This email, written by a ”Millenial” is making the rounds.  I think you will enjoy it as much as I did.  Thanks to GP Reader Dan in NY for sending this to me!

American liberals, leftists, social progressives, socialists, Marxists and Obama supporters, et al:
 
We have stuck together since the late 1950’s, but the whole of this latest election process has made me realize that I want a divorce. I know we tolerated each other for many years for the sake of future generations, but sadly, this relationship has run its course.
 
Our two ideological sides of America cannot and will not ever agree on what is right so let’s just end it on friendly terms. We can smile and chalk it up to irreconcilable differences and go our own way.
 
Here is a model separation agreement: 

Our two groups can equitably divide up the country by landmass each taking a portion. That will be the difficult part, but I am sure  our two sides can come to a friendly agreement. After that, it should be relatively easy! Our respective representatives can effortlessly divide other assets since both sides have such distinct and disparate tastes.
 
We don’t like redistributive taxes so you can keep them. You are welcome to the liberal judges and the ACLU. Since you hate guns  and war, we’ll take our firearms, the cops, the NRA and the military.
 
You can keep Oprah, Michael Moore and Rosie O’Donnell (You are, however, responsible for finding a bio-diesel vehicle big enough to move all three of them).
 
We’ll keep the capitalism, greedy corporations, pharmaceutical companies,Wal-Mart and Wall Street. You can have your beloved homeboys and illegal aliens. We’ll keep the hot Alaskan hockey moms, greedy CEO’s and rednecks. We’ll keep the Bibles and give you NBC and  Hollywood  .. 

You can make nice with  Iran  and Palestine and we’ll retain the right to invade and hammer places that threaten us. You can have the peaceniks and war protesters. When our allies or our way of life are under assault, we’ll help provide them security. 

We’ll keep our Judeo-Christian values.. You are welcome to Islam, Scientology, Humanism and Shirley McClain. You can also have the U.N.. but we will no longer be paying the bill. 

We’ll keep the SUVs, pickup trucks and oversized luxury cars. You can take every Subaru station wagon you can find. 

You can give everyone healthcare if you can find any practicing doctors. We’ll continue to believe healthcare is a luxury and not a right. We’ll keep The Battle Hymn of the Republic and the National Anthem. I’m sure you’ll be happy to substitute Imagine, I’d Like to Teach the World to Sing, Kum Ba Ya, or We Are the World. 

We’ll practice trickle down economics and you can give trickle up poverty your best shot. Since it often so offends you, we’ll keep our history, our name and our flag. 

Anyone know a good divorce attorney??

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

FoxNews Derangement Syndrome has long since joined Palin Derangement Syndrome and Bush Derangement Syndrome as conditions afflicting the angry left.

Glenn Reynolds often asks is there anything bacon can’t do?  Maybe he should also ask is there anything FoxNews (or Sarah Palin or George W. Bush) can’t be blamed for.  On Thursday and today, he linked two posts either correcting or failing to correct Robert Reich’s post* faulting FoxNews for helping gin up that “huge anti-incumbent wave” in 1994, you know, against the then-Democratic congressional majority.

Problem is, as Frank Ross points out, “Prof. Reich overlooked one minor detail: FoxNews Channel’s first broadcast wasn’t until October 7, 1996.”

The Huffington Post which also ran the column, as Alpaca reports, has yet “to issue a correction/retraction to the story.“

Guess the editors there still can’t fathom how Republicans won back Congress without FoxNews.  I mean, you know, how else could the American people have been turned against health care reform which everyone supports because it’s the right thing because liberals back it and they always want the very best for everyone (Except Sarah Palin.  And George W. Bush.   And Dick Cheney)?

But, here’s the kicker:  Reich was Secretary of Labor during the entirety of Clinton’s first term.  He’s not some upstart leftie blogger who didn’t to to college until this century and didn’t know when Fox was founded.   Reich was in the public eye in 1994; he had to be aware that there was no FoxNews until the month Clinton was re-elected.  Is this then, some kind of ex post facto memory when you apply your current prejudices to the past?

* (more…)

While it may not have been sonicfrog’s purpose to explain the difficulties the Democrats are currently facing, I do think his latest reflection gets at the problems of the majority party:

Conservatives are united behind a few simple ideas, and liberals are a group of divergent people united behind a few simple ideals. The former is much easier to craft into policy than the latter.

There is a huge difference between ideas and ideals.

I know I have more to say on this, but just caught it before bed, so thought I’d put it out there for debate and discussion.

Sorry, but I just can’t stop laughing about the fact that John Edwards was secretly screwing around on his wife, his mistress and the millions of doe-eyed liberals who thought he was the Second Coming of Robert Kennedy.

Aren’t you people just stupid?  ROFL.

You are the same people who think that Al Gore is a man of principle who truly wants to save the planet.   (Normal human beings already know that Al Gore is a snake oil salesman who is making hundreds of millions of dollars off the Global Warming Ponzi Scheme).

Once again, liberals’ love for Edwards show that they see the world as they wish it was — not as it truly is.

Oh and by the way — John Edwards is the most disgusting, slimeball of a politician in my lifetime.  He wins the Nobel Prize for Manwhoreness.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

George Will nails it:

The essence of contemporary liberalism is the illiberal conviction that Americans, in their comprehensive incompetence, need minute supervision by government, which liberals believe exists to spare citizens the torture of thinking and choosing.

And I agree with his assessment of the Democrats’ persistence on health care:

In their joyless, tawdry slog toward passage of their increasingly ludicrous bill, Democrats now cling grimly to Robert Frost’s axiom that “the best way out is always through.” Their sole remaining reason for completing the damn thing is that they started it.

Just read the whole thing.

Despite the failure of big government schemes to foster innovation or create wealth, Democrats here and leftists worldwide continue to promote them as Stephen Moore points out in How Barack Obama is Bankrupting the U.S. Economy:

I’ve been thinking a lot lately about one of my last conversations with [Milton] Friedman when he warned that “even though socialism is a discredited economic model and capitalism is raising living standards to new heights, the left intellectuals continue to push for bigger government everywhere I look.”  He predicted that people would be seduced by collectivist ideas again. He was right.

Clearly, this is the blogosphere-story-of-the-year (if not decade).  It matters not that the Mainstream Media is covering up this scandal, the free-wheeling democratized Internet is getting the information out.

Here’s another great summary from Robert Tracinski at RealClearPolitics:

For more than a decade, we’ve been told that there is a scientific “consensus” that humans are causing global warming, that “the debate is over” and all “legitimate” scientists acknowledge the truth of global warming. Now we know what this “consensus” really means. What it means is: the fix is in.

This is an enormous case of organized scientific fraud, but it is not just scientific fraud. It is also a criminal act. Suborned by billions of taxpayer dollars devoted to climate research, dozens of prominent scientists have established a criminal racket in which they seek government money-Phil Jones has raked in a total of £13.7 million in grants from the British government-which they then use to falsify data and defraud the taxpayers. It’s the most insidious kind of fraud: a fraud in which the culprits are lauded as public heroes. Judging from this cache of e-mails, they even manage to tell themselves that their manipulation of the data is intended to protect a bigger truth and prevent it from being “confused” by inconvenient facts and uncontrolled criticism.

The damage here goes far beyond the loss of a few billions of taxpayer dollars on bogus scientific research. The real cost of this fraud is the trillions of dollars of wealth that will be destroyed if a fraudulent theory is used to justify legislation that starves the global economy of its cheapest and most abundant sources of energy.

This is the scandal of the century. It needs to be thoroughly investigated-and the culprits need to be brought to justice.

As I stated on Twitter earlier today… “Can we at least all agree now that Global Warming is a political philosophy and not a scientific enterprise?”

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

So says a reader at Instapundit about the latest revelations regarding the firing of AmeriCorps inspector general Gerald Walpin.  The reader’s comment comes in response to Byron York’s reporting today on the Friday info dump by the White House on the brewing AmeriCorps scandal.

The new documents support the Republican investigators’ conclusion that the White House’s explanation for Walpin’s dismissal — that it came after the board of the Corporation for National and Community Service, which oversees AmeriCorps, unanimously decided that Walpin must go — was in fact a public story cobbled together after Walpin was fired, not before.

Walpin was axed on the evening of June 10, when he received a call from Norman Eisen, the special counsel to the president for ethics and government reform, who told Walpin he had one hour either to resign or be fired.  The next day, congressional Republicans, led by Grassley, objected, charging that Walpin’s dismissal violated a recently-passed law requiring the president to give Congress 30 days’ notice before dismissing an inspector general.

The new documents show the White House scrambling, in the days after the controversy erupted, to put together a public explanation for the firing. On June 11, less than 24 hours after Walpin received the call from Eisen, the board held a conference call.  The next day, Ranit Schmelzer, who is part of the corporation’s press office, sent an email to board members giving them talking points to use if contacted by reporters seeking information about the matter.

I thought Obama was going to be the most “transparent” President?  Yeah, transparently inept, terrible and corrupt.

I wonder….does “Rahm Emmanuel” mean “H.R. Haldeman” in Yiddish?

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

For all the talk from the MSM about a “civil war” in the GOP, it would appear that there are quite a number of “angry” liberals in the Democrat Party too. The liberal America Blog is calling for a boycott, or “pause” as they prefer to call it, of the DNC, Organizing for America and the Obama campaign due to broken promises on gay rights:

We are asking voters to pledge to withhold contributions to the Democratic National Committee, Organizing for America, and the Obama campaign until the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA) is passed, Don’t Ask Don’t Tell (DADT) is repealed, and the so-called Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) is repealed -– all of which President Obama repeatedly promised to do if elected.

America Blog’s “pause” is being echoed by other prominent liberal blogs and bloggers, including: Daily Kos, Dan Savage, David Mixner, FireDogLake, Michelangelo Signorile, Pam’s House Blend & Towleroad.

It’s not just a failure on gay rights by Obama/Pelosi/Reid that has liberal Democrats upset, the Stupak amendment to the recently-passed House version of ObamaCare has angered the prominent Open Left blog enough to likewise call for a boycott of the DCCC:

It is time for progressives to pass a Stupak amendment of our own. We need to stop giving money to organizations that spend money on John Boccieri, Bobby Bright, Travis Childers, Parker Griffith, and Harry Teague. We are better off without spending a single dime on most, if not all, of these 23 Democrats.

Their call to boycott the DCCC is being echoed by DailyKos.

With all the angst out there on both sides of the political spectrum it appears that we do indeed live in “interesting times“. How’s that hopeychangeyness coming along, Mr. President?

– John (Average Gay Joe)

No principles.

No respect.

No honor.

Just a simple lust for power.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

While Peggy Noonan is normally Dan’s territory, I hope he will indulge me on this one.  Reason being is that I’m now a self-created student of the “American Generations” after reading “The Fourth Turning“.

Noonan’s column today sums up exactly why, as a Gen X’er, I hold the Baby Boomers in such disdain and long for the day that they have exited our political structure.  Noonan also echoes a lot of what Strauss and Howe said about the Boomers in “The Fourth Turning”.

Her column title sums it up nicely: We’re Governed by Callous Children.

And her last paragraph fits the Boomer Class like a glove:

We are governed at all levels by America’s luckiest children, sons and daughters of the abundance, and they call themselves optimists but they’re not optimists—they’re unimaginative. They don’t have faith, they’ve just never been foreclosed on. They are stupid and they are callous, and they don’t mind it when people become disheartened. They don’t even notice.

As Strauss and Howe noted in 1997, it is now our time.  The practical Gen Xers & The Millenials have to rescue America from the Baby Boomers who lived their entire adult lives wishing for the ideals of America to end; and are now in the middle of fulfilling those goals.

It is time to take America back from these callous children.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

UPDATE (from Dan):  Bruce, of course, I’ll indulge you on this one.

I agree that the column you cite was particularly insightful.  And do hope you’ll indulge me by according me the privilege of writing a followup.

Obama signed the stupid piece of legislation this week.  Figured I should mention it.  To underscore how inane and childish this legislation is — it is named the Matthew Shepard/James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Law.

Would Byrd’s name be attached if George W. Bush hadn’t been the Governor of Texas?  Would this new law have punished Byrd’s murderers any more than they were?  No — two were sentenced to death, the other will spend the rest of his life in jail.

Stupid, childish, petty Democrats run our nation.  Meanwhile, Congressional Democrats and Obama oppose things like free-market healthcare reform, free-market social security reforms,  and tax reforms that would actually do something for gay families.  And the Islamist Pogrom of Gays?   Democrats are silent.

Never forget that, folks.  But when you murder someone this weekend, just make sure you don’t yell nasty things at them first.

*sheesh*

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Today President Obama signed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2010 which includes language making it illegal for a person basically to think the wrong things while committing a crime.

Yes, the Defense Authorization includes the pearl of Leftists, Hate Crimes (sic) language.

Before I get too far into what will necessarily be a mischaracterization of what I want to say here, let me be perfectly clear: I think those who support this legislation more or less have the best intentions in mind. I, too, am disgusted by the crimes against Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. I am glad that those who perpetrated these vilinous acts against Shepard are currently each serving two consecutive life sentences. They will never again see the light of day. Meanwhile, two of the three murderers of Byrd are awaiting their executions while the third is currently serving life in prison.

What must be realized, however, is that the fates of these five men are symbols of how the justice system in America worked without the need for a hate crimes act.

Plain and simple, this is a law that criminalizes what someone is thinking.

All instances of its execution necessarily have contingent upon them the breaking of a law that already exists, and the justice that certainly follows thereafter. All that will happen is that an accused person will be held criminally liable for thinking things.

This law is brought forth with all the best of intentions and I don’t think those who support it realize how insidious and counter to our system of liberty it really is. It’s truly the stuff of Orwell

It is an abomination of liberty, and hopefully the Supreme Court will knock down its clearly unconstitutional basis.

That said, it is incredibly poetic that in July, anti-gun activists celebrated the defeat of a rider to the same bill that would have made it easier for law-abiding citizens to travel among the states with concealed weapons.

Tell you what: If you want to stop hate crimes, here’s a first step: Allow people to defend themselves!

It seems to me that these two riders tell the story of the Left in America today: Trust us. We’ll take care of things for you. Leave your liberties aside and put your faith in the government to take care of you.

It troubles me.

- Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from HQ)

One of the most annoying things about researching Athena for my dissertation has been reading those (supposed) scholars who insist this owl-eyed deity was really just a man in drag or a woman who wanted to be a man. They base this conclusion on her closeness to her father (as if no woman had ever been close to her father) and her supposed masculine attire. She was often glad in the armor in which she was born. And, well back then, women didn’t wear armor.

They make this hasty judgment based on appearance alone, but scratch the surface and Athena is very clearly female. She always wear a peplos, the garment most women wore in classical Greece indeed, the presentation of a new peplos to the goddess was the culmination of the quadrennial Panthenaia. She measured herself against her female counterparts, indeed, started a war because a prince of Troy found her Aphrodite fairer than she.

Such hasty judgments seem commonplace among many in academia–and on the political and social left. In his book, Taking Sex Differences Seriously, Steven E. Rhoads writes :

Some feminists have devoted entire books to the claim that women will close the strength gap with men once they train as men do, but the best evidence shows otherwise.

Kind of sounds like Democrats’ confidence back at the beginning of the year that the “so-called stimulus” would create hundreds of thousands of jobs, but the best evidence showed otherwise. And yet now Dr. Christina Romer, Chair of the President’s Council of Economic Advisers now saying that that stimulus won’t need to much growth by mid-2010 and unemployment is likely to remain about 10%, the White House is finally taking a look at that best evidence.

Like so many in academia — and on the political and cultural left — these officials prefer their theories of how the world should work to actual evidence of the way it does.

Here’s the news Dan was referring to earlier today.

The NEA [National Endowment for the Arts] and the White House did encourage a handpicked, pro-Obama arts group to address politically controversial issues under contentious national debate. That fact is irrefutable.

This practice has never been the historical role of the NEA. The NEA’s role is to support excellence in the arts, to increase access to the arts, and to be a leader in arts education. Using the arts to address contentiously debated issues is political subversion. And the fact that the White House played a role in encouraging the arts to address contentious issues should also be considered a government overreach.

Three days after the conference call a coalition of arts groups, led by Americans for the Arts, a participant on the conference call per the meeting contact list and recipient of NEA grants, sent out a press release with the heading “Urgent Call to Congress for Healthcare Reform,” which called for the creation of “a health care reform bill that will create a public health insurance option.” Eleven days after the conference call, Rock the Vote, another participant on the call, announced a health care design contest. “We can’t stand by and listen to lies and deceit coming from those who are against reforming a broken system,” they stated in their announcement. “Enough is Enough. We need designs that tell the country YES WE CARE! Young people demand health care.”

These may both be coincidences and I am not suggesting that the NEA or these groups definitively violated the law in these efforts. That’s for others to discuss and investigate. As I’ve stated in various television interviews, the organizers never discussed any specific policies.

Oh.. NOW I UNDERSTAND.  It is Andrew Breitbart and his team that are doing those jobs that the American mainstream media won’t do.

People will go to jail over this corruption. It is just a question of who and how deep within the White House.

UPDATE: BigHollywood’s Nick Gillespie adds:

It’s ironic that official attempts to use artists have come to light only weeks before the 20th anniversary of the destruction of the Berlin Wall and the subsequent collapse of the German Democratic Republic, a regime that spent an enormous amount of time, energy, and resources creating fake culture to bolster its political agenda. “Official” culture is always unseemly, especially when the connections between officials and the ostensible creators are hidden from the audience.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

All at the same time, in fact.

Can we officially declare Kanye West as “Douchebag of the Century”?

And Beyonce as “Goddess of the Century”?  She is talented, smart and classy.

The Leftists that embraced him when he said “President Bush hates black people” should be ashamed of themselves now.  *crickets chirping*

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

Welcome Instapundit Readers!!

PatriotPartner has been trying to call Sen. Kay Hagan’s office today to express outrage over the radical “green jobs czar”, Van Jones.

However, while most of us are still working today — it appears our Senator from North Carolina has vanished.  All of her phone numbers are going unanswered, and the voicemail is full.  That says to me: “I don’t want to hear from my constituents.”

Congress has been out for a month and the President has been on vaca for 2 weeks.  The rest of America (well, those of us who still have jobs) are working our asses off.

Can’t we expect the same (or better) of our elected officials.

Don’t believe me?  Call Senator Hagan’s offices and see for yourself:

SENATOR KAY HAGAN

DC OFFICE: 202-224-6342

GREENSBORO, NC OFFICE: 336-333-5311

RALEIGH, NC OFFICE: 919-856-4630

Can someone please find my Senator? I hope she isn’t in Argentina.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)

UPDATE (from Dan): Seems my Senator, Ma’am Barbara Boxer, is also on the missing persons list, though they do answer the phone at her LA office.

UPDATE (from JohnAGJ): My Senators in Virginia at least have been found. Jim Webb (D) refuses to hold town hall meetings, believing them to be unnecessary, while Mark Warner (D) seems to be trying to please everybody: giving Democrat talking points on the one hand, while claiming to oppose the House bill with the other.

Roger Clegg (via Glenn) offered a slightly different take on the New York Times article I considered in my previous post.  While, like me, Clegg finds the “renewed emphasis on ['disparate impact'] lawsuits . . .  disturbing but, again, not surprising,” he found the policy was nothing new: 

. . . the issues raised by the Obama administration’s civil-rights policies will be important, but they will not be surprising or even new. Here, as elsewhere, it’s just the usual liberal nonsense, warmed over and worse.

Emphasis added.  The usual liberal nonsense heated up with a extensive infusion of cash from a Democratic Congress eager to dole out dollars to favored interest groups.

Clegg’s words that Obama’s polices at Justice are little more than the “usual liberal nonsense warmed over” made me wonder yet again why so many on the left wax lyrical about Barack Obama.  While kayaking with my family, I met a nice liberal woman from LA who was shocked (**shocked**) to learn that I did not think very highly of the President.

What, I continue to ask, justifies their enthusiasm for this man offering warmed over liberal policies?

He’s no new kind of politician, just a hard-core leftist* of the old school, with increased eloquence and a more powerful presence.

As per my last post, as I read the New York Times yesterday, I caught something which gets at the essence of conservative and liberal (using those terms in their contemporary, not classical context) attitudes toward discrimination:

. . . the Obama administration is planning a major revival of high-impact civil rights enforcement against policies, in areas ranging from housing to hiring, where statistics show that minorities fare disproportionately poorly. President George W. Bush’s appointees had discouraged such tactics, preferring to focus on individual cases in which there is evidence of intentional discrimination.

Emphasis added.

Regardless of what one feels about the state adjudicating discrimination in the private sector, if the government is going to get involved, shouldn’t it limit that involvement to sanctioning (or otherwise punishing) those who single out individuals from protected classes?

The contemporary conservative wants to want evidence of bias before pursuing a case of discrimination, the liberal proceeds when he finds inequality of results.  Now you see why I bristle at gay activists demanding equality, particularly when they claim their goal is “full equality” (whatever that is).  As the Times article shows, under a liberal (in the contemporary context) Administration, we’re not talking about equal rights, but about equal outcomes.

And that means less freedom and increased government intervention in the decisions of private associations and enterprises.

Just when you think the American liberal left can sink no lower to weaken their own nation….

WASHINGTON POST: The Justice Department recently questioned military defense attorneys at Guantanamo Bay about whether photographs of CIA personnel, including covert officers, were unlawfully provided to detainees charged with organizing the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, according to sources familiar with the investigation.

Investigators are looking into allegations that laws protecting classified information were breached when three lawyers showed their clients the photographs, the sources said. The lawyers were apparently attempting to identify CIA officers and contractors involved in the agency’s interrogation of al-Qaeda suspects in facilities outside the United States, where the agency employed harsh techniques.

If detainees at the U.S. military prison in Cuba are tried, either in federal court or by a military commission, defense lawyers are expected to attempt to call CIA personnel to testify.

The photos were taken by researchers hired by the John Adams Project, a joint effort of the American Civil Liberties Union and the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, to support military counsel at Guantanamo Bay, according to the sources, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the inquiry. It was unclear whether the Justice Department is also examining those organizations.

Both groups have long said that they will zealously investigate the CIA’s interrogation program at “black sites” worldwide as part of the defense of their clients. But government investigators are now looking into whether the defense team went too far by allegedly showing the detainees the photos of CIA officers, in some cases surreptitiously taken outside their homes.

American liberals want to defend terrorists at all costs and provide them with Constitutional protections.  But in doing so, they deny those same protections to American citizens.  The irony is rich if it weren’t so serious.

Abraham Lincoln would have called these acts of treason.  I doubt the self-proclaimed reborn Lincoln at 1600 Penna will feel any sympathy, except for the ACLU.

As Michelle Malkin says:  Privacy for jihadi, but not for thee.

-Bruce (GayPatriot)