I’m for checks on the federal government coming from the states and people. But what is James checking here? Acorn isn’t federal officials. What exactly is the policy he is calling corrupt? A general pattern? And what is he checking about Sen. Landriue? That she didn’t answer phone calls being the beleaguered and possibly corrupt?

I’m for health care being discussed by the state and the people; Not the federal government. I don’t think we need a federal government; and certainly the bind of federal health care is something to work out of. So if you want to be a check on the federal government and federal government health care; such seems a moral battle. But if you want to be a check on community organizers or senators not answering their phones; when those agencies seem about par for the course; I’m not sure that James is about political theory and policy; but being annoyed with pathetic democratic machines.

But still does breaking any law — even when you intend to later reveal your actions — make you whatever you may be targeting? I hardly think so. I usually agree with Malkin but I still say she’s wrong on this point.

Know your limits. Know the law. Don’t get carried away. And dont’ become what you are targeting.

And you agreed with this rubbish, Dan?

(This is a late post on this topic, I know, but I’m just now reading the update.)

It doesn’t surprise me that if Dan and Bruce disagree, that I’d personally side with Bruce. But honestly, Dan. Malkin is all wet here.

People should know their limits and not get carried away, no matter what they’re doing, of course. But how is it that breaking some laws makes you into “what you are targeting”? A glaring non sequitar there if you ask me.

As for James O´Keefe I admired his effort in exposing ACORN for what it is. I would certainly call him a patriot. As for the alleged breakin and attempt to wiretap (without equipment) of Senator Landrieu´s office, I will wait to hear him on his day in court.

In ethics, we look at good and evil. O’Keefe appears to have engaged in evil. That is why he was arrested. That is why the guy who murdered George Tiller was arrested.

But St. Augustine pondered the just war and the starving man stealing an apple. His work was not exploring moral relativism, but examining evil as must not, ought not and justifiable. Medical triage is justifiable evil. Over the centuries of enlightened development we have refined our views to the point where some people can justify just about anything and others are unable to forgive.

Until the facts are known, I will hold judgment. But if we have reached the point where politicians invite spying and covert investigations by their corrupt practices, then journalists will act like journalist as the New York Times did when it published the Pentagon Papers. Those papers were not obtained legally. The last time I checked Daniel Ellsberg was still a martyr and Father Robert Drinan was praised by the left for sanctifying the whole affair.

Isn’t a good offense the best defense?

Unless you are calling for outright revolt and perhaps expulsion of liberals, a la the Loyalists of old, for which you run enormous risk which may not be “justified” or considered to be morally correct, not at the expense of the law. If you are advocating possibly criminal tactics of opponents you criticize for the “greater good” than you will become no different and no better than them which frankly I want no part of.

I guess when everything comes out, we will know for sure, but he seemed like a jackass in college, too, for example, campaigning against Lucky Charms in the school cafeteria because they were offensive to Irish people.

The absurdity of this strikes as being hilarious, more in the vein of the recent bake sales that charged different prices depending upon race. If that is what O’Keefe intended, than it seems to be a good example of exposing absurdity by being absurd.

Aye, let’s convict people for nothing in the court of public opinion a la Rep. Murtha.

When it comes to this despicable excuse for a human being, I’m sorely tempted to say “yes”…

I stand by all of my words.

That’s a mistake and one which cedes any moral high ground when it comes to legitimate critiques of liberal misconduct. It’s one thing to “stand by” O’Keefe because you believe he is innocent and the charges he is accused of lack any merit, it’s quite another to excuse possible criminal behavior because you consider him to be a political ally. I hope O’Keefe is innocent, I really do. I hate to see young lives destroyed over stupid mistakes and from a purely selfish political stance it would be hurtful, though not overwhelmingly so as libs may wish, to efforts in stopping the extreme Left. I’m also grateful for his helping to expose ACORN shenanigans and love the pricks into the liberal establishment, but I cannot and will not support breaking the law in order to do so. If O’Keefe were a liberal activist who did the same thing against say Senator Coburn’s office I do believe you would be singing a different tune.

At the close of my winding essay, I asked rhetorical questions. You have charged me with stating that I support taking the low road. We may well be at the Tammany level where raw power and turf battles break out. I don’t know. But sending Susan Collins with a box of chocolates to meet with Rahm Emanuel is off the table.

I can not speak for Gay Patriot, but if O’Keefe has done something illegal, he should pay the price just as every sleaze bag Democrat should do as well. Shall we list the tax cheats and graft artists for you?

But when Eric Holder helps the crotch bomber to clam up, I am sure he will be right at O’Keefe’s side waving off the FBI and providing free, world class defense.

This is the milieu we are in and you can hardly blame it on Bush other than your own Bush Derangement Syndrome has driven you to engage in political gorilla warfare where nice guys finish last.

Your squealing is just like Bertha Lewis. Obviously, O’Keefe is going to have a ton of laws thrown at him. But, he took the risk and we all have yet to learn what risk he took and why. Stay tuned.

Tano believes laws are for the little people. All the actions that fascists like him and bob take are for ‘our own good’ as they’re enlightened and know better.

– Posting white people outside polling places with nightsticks and having them tell anyone who walks up, “You are about to be ruled by the white man, n*****”.

Reason: the Barack Obama Party and Tano have stated that it is not a crime for Black Panthers to stand outside polling places with nightsticks and tell anyone who walks up, “You are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker”.

– Forging peoples’ names and committing voter registration fraud for millions of registrations.

Reason: Barack Obama’s organization ACORN has forged peoples’ names and committed voter registration fraud for millions of registrations, and both the Barack Obama Party and Tano state that that is not a crime.

– Voting on multiple occasions in the same election under fictitious names

Reason: the Barack Obama Party, Tano, and the media have stated that voting multiple times in an election is perfectly acceptable and justified.

So Tano, here you go. If Bruce does all of these things, he is doing exactly what you support and endorse as an Obama Party member.

Now, if you are attacking him as practicing “sleaze politics”, that means you are sleazy, since he would be doing exactly what you support and endorse.

What’s the matter, Alinsky boy? No answer? Can’t you live up to the standards you follow? Why do you demand that other people follow higher standards than you, who admittedly engages in sleaze politics?

He has no principles of his own. He does not stand for anything higher than the lowest standard he sees out in the rest of the world.

Which is the one set by the Chicago thug Barack Obama and you, Tano.

So why should Bruce try for anything higher when dealing with street dirt and gutter filth like you and Barack Obama? Why should Bruce be nice to thugs and hatemongers like yourself and Obama who openly support criminal actions like voter fraud and voter registration fraud?

Do you think criminals like yourself deserve kind treatment, Tano? Do you think because you vote fraudulently and forge ballots that you should be given some type of special dispensation?

What Bruce is advocating is putting a stop to criminal activity such as yours and Obama’s. What you advocate is continuing the criminal activity.

That shows the Chicago thug Obama’s values system. He supports criminals and thugs instead of law-abiding citizens. He believes in committing fraud and crimes to keep his grip on power, even if it disenfranchises law-abiding citizens.

The choice is between allowing the criminality and thuggishness of Barack Obama to continue or putting a stop to it. The former is INFINITELY higher. Stopping criminals is better than allowing criminality to continue.

You don’t understand that, Tano, because you are a criminal and a thug, just like your Barack Obama. Gutter trash and filth is what both you and your Obama are.

As I did above.

Your party and you openly support, endorse, and practice voter fraud and voter registration fraud. Your party and you exhort people to vote multiple times, which is a crime, and insist that doing so is justified. Your party and you openly support posting armed thugs outside polling places to hurl racial epithets at and threaten white voters.

You are a thug, Tano, and a criminal. And the reason you are squealing and crying right now is that Alinsky thugs and criminals like yourself depend on other peoples’ moral aversions to turning the same type of behavior you practice back on them. You are not able to take the dirty tricks that you and your party openly endorse and practice being practiced on yourself.

The justification is simple. If you are going to forge ballots and vote on multiple occasions, as you and your party have already been convicted of doing, you have already broken the law, and there is thus no need for me to follow it to put a stop to you. You can’t follow the law because you would lose, and that means you have to cheat — which demonstrates repeatedly your inferiority and the failure of liberalism.

That was a long winding comment that really went nowhere. What did you end with? “Do we try to get ahead of how the Democrats subvert the process? Isn’t a good offense the best defense?”

How clearer can you be? You are making the exact same point that I was making. Bruce advocates complete sleaze politics – including criminality. He justifies it by claiming Democrats do the same. He has no principles of his own. He does not stand for anything higher than the lowest standard he sees out in the rest of the world. Its like living in a gang neighborhood and feeling that you are totally justified in being the baddest banger in the neighborhood – good offense and all that.

And to hear you people talk about supposed Democratic criminality – its just pathetic. Look at the record. Count the convictions. Use your common sense for chrissakes. Nobody with at least half a brain believes that Democrats are somehow more prone to electoral criminality than Republicans – you guys literally wrote the book on this stuff. – LINK