Left-Wing Hate vs. Conservative Principles

Some especially astute observations from R.S.M:

While there are parallels between Left and Right, however, it is an error to assume that Left and Right are perfectly analogous. The most successful Republican president of the 20th century was Ronald Reagan, who was accepted by conservative True Believers as one of their own. And the worst Republican presidents of the 20th century were Herbert Hoover and Richard Nixon, both of whom embraced liberal policies to the consternation of True Believers. Meanwhile, the most successful Democratic president of the past 50 years, Bill Clinton, succeeded only because he was willing to abandon many of the liberal policies favored by his party’s True Believers.

The passions of True Believers are necessary to, but are not sufficient for, political success. Obviously, it helps if the True Believers believe in things that are actually true. An irrational hostility to “moneyed interests,” pursued as a matter of principle and policy, can never result in economic prosperity. Nor will Code Pink-style pacifism result in sound foreign policy.

[snip]

The Democratic Party’s True Believers have watched the rise of the conservative Tea Party movement, which has shown the same capacity to organize discontent that characterized Team Obama in 2008. Given that kind of fired-up grassroots enthusiasm to work with, if the Republican Party can field attractive candidates, supported by competent campaign teams, the era of Hope and Change will suffer a serious setback in November.

At some level, the Coffee Party people sense this impending disaster, and it fills their hearts with Fear and Loathing.

Read the whole thing here.

Left Wing Filth and Hatred

Left-wing hate

Alan Colmes says the Right is "struggling to draw equivalency with Obama-bashing."

There's no struggle. It's quite easy to find evidence of vile left-wing hatred and violence...it's abundant, and it's tolerated and accepted by mainstream lefties:

(Warning: totally NSFW)

• A look back at some of the crazed radicals the media spent years ignoring
• We support our troops when...
• ZombieTime Hall of Shame
• Bushitler
• Bush Monkey
• 21 Hateful Attacks on Sarah Palin
• Leftwing Violence at 2008 GOP Convention
• HuffPo offended by Tea Parties

Don't miss the misogynistic hate filth from this left-wing sex pig:

(Warning: totally NSFW)

• Twitter: WhoIsAgentZero
• Obama supporter (and Coffee Party Leader) Annabel Park seems to be okay with vulgar, violent sexism

No, the left-wing hatred that I've seen is NOT equivalent to the peaceful and mild mannered dissent that I've witnessed at the tea parties over the past year. The left-wing hate is truly disgusting.

Left-wing outrage over uncivil discourse was conspicuously absent two short years ago. Alan Colmes: During the Bush years, where was YOUR concern for incivility?

More

Extensive documentation of Left Wing hatred and filth from ZombieTime (NSFW)

Breitbart: If the LEFT stops eating our fingers, beating up black men, throwing eggs at our buses, threatening violence, perhaps we can work together!

Why the Tea Party Will Fail

Did he cross his heart and hope to die?

Some wishful thinking from a Tea Party hater:

The Tea Partiers will fail because for them to succeed we would need to shred the US Constitution and start over. That would require a revolution, and that’s not going to happen.

You just have to examine what they stand for. They claim to be strict constitutionalists, but they can’t stop screaming that what Democrats are doing is unconstitutional – against the will of the people.

The Tea Partiers must have forgotten that Democrats won two elections – one in 2006 and another one in 2008.

Obama and Congressional Democrats campaigned on health care reform. So it’s disingenuous for the Tea Partiers to now claim that Democrats are defying the will of the people by pursuing the agenda that they campaigned on.

Time to school another left-wing hatriot.

First, let's remember that elections never authorize Congress to abuse the constitution.

Second, Obama and Congressional Democrats did NOT campaign on ObamaCare's key ingredients: the Cornhusker Kickback, Gatoraid, the Louisiana Purchase, backroom deals with BigPharma...or the unconstitutional "individual mandate." (In fact, Obama rightly campaigned against the individual mandate.)

Polls have made it very clear: ObamaCare is not the health care reform Americans had in mind when Democrats were campaigning in 2008.

Pelosi and her cronies campaigned against the "culture of corruption" and promised "open and honest government." I'm still waiting for that. The American people are still waiting for that. And we'll all remember the bribes and broken promises when we show up to vote in November.

But the left-wing extremists don't seem to care about the indignation of the American people. They temporarily assembled a caucus in Congress barely big enough to override the objections of the people, and they seized as much unconstitutional power as possible, as fast as they possibly could.

The problem with the left is that the left has no respect for the Constitution―the very document through which the people loan their power to the president and to Congress. The radical left defied the Constitution in order to advance their unpopular and reckless health care agenda, and now they're flaunting their disregard for the constraints of the supreme law of the land.

The Tea Party movement is a megaphone for those who have been disenfranchised by the radical left. That's why the Tea Party will succeed.

Representative Phil "The Constitution Doesn't Matter" Hare (D-IL):

Video via Dana Loesch

More

Flashback: Obama slams Hillary's plan for "forcing everyone to buy insurance."

Bobby Schilling is running against Phil Hare

Atlanta Tax Day Tea Party

Wecome, PartysOver Readers!

Separation of Church and Home

This blog isn't about science or religion, but sometimes science, politics and religion collide; and when all three of these intersect with elementary education, sparks will fly.

An article released by the Associated Press this weekend is a fine example of this explosive combination of issues. Although it probably doesn't qualify as a hit piece, Dylan Lovan does a pretty good job of portraying home-schoolers as anti-science wingnuts:

Two of the best-selling biology textbooks [for home-schoolers] stack the deck against evolution, said some science educators who reviewed sections of the books at the request of The Associated Press. "I feel fairly strongly about this. These books are promulgating lies to kids," said Jerry Coyne, an ecology and evolution professor at the University of Chicago.

Coyne is even more explicit about his antipathy toward home-schoolers in his personal blog:

As Lovan noted in his piece, “83 percent of home-schooling parents want to give their children ‘religious or moral instruction.’”

I weep for those children. For many of them are simply being brainwashed by their parents. Yes, that’s what it is—brainwashing...

How many budding biologists have been stifled by their parents’ willful ignorance of science, and on their insistence that the Bible is the real source of biological information?

Wow...sounds like the state should intervene, doesn't it? These poor kids probably should be taken from their parents. Forcing the kids to go to a government-run school would be a good start, but insufficient. Sure, you can get them on the right track at school, but what's going to happen when they go back home to their parents?

Reaction to Lovan's article on the left-wing spite sites has been even more paranoid. Robert Crook provides his very humble opinion:

Religiously brainwashing children, who are helpless because they depend entirely upon their parents, I asserted, is a form of child abuse.

Home-schooling, too, in most cases is done for the purpose of brainwashing, and therefore in most cases is child abuse.

Children home-schooled by “Christo” fascist parents are put at a huge disadvantage. Even children who are home-schooled for reasons other than religious indoctrination — children whose home-school curricula aren’t religious-based — are put at a disadvantage because they don’t get the same opportunities to socialize with children who come from different backgrounds as do their non-home-schooled peers.

For all the talk about the need for exposure to diverse views, Mr. Crook's ability to digest opposing opinions is surprisingly underdeveloped:

I Googled your e-mail address and found your blog, rightklik.net. On your blog you link to Michelle Malkin, RedState and The Heritage Foundation as “important websites,” for [expletive deleted] sake. You’re a wingnut. So I’ll consider the source. You are, after all, preparing your children for the End Times, which they don’t teach in our public schools.

Unfortunately, this notion that home schooling is some kind insidious abuse is not confined to personal blogs and left-wing hate sites. Serious scholarly publications have entertained the idea as well:

The right to unregulated homeschooling visits quite concrete harms on the homeschooled children themselves, the mothers who are teaching them, and the often rural and isolated communities in which they are raised and taught...

...[T]here are political harms. Fundamentalist Protestant adults who were homeschooled over the last thirty years are not politically disengaged, far from it. They vote in far higher percentages than the rest of the population. They mobilize readily. The “army” in which adult homeschooled citizens are soldiers has enormous clout: homeschoolers were called “Bush’s Army” in 2000 and 2004 for good reason...

They are as effective as they are, and as successful as they are, because they engage in politics in the same way that soldiers participate in combat. They don’t question authority, and they can’t go AWOL. With little education, few if any job skills, and scant resources, their power either to influence the lines of authority within their own sphere, or to leave that sphere, is virtually nil.

An army of stupid, conservative Rove-bots? This must be stopped! Here's the plan:

As the political philosopher and homeschool critic Robert Reich has persuasively argued, curricular review would give the state a way to ensure that the academic content is such as to protect the children’s interest in both acquiring the necessary skills for active, autonomous, and responsible citizenship in adulthood, and in being exposed to diverse and more liberal ways.

And now we see the real concern. The statists aren't losing sleep at night because little Johnny can't read ― if that were the case, they'd allow kids to escape our lousy public schools ― no, the statists are worried that Johnny is sneaking off to Tea Parties with his parents when he should be at a real school singing praises to Barack Hussein Obama! Better keep an eye on Johnny.

Mmm, mmm, mmm!

More

Just for kicks, I recommend a visit to Dylan Lovan's Twitter feed. He links to this surprisingly religulous, unintentionally funny video from Symphony of Science:

...The sky calls to us

If we do not destroy ourselves

We will one day venture to the stars

A still more glorious dawn awaits

Not a sunrise, but a galaxy rise

A morning filled with 400 billion suns

The rising of the milky way...

...as religious as anything I've ever seen or heard.