she was first asked to sign the proclamation, she asked for more information on the subject, and was handed a package of FIJA materials. After reading them, she asked for more, including historical documents. It seems she is a history buff. After researching the subject and the controversy, she signed the proclamation.


The company you keep is important, I agree.


I agree with all you're saying Jon. I remember thinking I never want to become the kind of "hater" that so many millions seemed to suffer from when GWB was in office. I thought that kind of visceral hatred of the man, was unhinged.

I hate the legislation and the budgets Obama is passing, but I don't hate the person. Many, I'm sure not all, of the birthers seem to fall into the unhinged category. Even if it turned out that Obama wasn't born here, what then? Impeachment?? I don't think so. Conservatives would lose the support we're slowly beginning to get back.

Even If...

Even if it turned out that Obama wasn't born here, what then?

Even if!!?? That in the nutshell is the problem, you think you're sounding reasonable, not at all like those others. Anyway, I found who really wants granny dead and it isn't Obama.

It's Wall Street:

After the mortgage business imploded last year, Wall Street investment banks began searching for another big idea to make money. They think they may have found one. The bankers plan to buy “life settlements,” life insurance policies that ill and elderly people sell for cash — $400,000 for a $1 million policy, say, depending on the life expectancy of the insured person. Then they plan to “securitize” these policies, in Wall Street jargon, by packaging hundreds or thousands together into bonds. They will then resell those bonds to investors, like big pension funds, who will receive the payouts when people with the insurance die. The earlier the policyholder dies, the bigger the return — though if people live longer than expected, investors could get poor returns or even lose money. Either way, Wall Street would profit by pocketing sizable fees for creating the bonds, reselling them and subsequently trading them. But some who have studied life settlements warn that insurers might have to raise premiums in the short term if they end up having to pay out more death claims than they had anticipated. The idea is still in the planning stages. But already “our phones have been ringing off the hook with inquiries,” says Kathleen Tillwitz, a senior vice president at DBRS, which gives risk ratings to investments and is reviewing nine proposals for life-insurance securitizations from private investors and financial firms, including Credit Suisse. “We’re hoping to get a herd stampeding after the first offering,” said one investment banker not authorized to speak to the news media.


For the humor impaired, this is called snark.

The Next Right?

I have really enjoyed both Jon and Patrick's posts and all of the comments under both.  I too would love to see either Jon or Patrick with Rachel Maddow, as sensible debate seems to have gone the way of The National Enquirer or Reader's Digest lately.  There just isn't any  intelligent discussion anymore, so I have taken to hopefully watching PBS and BBC .  What with RW talk radio,  cable news channels,  partisan internet sites, there is a dearth of real political discussion.  The closest I can find, on the right, is this site.


While you sit here and agonize about whether this extreme, loud, proud-to-be-ignorant, thinly disguised racist,  Palinized mob is on the fringe of the "broad continuum of the Conservative Movement," or a threat to it....consider this:  Not only is the mob a threat to the Conservative Movement, it has usurped the movement.  The Next Right is the mob; it has passed you by.  You no longer can control the mob....whether the mob is relevant to your movement is moot, it has very sadly replaced you. Rational conservatives have been relegated to the dark, dusty corners of reason, and for rational conservatives to have been thusly relegated, is a very dangerous thing for this country.

But you know what?  You did it.  You.  Your chickens are coming home to roost now, and it isn't pretty.  None of you spoke out when Rush said he wanted Obama to fail.  You knew it was a dog whistle to the base to take whatever actions were necessary to make Obama fail in everything....even if some of Obama's policies are good for them and good for our country.  You heard that dog whistle, but if you spoke out at all, it was weak, weak.  You have heard the dog whistles coming from Beck, Hannity and the rest who profit, either in power or in money, from the mass ignorance of the base.  When corporatists dog whistled to the base and made them take actions that could only be to their personal detriment, you said nothing, because you are all about the profit motive.  You are the ones who have preached that success equals money, and people should be evaluated on how monitarily successful they are,  and if that means corporations make all of the policy in this country, to the detriment of the consumers, then so be it.  Ironical that this mob that heard the corporate dog whistle, and interpreted it to be a rally against "socialism" cannot even afford to be stockholders in those corporations.

You rational ones, (relatively) have never called out your GOP pols when they play to the mob by slinging about terms such as Naziism, Fascism, Socialism, Communism.  The mob doesn't even know the difference in those labels, but you do, and remain silent.  And yes, the Left did it too in the Bush years, but not to the extent being seen now.  The mob actually thinks we are being transformed into Nazi Germany or Communist Russia.  You know this isn't so, it's just lefty/righty politics and policies....but the mob doesn't understand the politics of it all.  They have been deliberately and crassly frightened for unspoken reasons that are not good for America as a whole.  This is not good, as my granddaughter would say.  This is not good.  Yes, there will be another Oklahoma City or assassination, and when there is, I will largely blame you, the rational ones.  You saw all of this happening, but you let it happen.  Now you sit around and complain about the crazies that are tainting the Conservative Movement.

Although I didn't agree with many of the goals and ideals of the Conservative Movement, I admired it, because you truly wanted what is best for this country (in your view.)  That is really to be admired, and listened to, and thought about., and respected. But  what we have now is an American public that does not differentiate between the Conservative Movement, the GOP and the mob.  The talk-radio dog whistlers, the cable news channels, the MSM and the alternative media will not make the distinction for the people.  So, yes the fringe crazies are now identified as Conservatives/GOP.  That identification will eventually frighten the Independents and the moderates of both parties, and your movement will have been usurped by the fact it already has been.

The Next Right?  It's the mob, and regretfully you will be irrelevant.











Absolutely right.

Want some details to go with your nightmares? I spend the mid-nineties covering the militia movement for the alternative press and occasionally wrote about them for FAIR. I actually am the journalist who broke the story about G. Gordon Liddy's comments about shooting ATF agents in the head. I mostly went on to other things, but I did do a follow up in 2004:


Homegrown Terrorists WMD found—in Texas, so media yawn By Richard Bottoms

In his interview with Tim Russert (Meet the Press, 2/8/04), George W. Bush said, "See, free societies are societies that don't develop weapons of mass terror." Putting aside the U.S. government's enormous stocks of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons—which Bush would presumably insist are not intended for terror—the statement also overlooks the fact that the U.S. also produces freelance domestic terrorists bent on creating weapons of mass destruction. Russert might have reminded Bush of recent events in his home state of Texas, where William Krar was indicted in May 2003 for, among other things, possession of a weapon of mass terror. But it wouldn't have meant much to Russert's viewers, given that NBC—along with other broadcast networks, cable outlets and newspapers around the country—have virtually ignored this important story. Krar and his wife, Judith Bruey, had assembled quite an arsenal in a storage facility in Noonday, Texas, including 500,000 rounds of ammunition, machine guns, pipe bombs, briefcase bombs and their own personal WMD: a cyanide bomb. Unfortunately for Krar, a package he sent in early 2003, containing fake U.N. and Defense Intelligence Agency IDs, went astray on its way to New Jersey militia member Edward Feltus. The accidental recipient alerted the FBI, leading to the arrest of Krar, Bruey and Feltus in May 2003. Along with various white supremacist literature, the FBI seized documents indicating that co-conspirators may still be at large, though the trio has continued to keep silent about all details, including their accomplices and intended targets.


Five years down the road this extremists are even better prepared to wage war. Add the tsunami of weapons purchases that have occurred since Obama was elected and there is a scarily dangerous, highly organized very angry mass of people out there being egged on by Limbaugh, Beck, and Hannity.

We are not exaggerating or hyping the homegrown threat. Whatever Ruffni, Frum, and Moran are doing to put the brakes on this out of control mob, they better do it louder and will a lot more intensity or there's going to be a bloodbath and soon.


no connection

congrats for uncovering illegal activity.

but show me where Limbaugh, Beck, and Hannity egged these people on?

show me where birthers following the rule of law is comparable  to illegal activity?

show me that the tsunami of weapons purchases are the highly organized very angry mass of people and not just people anticipating obama and the dems trying to curtail their 2nd amendment rights?

maybe you should stick to militia type investigation. oh say like the muslim compounds

Beyond Stupidity

I actually specialized in keeping up with Neo-nazi Skinheads in their compunds and the so-called mainstrean yellers like G. Gordon Liddy. You may think spending an hour of radio time describing how best to murder ATF agents as good clean fun, I think it's dangerous cheerleading of people like Tim McVeigh.

How is it that you militia types are so ultra-patriotic while at the same time ready to haul out your guns and secceed if you don't like the duly elected president?

You and the other kooks who have taken over the GOP are what is destorying it, and I wouldn't care all that much since I'm a Democrat and dearly love seeing Republicans implode, but then there's that issue of mountains of non-rehetorical explosives and hot heads ready to use them to "save the republic".

I've heard all the crap about admiralty flags, UN biospheres, internment camps, and Ghurka assasins ready to rain down upon us back in 1994 in between exhortations for suckers to buy gold and stock up on dry goods against the millineum.

Nothing's changed, except perhaps 9/11 making it a little iffy to blare on constantly about hanging congressmen from trees and marches on Washington carrying AR-15's.

This is going beyond stupidity into dangerous and credible threats.

It's like this

show me where birthers following the rule of law is comparable  to illegal activity?

The Birthers' aim is to deligitimize the Obama; to say he's not even an American. It's the same impulse that drove the same crowd to call him a Muslim, or, more sinisterly, a secret Muslim. Obama is a moderate liberal whose every move has included foolish and costly attempts at forging "bipartisanship," yet he's presented as some sort of radical socialist trying to impose an alien way of life on the U.S. When corporate interests organize the astroturf campaign against health care reform, they use as a rallying cry the notion that Obama actually wants to set up death panels to kill the elderly, the infirm, the unproductive, and rather than calling BS on such ludicrous BS, the wind-up Bubble People robots show up in force at health-care townhall forums nationwide to protest this outrage.

These aren't political disagreements. The common theme, here, is to deligitimize and even dehumanize the Obama. The cumulative effect of this is that, eventually, some right-wing superpatriot is going to decide to take it upon himself to "save" the republic. He doesn't have to follow the voices in his head--he can follow the voices on his TV and radio.