Heard Rush talking about this on my drive in to work this morning.
This is a stunning development, if the author’s viewpoint is shared by any significant number of Democrats.
Jamie Irons
Bill and Hill smell blood in the White House water right now. Not a safe place to be. An article in the London Telegraph was discussing Bill Clinton’s campaign efforts for candidates this year. An unspoken but apparent sub-text of that article was Run Hillary, Run!
In a twisted painful turn of logic, maybe the Clintons would actually be a good (or least best of several evils) for the Democrat party.
Looks like my $100 wager that Hillary will run is getting safer by the day. Bill’s been sabotaging the Dems for weeks now. After reading this I’m starting to understand why.
Well, assuming that this letter is legit, I hate to tell her, but Hillary is just as much a communist as is Obama.
The infiltration of the Democrats by the Communist started in the 1920’s. The New Dealers where all collectivist of one sort or another. Whatever does she think the phrase “New Deal” means? By the time the “New Left” crowd took over the Democrats in the 1960’s it already had been softened up at least one generation of communist cadre inserting themselves in high places in the Party, government, academia, media and the NGO’s.
No, I am afraid that this person is a typically well meaning “useful idiot” who only now notices what the Democrat Party is about, and she makes the fundamental mistake of attributing it to Obama and his wrecking crew. Obama is just a figurehead, a front man, and a rather witless and hapless one too. If it were not Obama who was put forward it would have been someone else–the results would have been the same. In a way, Clinton and Carter are very much of the same mold, they were just more cautious.
The Left has been working toward this end for at least 3 generations now. That they have gotten this close to victory shows how degraded our national political life has become.
Oh, some people need to get a life, like this hysterical girl. I suspect she’s speaking only for herself but trying to make it sound like a “movement”. Yeah, right, and that “Democrat” party line sounds so authentic. This is like that anonymous article that appeared some weeks ago where the “senior adviser to several presidents” had all those mutterings about a civil war.
Where is Sid Blumenthal writing these days, is he using some new aliases?
Dan D: It’s written by a gay guy, Kevin DuJan, a blogger at Hillbuzz who’s been blogging ever since the 2008 campaign. There isn’t much doubt he’s sincere. He was very active in the Democratic Party in Chicago for many years.
I wonder what this will do to Obama’s message that he is evolving with regard to gay marriage. I suspect it may increase the stay at home gays.
It is a triple WOW. I’d love to see it make page 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle just to see Boxer’s reaction.
I googled “Kevin DuJan” results for the last 24 hours and received 236 hits. Looked at them and he has yet to make it too the lamestream media or the big left blogs. That may change.
544 hits for “Open letter to Rush Limbaugh,” within the last 24 hours.
My question is, then why take the SOS job? To pay for Chelsea’s wedding? Lol
And i agree with Hattip, Hillary would be an equal nightmare to Obama. We’d all just be called sexist instead of racist.
Not to mention, but Kevin points out that there’s no way that he’d vote for Clinton in a 2012 campaign or a 2016 – the Democratic Party is just that corrupt. If you get the time, actually read the letter. What he wrote about the “Kos kids” denigrating a dead woman is just sickening and really tells anyone all they need to know about the current left.
They are learning the difference between being a real part of something real, and being used for ulterior and expedient goals.
anyone want to realize that this is a all or nothing gig and that they don’t intend to let go? that the issue of voting was never an issue if there is too much violence, rationing, and such to have elections… right?
there is a reason why the lowest and worst punishment in Dante’s hell was for BETRAYAL
Good cop Bad Cop works because the victim forgets they are both cops first
1. The Michigan primary was moved up to January, apparently against the wishes of the national Democratic Party. I’m sure that neither Beatific Barack nor Saint Hillary were pure as driven snow regarding the process. A political activist like DuJan surely knows this. He is disingenuous not to mention it in his post.
2. A Chicago Democrat is shocked shocked that there was hanky-panky and hardball involved in the nomination process? Give. Me. A. Break.
3. Afaic Clinton lost the nomination because of her arrogance and complacency. By the end of the primaries she had clearly taken Obama’s measure, but it was just a little too late.
The Oval Office was hers to lose, and she lost it. I believe she knows that.
4. Seeing how close Kerry–Kerry!–came in 2004, I suspect Hillary could have won. I suspect that Hillary suspects that too.
This guy was in the Democratic Party in Chicago for years and he just discovered they play dirty?
I’m from Chicago and I had to buy off my kindergarten teacher. We Chicagoans would not have it any other way; sure the city is corrupt, but everyone is in on the take. Anyway you can trust a crook; it’s the ideologues who will stab anyone and everyone in the back.
Obama has given political corruption a bad name; one that it does not deserve.
This somehow reminds me a letter Bukharin wrote in prison cell to future generation of Communists before his execution and managed to pass to his wife. She was able to publish it during Perestoika, but it fell flat. Communism was already dead, and his invectives accusing Stalin in crimes against Party and Russian people were too late and add little to what was already known.
By the way, the best quote from the letter is the reference to ALIAS…
and THAT is EXACTLY what i described.
but i shorten it by saying, paint exit on entrances, paint entrance on exits, yell fire and watch them run the wrong way in reality, but the right way in their heads.
and as i said, your thoughts are not important…
(neither are mine, so dont get snippy)
but the ones running into the fire, not out, all think that what they are thinking is right, and no one can show them they aren’t as to do so, is to have them step into the hall of mirrors.
they would rather be wrong in comfort
than right, and betray all by not wanting to act
i would say take a lesson from the Estonians and Latvians…
if we all came out and sang the songs and things that they hate… we would win…
this was why i wished way back that someone could do a flash mob of the school house rock songs of the constitution…
imagine the bad history…
20,000 show up and sing “we the people”
they lose if they let us
they lose more if they stop us
The Land That Sings
Non-Latvians may find it hard to comprehend the importance of the Latvian Song and Dance Festival which takes place in Riga once every five years, and takes over the hearts and minds of the entire nation. The simple fact is that the festival is inextricably bound with Latvia’s very identity.
After centuries of foreign rule, social and political changes in the 19th century led to the rise of a National Awakening in the minds of the Latvian people. They strove to rediscover their Latvian identity, despite the oppressive influence of so many foreign powers. The way they did this was through song.
Latvian folksongs, or ‘Dainas’, have a centuries old history and is estimated that over 1.2 million exist – making Latvian oral tradition one of the richest in the world. Dainas are characteristically made up of quatrains, or four-lined stanzas, and their topic usually include philosophies on life, love and the world order and the important rites of passage surrounding birth, marriage and death.
Taking the idea from the recent German practice of organising huge choir concerts, the Latvians organised their first Song Festival in Riga in 1873 in which 45 choirs and 1019 participants took part. Much of the aim of the festival was to help foster in Latvians a sense of national identity – and this certainly worked, as in 1918, during the aftermath of the First World War and the Russian Revolution, Latvia declared itself an independent state.
Unfortunately for the Latvians, Soviet Russia was to reclaim the state as its own following WWII. However, even the Soviets, who had criminalised the ownership of a Latvian national flag, dared not deny the people their beloved Song Festivals. And so the Song Festival continued to exist, albeit with an unhealthy amount of panegyric in praise of Lenin. Despite the heavy russification of the festival it was understood between Latvians, at first tacitly and later in the 1980s more openly, that the event stood for Latvian national identity. From 1987 to 1991 in fact singing protests became Latvia’s most powerful weapon against the Soviet regime, as it did in Lithuania and Estonia, in what is now termed the Singing Revolution.
enough about history, what does this Latvian Song and Dance Festival (the dance element was added in 1948) actually consist of? Well basically some of the largest choirs in the world getting kitted out in national dress and singing their hearts out! At the last Song and Dance Festival in 2003 over 30,000 participants, 300 different choirs, more than 500 dance groups, plus 57 brass bands, three symphonic orchestras and one chamber orchestra all took part during a crazy eleven days in June and July. On top of that a large number of art exhibitions, parades and also some contemporary rock and pop concerts took place.
A couple things about Dujan’s “Open Letter..” don’t make sense to me.
He makes it sound like Hillary is a saint who was horribly wronged by Obama, Donna Brazile, Howard Dean, and the Democrat Party generally. If so, then why is she a part of his administration? I guess the case can be made that if she really wants to be president one day, then it’s to her advantage to be Secretary of State. But it’s not a pre-requisite. After all, Hillary gave up her Senate seat to become part of Obama’s adminstration, and alot of senators, Obama for example, have used their senate seats as a stepping stone to become president. So why serve in an administration that stabbed you in the back? I don’t get it.
The second thing about hsi letter that doesn’t make sense is that he makes it sound like the Democratic Party took a hard left turn relatively recently. Has he been sleeping the past 35-40 years? It started in the 1970s and has been building steam ever since. While it may be true the far left wasn’t a majority in the Party until recently, it is undeniable that the Democratic Party actively recruited every conceivable leftist radical (environmentalists, feminists, gay rights advocates, Marxists, etc) in American society since the anti-Vietnam War days. It was that recruitment of radicals that initially gave rise to the intellectual neoconservative movement within the Democratic Party in the 1970s. Over time, the neocons became increasingly dissatisfied and ultimately left the Democrats and became Independents and Republicans. Today, the core base of the Democratic Party are the radicals.
Just look at who the Democrats nominated to be our current President: a man who had radical communist Frank Davis Marshall as his father figure; who started his political career as a community organizer; who was a close associate of domestic terrorist Bill Ayers; and who spent 20 years sitting in the racist, America-hating church of Jeremiah Wright.
Bob from Virginia, gs, Scott:
Yes, the letter is not exactly internally consistent. But people often aren’t. It may be partly a case of closing one’s eyes to bad things as long as you think it’s for a good cause, and then learning the rot goes much deeper than you thought when you finally become the victim.
Also, he’s written quite a bit about why he originally supported Hillary and why he couldn’t vote for her if she ran in 2012.
I know quite a few people whose eyes were opened by the Obama forces’ treatment of Hillary. One is Robin of Berkeley.
Kevin Dujan is the real deal. And since he’s based in Chicago he has a lot of very detailed, specific information about just how slimy Obama really is.
So I repeat myself, at the risk of sounding crude, there must be 50 ways to lock and load.
I’m inclined to agree with gs and others that DuJan seems awfully naive about Hillary, Chicago politics, etc.
But neo’s comment at 5:54 pm also makes sense. Once the “change” process starts, there’s no telling where it will lead. We need all the changers we can get, ASAP.
neo, I see your point but, having read the DuJan piece linked by CV, I’m sticking by my skepticism.
I have taken one Obama conspiracy theory seriously: the Michelle ‘whitey’ tape. I’m not paying attention to any more unless accompanied by evidence.
I agree that nefarious things might be going on, but paying attention is not a constructive use of my time until evidence is on the public record. I don’t mean proof beyond a reasonable doubt: I mean something that a prosecutor would submit to a grand jury.
And I don’t rule out that Democrats might plant a false trail that leads nowhere, leaving the Right with no credibility to follow up the actual wrongdoing.
If so, then why is she a part of his administration? I guess the case can be made that if she really wants to be president one day, then it’s to her advantage to be Secretary of State.
I think it makes perfect sense. By joining the Cabinet she a) showed party loyalty, b) picked up at least notional foreign policy cred, and c) positioned herself later to pick a fight with Buraq and leave the Cabinet on a “matter of principle” in a probably successful effort to vaccinate herself against Husseinitis. She can command page one headlines any time she wants merely by resigning with a splash. None of these considerations would obtain had she remained in the Senate; she’d just be one more backbencher carping at the boss.
Joining the Cabinet was therefore a smart move, and for me a heartening one in a dark time, because it showed that the Clintons had taken Buraq’s measure and figured he would crash and burn before long. (Otherwise this move made no sense.) Look for Buraq to get primaried next year, with a “principled” Hillary “regretfully” answering her party’s call to come back from private life and lead them from the wilderness.
The game is afoot, as of Wednesday. The irony is that Hillary is probably hoping for an epic Republican beatdown even more than we are. Her whole future rides on it.
Occam’s Beard Says:
October 28th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
The irony is that Hillary is probably hoping for an epic Republican beatdown even more than we are. Her whole future rides on it.
Rush Limbaugh has been saying exactly that.
Rick, I’ve never listened to Rush, but obviously should.
The writer is outraged that the Obama campaign used every dirty trick printed in Alinksy’s “Rules for Radicals”, but he seems to be unaware that Hillary Clinton is also an acolyte of Saul Alinsky. In fact, Hillary wrote her Senior Thesis on Alinsky–a thesis which she (successfully) suppressed until after the Clintons left office.
The whole thing does feel a bit odd. But if he is honestly relating his sincere reaction to the situation since 2008, I suppose it would have to be a bit odd.
I think there’s more of this going on than is at all apparent. I did some “canvassing” for Republicans in a local community a couple of Saturdays ago; here are some handouts I made myself out of my own ideas:
Anyway, I ran into a woman (mowing the lawn at the time) that I have known my whole life; I’ve known her family my whole life. She has always been a very staunch Democrat and, not being one to keep her opinions to herself, everybody knows that.
I said I’m asking people to consider voting for the Republicans for a change. And she motioned to her husband and said, “Mick switched his registration from Democrat to Republican this summer, and our son just did too.” She didn’t say she was going to do so herself, but it sure sounded like it’s coming sooner or later.
What the Democrats have been doing in DC really got to them. But, in her case, there is something else, too. IIRC, she had been in favor of entitlements because, as she used to put it, “We’re all in this together.” But she said the other day, “I used to be all for entitlements, but not any more.” She explained how her eyes got opened: “I’ve worked for the United Way for 17 years now, and I’ve seen how entitlements make people think they shouldn’t have to do anything for themselves.” And she related a story about how she got a phone call from a woman who wanted to “report” a charity… for not paying her gas bill!
In summation, my conversation with her is one of the biggest surprises I’ve had in many a year.
He is not naive. It’s the people on this side who are [pleasantly] surprised who are naive.
Hillary was planning this comeback since she lost the election in’08. I think even in threads on this site we’ve spoke about it.
She is a shrewd sly patient strategist and she lay low for a while exactly for this moment; she is prepared (not less than Obama) to toss him under the bus, and for this goal any tactic that seems appropriate at the moment will do – even fraternizing (for a short time) with Rush.
He cohorts are molding themselves after her; I would not believe that guy – from Chicago! – does not know about Hillary’s communist sympathies or didn’t notice similarities between her and Obama’s healthcare bills; and his railing against unions is just too transparent a hook for Rush readers to be conned.
Oh, please.
pst314: I have heard over and over that Hillary wrote her thesis on Alinsky, therefore is an Alinsky disciple.
It’s certainly possible that she wrote an admiring treatise on Alinsky. But just the fact that she wrote on the subject does not make her a disciple. She might be, she might not be. I would prefer to read the work before I made that judgment. I have certain studied, and written about, plenty of things and people I don’t admire or follow or advocate.
And believe me, I am no Hillary fan. But I have never seen anyone write about what is actually in the thesis. It’s all speculation, as far as I know. Have you actually read it? Or read something by someone who has?
Tatyana: I’ve been reading his work for several years now. Not based solely on this letter at all, I believe he is quite sincere. He does not support Hillary for president, either. He, however, is definitely inconsistent in his beliefs; to me they don’t quite add up, either.
Speaks for itself:
Greatest_Movie_Line_Ever.wmv
1088K Download
These guys are legit. But, as many commentators have noted, they (like many “PUMAS”) still hold Hillary on a pedastal, which is too bad. None-the-less, the Hillbuzz guys like many “PUMAS” have been on the front lines of political action for the past couple of years, working like dogs for conservative candidates and trying to expose the hyposcrisy and corruption on the left. Many people wonder how a person could go from being liberal to being conservative, from supporting Hillary to supporting Sarah. The motivations vary for many former Dems, but 2008 was a genuine wake up call for many (myself included) and for lots of us, there is no going back. I only wish people in the ranks would stop seeing Hillary with rose colored glasses. She’s as much of a danger as the rest of the liberals and if former Dems can’t see that she proved herself to be an opportunist, it’s a shame. But it doesn’t take away from the incredible political activism they engage in every day. Better late than never to wake up. And a lot us did.
This is great news. Just today I was worrying that with all the Tea Party candidates that might win, we were still stuck with the Republican staffers. The same ones who are trying to sabotage the tea party at every turn. And really it is staff on the Hill that gets the things accomplished. This letter tells me there is a different talent pool to move things along. The experienced Dem talent pool if we judge by the amateur hour that the Dems have been since Obama took over. There’ll be conflicts but properly managed, the two minion pools could be balanced to keep things in the middle.
Another “wow” via instapundit:
WOW: Charlie Cook moves Barney Frank’s seat from “likely Democratic” to “lean Democratic.” Plus this: “Remember, as of just a few weeks ago, this seat wasn’t even on the board.” Frank’s opponent, Sean Bielat. seems to be surging.
Posted at 8:38 pm by Glenn Reynolds
It started as a “safe” seat.
annonymous Says:
October 28th, 2010 at 8:57 pm
The motivations vary for many former Dems, but 2008 was a genuine wake up call for many (myself included) and for lots of us, there is no going back.
Better late than never to wake up. And a lot us did.
Welcome aboard, annonymous! Have a seat and make yourself at home.
Google search of “Open letter to Rush Limbaugh” for the last 24 hours now up to 10,100 hits from 544 in only 5 hours. No lamestream media sites yet.
neo, Hillary’s thesis supposedly can be found online, here for example.
Neo: The title of Hillary’s senior thesis was “There Is Only the Fight…”: An Analysis of the Alinsky Model.
Google should find copies around the web.
Glad to see so many are skeptical of DuJan’s ‘road to Damascus’ moment as I am. Hillary was no prize, as much a socialist as Obama, maybe with a little more tact. But just a little. Hillary’s college thesis was on Alinsky. Now who uses his tactics? Right, Obama.
I get the feeling that if Hillary had won, and was just as horrible a president as Obama, DuJan would be right there calling us sexists, Rethuglicans, tea baggers, and the rest of the litany of insults the left throws at us for disagreeing with Obama’s policies. I find DuJan to be a bit of a hysterical phony.
The masthead for Hillbuzz still has a photo of their sainted Hillary on it. Tells me all I need to know about this co-called new found conservative. Old habits are not broken.
There is plenty of behavioral evidence to strongly support the belief that Hill’s Alinsky thesis was in favor.
Saul A. was a hot ticket item for the Dems and RINOs in the ’60s and ’70s, when Hillary was young and impressionable. The Rochester NY city council brought him to town after the black riot of ’64 incinerated many city blocks. Rochester was then a Kodak+Xerox company town with many new millionaires; guess it had to do their new-found guilt at being in the money.
Tom: I just quickly skimmed Hillary’s thesis. What a bloody bore! Reminds me of all those awful sociology texts I had to wade through in college; couldn’t stand them then, and can’t stand them now.
I agree that it is at least somewhat admiring. The context seems to be this: Alinsky’s a proponent of “democracy” and empowering the poor to help themselves. None of this is surprising; we certainly know that, although Hillary began as a Goldwater supporter, by the time she was a senior in college she had become a liberal/leftist. She met Alinsky in high school, however, when she was a conservative. Her pastor introduced them.
I’ve been reading stuff at Hillbuzz periodically (but infrequently) over the past two years, and I also want to vouch for DuJan being sincere. Are there internal contradictions? Absolutely, but this is not uncommon for people who are waking up to a different world than their previous worldview had led them to believe in. My disillusionment with the Democrats began during the Clinton years, but even after that, I still thought of myself as a “moderate” for a long, long time.
For those who are skeptical of Hillbuzz and are judging based on quick impressions (such as their masthead, which I agree needs to be updated, along with, perhaps, even their name, or this one letter), you are truly missing the bigger picture. These guys have been on the front lines of political activism solid, non-stop for the past couple of years. And conservatives should thank them for their efforts. Their lives have been threatened and they have suffered in many ways because they have “come out” as anti-Dems (as it were; my word) in a very liberal town, with liberal friends, co-workers, etc. As neo noted, humans are not always consistent. Again, big picture, these guys are the real deal and they have devoted more time, energy, and money (non of which they have readily available) to support conservatives. It’s no small thing when someone’s entire world view shifts in a major way AND they go to bat for the new team. Immediately. With great passion, commitment, and drive. This isn’t about flash-in-the pan. It’s about a very real journey that has brought a lot of good folks to the conservative side.
Rewarding discussion!
One American Thinker commenter on KD’s HillBuzz essay thought KD was a hypocrite for endorsing dirty tricks while he was a Clinton operative, yet is now exposing those same tricks as a conservative operative/activist. And he is teaching his fans to apply the same tricks for the conservative cause!
Good point. How does a professional political operative or activist deal with moral/value issues? Does he/she just disregard these issues and go for the perceived higher benefits to self and/or cause-of-the-moment?
I can see where neocons (recovering Democrats?) such as our hostess here and KD-and-crew there could get into terrible knots as to where their truths and their loyalties actually rested.
And what of my own values? Granting my hope that socialists everywhere would self-destruct, does that give me moral high ground?
Is political morality an oxymoron?
annonymous Says:
October 29th, 2010 at 12:19 am
I’ve never read Hillbuzz much, unless I saw it linked from somewhere else. I’ve never been a Hillary Clinton supporter. At all.
I don’t know whether you’re associated with that site, or how you came to this site. I don’t know whether you’ve spent much time reading this site.
But if you’re really in the process of breaking away from the left/liberal plantation, then you couldn’t have come to a better place. This blog’s proprietress, Neo, along with a number of commenters including myself, are ex-liberals and even ex-outright leftists.
See Neo’s collection of posts in the “A mind is a difficult thing to change” category in the right sidebar.
In my case, I discovered Ayn Rand in the late 1990s and read everything I could find by her. I especially recommend her nonfiction essays. The way I like to describe her influence on me is “She systematically demolished my most cherished beliefs and assumptions, and then proceeded to rebuild them on a stronger foundation.” It was actually fairly easy and painless.
So good luck and happy reading!
The great Wretchard suggests that the Obamites are conducting a reverse purge. Hillary’s team may believe that they are crippling the Democratic machine and setting up Hillary for revenge in 2012, but the Left activists will be left in charge of the Party apparat. Will Hilary be interested in waiting until 2020 for vindication? Hard to imagine.
Oblio:
That’s interesting. I’ve read that the Tea Party is giving the Republican Party one last chance to get its act together, and it it doesn’t, it will go the way of the Whigs in 2012.
If the Democrat Party turns into a far left wing party, then presumably lots of middle-of-the-road Democrat voters will wash their hands of them.
Could we see two new parties in 2012? I’d be up for that.
Neo,
There is one more thing about the Hillbuzzers: they all are huge supporters of Sarah Palin.
Kevin DuJan even blogs at Conservatives4Palin nowadays!
annonymous Says:
October 29th, 2010 at 12:19 am
For those who are skeptical of Hillbuzz and are judging based on quick impressions (such as their masthead, which I agree needs to be updated, along with, perhaps, even their name, or this one letter), you are truly missing the bigger picture.
And you assume much. I started reading Hillbuzz back during the ’08 campaign, and commented infrequently. Been reading it less and less of late until I finally deleted their bookmark. I increasingly found them to be self-important with articles full of catty innuendo (pun intended).
So yes, the masthead speaks for itself, or rather for them. As for the name of the site, that is easily morphed into a political blog about Capitol Hill, and would not be a problem. But the picture of Shrillary is saying we still love her, warts and all. That means they haven’t really changed one bit, haven’t gone the full David Horowitz. Actions speak louder than words.
I have been reading the hillbuzz site since the Presidential election, and yes Kevin Dujan is absolutely sincere. The hillbuzz guys are disgusted with the Democratic Party and they are currently doing everything in their power to help elect the conservative candidate in Chicago, Joel Pollak.
And yes, as someone who was a liberal until the 2008 Presidential primaries and has now ONLY voted for Republicans since then, political conversion is possible. Do they still view Hillary with rose colored glasses? Yes, but even that may change. They say that in a race between Palin and Hillary they would go with Palin.
As far as being “catty” yes, they can be sometimes. That would describe a number of gay men I know and like-and no, I don’t know them personally. That would make them like some women I know-and even some men. There ought to be a masculine equivalent to “catty”.
This is not naivety, this is the power of denial. I met Communist Party apparatchiks who look both sincere and intelligent, should be also well-informed about dirty secrets, but sound naive like babies. But important aspects of reality were obscured from critical analysis for them, explained away by childish arguments which no objective thinker could accept. The need to keep their identity and beliefs intact overwheighted elementary logic. My grandmother, Bolshevik since 1917 (even before they raised to power), a historian and Arabist, worked in Komintern and later in Kominform, a propaganda branch of the Party. She knew quite well what medieval Asian despoty is and how propaganda is done, but refused to apply all her formidable knowledge to Stalin regime. Almost all her collegues perished in purges, she should have known that they were innocent, but denied this too. Only after Khruchshev dismounting of Stalin cult, she accepted the reality, and became very vocal about it. She explained to me in early 60s: “I just forbade myself to think about certain questions”.
Look, the guy is just confused as to which side he wants to play on.
🙂
Only 18,400 hits on “Open letter to Rush Limbaugh.” Regardless of whether or not KD is sincere, knowingly sincere, or whatever, this letter, man, website, and effort reveal the one message we should be hammering: Obama is not who he says he is. He is a liar.
I came to Hillbuzz because of their apology letter to Pres.Bush.It brought tears to my eyes.You can find it on their site.IMO, they helped Scott Brown get elected.I sent him money because of them.Kevin is sincere in my view and can help the Conservative cause in many ways.
Yowzzaaaa…Fascinating. thanks for posting this one, N-Neo.
Kevin sounds like a fellow who thought he went to bed with nice Doctor Jekyll last night. . . .
. . . and woke up with MR HYDE!
I know how he feels. I had the same sickening feeling when I realized in 2001, even before the Muslim massacres, that the Demos, my then-party, were willing to burn down the nation’s trust in our election system to the ground, all to one of their guys into the White House.
That enraged me. It didn’t make me a Republican, though. That took a few more shocks: seeing their Quisling behavior after Sept. 11th, seeing them sheath the Racism sword for only a month, tops, before drawing it again, and so forth and so on.
I realized I didn’t have any idea who I’d been sleeping with. Here I thought they were good guys who were taking care of the little fellow, protecting our animal friends, and ensuring that the fanatical Puritans didn’t recriminalize abortion.
I suspect that this fellow won’t be a conservative, but he may be marooned between the boats.
I can see why many here are skeptical, but you must make allowances for new generations who are only taking the red pill now. Kevin is only in his early 30s, and was raised entirely within the dem bubble, like so many people, like me. You may be familiar with the decades of skulduggery, the tactics, the incidents, the coalitions, the methods and the ideology of the Left with the proper understanding of them as hyper destructive manipulators, but the newly awakened suckers have everything to learn. You can be sure their manipulator masters weren’t cluing them in. Please think in terms of teaching and sharing what you know. These are survival skills.
In 2007, I was a low-information typical woman democratic voter. I bought what the LSM peddles. Then I became interested in the primaries and checked out BO who I instantly (yes instantly) marked as an NPD. I know NPD because my dad was one and I spent several years studying it in order to fend him off. Right away I could see the implications of an NPD president and it scared the **** out of me. It was then that both my political awakening and political involvement began. Never would have believed I would end up within 2 years shunning LSM, studying up on conservatism, and sending monetary support to republican candidates.
Now, as to democratic dirty tricks. Is it morally impure to know and understand what those tricks are? How will you stop them if you refuse to know what they are doing, with whom and how? What will that get you? Whipped, that’s where.
On the other hand, it is a separate thing to say that DuJan is encouraging his readers to employ the same tricks. As a hillbuzz reader I disagree. He is hardly advocating, for example, vote fraud. He is much more interested in busting vote fraud by raising awareness that these things do go on and need to be documented. The Left is constantly doing the elephant in the living room dysfunctional family trick of pressuring people to disbelieve in reality.
But if I go to a dem survey and fill it out in a misleading fashion, or if I join OFA and claim to make calls, or claim to have certain ‘organizing’ successes or find other ways to actively undermine them, well, so sorry. I always admired Odysseus’s wits. One could split hairs over how he handled the Cyclops and whether it was morally pure – all the way until monster lunchtime. By monster lunchtime you will be on the menu and on his timetable and your chance to act will have passed.
Don’t know what to make of this, but…
That photo looks to be very badly Photoshopped.
Heard Rush talking about this on my drive in to work this morning.
This is a stunning development, if the author’s viewpoint is shared by any significant number of Democrats.
Jamie Irons
Bill and Hill smell blood in the White House water right now. Not a safe place to be. An article in the London Telegraph was discussing Bill Clinton’s campaign efforts for candidates this year. An unspoken but apparent sub-text of that article was Run Hillary, Run!
In a twisted painful turn of logic, maybe the Clintons would actually be a good (or least best of several evils) for the Democrat party.
Looks like my $100 wager that Hillary will run is getting safer by the day. Bill’s been sabotaging the Dems for weeks now. After reading this I’m starting to understand why.
Well, assuming that this letter is legit, I hate to tell her, but Hillary is just as much a communist as is Obama.
The infiltration of the Democrats by the Communist started in the 1920’s. The New Dealers where all collectivist of one sort or another. Whatever does she think the phrase “New Deal” means? By the time the “New Left” crowd took over the Democrats in the 1960’s it already had been softened up at least one generation of communist cadre inserting themselves in high places in the Party, government, academia, media and the NGO’s.
No, I am afraid that this person is a typically well meaning “useful idiot” who only now notices what the Democrat Party is about, and she makes the fundamental mistake of attributing it to Obama and his wrecking crew. Obama is just a figurehead, a front man, and a rather witless and hapless one too. If it were not Obama who was put forward it would have been someone else–the results would have been the same. In a way, Clinton and Carter are very much of the same mold, they were just more cautious.
The Left has been working toward this end for at least 3 generations now. That they have gotten this close to victory shows how degraded our national political life has become.
Oh, some people need to get a life, like this hysterical girl. I suspect she’s speaking only for herself but trying to make it sound like a “movement”. Yeah, right, and that “Democrat” party line sounds so authentic. This is like that anonymous article that appeared some weeks ago where the “senior adviser to several presidents” had all those mutterings about a civil war.
Where is Sid Blumenthal writing these days, is he using some new aliases?
Dan D: It’s written by a gay guy, Kevin DuJan, a blogger at Hillbuzz who’s been blogging ever since the 2008 campaign. There isn’t much doubt he’s sincere. He was very active in the Democratic Party in Chicago for many years.
I wonder what this will do to Obama’s message that he is evolving with regard to gay marriage. I suspect it may increase the stay at home gays.
It is a triple WOW. I’d love to see it make page 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle just to see Boxer’s reaction.
I googled “Kevin DuJan” results for the last 24 hours and received 236 hits. Looked at them and he has yet to make it too the lamestream media or the big left blogs. That may change.
544 hits for “Open letter to Rush Limbaugh,” within the last 24 hours.
My question is, then why take the SOS job? To pay for Chelsea’s wedding? Lol
And i agree with Hattip, Hillary would be an equal nightmare to Obama. We’d all just be called sexist instead of racist.
Not to mention, but Kevin points out that there’s no way that he’d vote for Clinton in a 2012 campaign or a 2016 – the Democratic Party is just that corrupt. If you get the time, actually read the letter. What he wrote about the “Kos kids” denigrating a dead woman is just sickening and really tells anyone all they need to know about the current left.
They are learning the difference between being a real part of something real, and being used for ulterior and expedient goals.
anyone want to realize that this is a all or nothing gig and that they don’t intend to let go? that the issue of voting was never an issue if there is too much violence, rationing, and such to have elections… right?
there is a reason why the lowest and worst punishment in Dante’s hell was for BETRAYAL
Good cop Bad Cop works because the victim forgets they are both cops first
1. The Michigan primary was moved up to January, apparently against the wishes of the national Democratic Party. I’m sure that neither Beatific Barack nor Saint Hillary were pure as driven snow regarding the process. A political activist like DuJan surely knows this. He is disingenuous not to mention it in his post.
2. A Chicago Democrat is shocked shocked that there was hanky-panky and hardball involved in the nomination process? Give. Me. A. Break.
3. Afaic Clinton lost the nomination because of her arrogance and complacency. By the end of the primaries she had clearly taken Obama’s measure, but it was just a little too late.
The Oval Office was hers to lose, and she lost it. I believe she knows that.
4. Seeing how close Kerry–Kerry!–came in 2004, I suspect Hillary could have won. I suspect that Hillary suspects that too.
This guy was in the Democratic Party in Chicago for years and he just discovered they play dirty?
I’m from Chicago and I had to buy off my kindergarten teacher. We Chicagoans would not have it any other way; sure the city is corrupt, but everyone is in on the take. Anyway you can trust a crook; it’s the ideologues who will stab anyone and everyone in the back.
Obama has given political corruption a bad name; one that it does not deserve.
This somehow reminds me a letter Bukharin wrote in prison cell to future generation of Communists before his execution and managed to pass to his wife. She was able to publish it during Perestoika, but it fell flat. Communism was already dead, and his invectives accusing Stalin in crimes against Party and Russian people were too late and add little to what was already known.
By the way, the best quote from the letter is the reference to ALIAS…
and THAT is EXACTLY what i described.
but i shorten it by saying, paint exit on entrances, paint entrance on exits, yell fire and watch them run the wrong way in reality, but the right way in their heads.
and as i said, your thoughts are not important…
(neither are mine, so dont get snippy)
but the ones running into the fire, not out, all think that what they are thinking is right, and no one can show them they aren’t as to do so, is to have them step into the hall of mirrors.
they would rather be wrong in comfort
than right, and betray all by not wanting to act
i would say take a lesson from the Estonians and Latvians…
if we all came out and sang the songs and things that they hate… we would win…
this was why i wished way back that someone could do a flash mob of the school house rock songs of the constitution…
imagine the bad history…
20,000 show up and sing “we the people”
they lose if they let us
they lose more if they stop us
The Land That Sings
enough about history, what does this Latvian Song and Dance Festival (the dance element was added in 1948) actually consist of? Well basically some of the largest choirs in the world getting kitted out in national dress and singing their hearts out! At the last Song and Dance Festival in 2003 over 30,000 participants, 300 different choirs, more than 500 dance groups, plus 57 brass bands, three symphonic orchestras and one chamber orchestra all took part during a crazy eleven days in June and July. On top of that a large number of art exhibitions, parades and also some contemporary rock and pop concerts took place.
2013 is the next one…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=baaX4-1_df0
1 vs 50 000 people singing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjkQjKdKKMo&feature=related
to see 50,000 singing in one place..
the world shakes…
20 000 singers-100 000 listeners Sanctus-Urmas Sisask Live!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFmD1Vk3K5E&NR=1
i should point out that there are only a few million latvians…
2,266,094
so 100,000 showing up in one place is a big thing…
it would be like 16 million Americans show up at one place and sing their songs and culture…
and then do it again every 5 years!!!!!!!!!
here is the estonian version…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVYqFPq88VU&NR=1
A couple things about Dujan’s “Open Letter..” don’t make sense to me.
He makes it sound like Hillary is a saint who was horribly wronged by Obama, Donna Brazile, Howard Dean, and the Democrat Party generally. If so, then why is she a part of his administration? I guess the case can be made that if she really wants to be president one day, then it’s to her advantage to be Secretary of State. But it’s not a pre-requisite. After all, Hillary gave up her Senate seat to become part of Obama’s adminstration, and alot of senators, Obama for example, have used their senate seats as a stepping stone to become president. So why serve in an administration that stabbed you in the back? I don’t get it.
The second thing about hsi letter that doesn’t make sense is that he makes it sound like the Democratic Party took a hard left turn relatively recently. Has he been sleeping the past 35-40 years? It started in the 1970s and has been building steam ever since. While it may be true the far left wasn’t a majority in the Party until recently, it is undeniable that the Democratic Party actively recruited every conceivable leftist radical (environmentalists, feminists, gay rights advocates, Marxists, etc) in American society since the anti-Vietnam War days. It was that recruitment of radicals that initially gave rise to the intellectual neoconservative movement within the Democratic Party in the 1970s. Over time, the neocons became increasingly dissatisfied and ultimately left the Democrats and became Independents and Republicans. Today, the core base of the Democratic Party are the radicals.
Just look at who the Democrats nominated to be our current President: a man who had radical communist Frank Davis Marshall as his father figure; who started his political career as a community organizer; who was a close associate of domestic terrorist Bill Ayers; and who spent 20 years sitting in the racist, America-hating church of Jeremiah Wright.
Bob from Virginia, gs, Scott:
Yes, the letter is not exactly internally consistent. But people often aren’t. It may be partly a case of closing one’s eyes to bad things as long as you think it’s for a good cause, and then learning the rot goes much deeper than you thought when you finally become the victim.
Also, he’s written quite a bit about why he originally supported Hillary and why he couldn’t vote for her if she ran in 2012.
I know quite a few people whose eyes were opened by the Obama forces’ treatment of Hillary. One is Robin of Berkeley.
Kevin Dujan is the real deal. And since he’s based in Chicago he has a lot of very detailed, specific information about just how slimy Obama really is.
If you liked that post, you’ll love this one:
http://hillbuzz.org/2010/10/27/could-the-black-panthers-voter-fraud-and-other-illegal-obama-2008-actions-be-the-big-scandal-the-white-house-insider-was-talking-about/
Secretary of State is a “non-political position”.
So I repeat myself, at the risk of sounding crude, there must be 50 ways to lock and load.
I’m inclined to agree with gs and others that DuJan seems awfully naive about Hillary, Chicago politics, etc.
But neo’s comment at 5:54 pm also makes sense. Once the “change” process starts, there’s no telling where it will lead. We need all the changers we can get, ASAP.
neo, I see your point but, having read the DuJan piece linked by CV, I’m sticking by my skepticism.
I have taken one Obama conspiracy theory seriously: the Michelle ‘whitey’ tape. I’m not paying attention to any more unless accompanied by evidence.
I agree that nefarious things might be going on, but paying attention is not a constructive use of my time until evidence is on the public record. I don’t mean proof beyond a reasonable doubt: I mean something that a prosecutor would submit to a grand jury.
And I don’t rule out that Democrats might plant a false trail that leads nowhere, leaving the Right with no credibility to follow up the actual wrongdoing.
I think it makes perfect sense. By joining the Cabinet she a) showed party loyalty, b) picked up at least notional foreign policy cred, and c) positioned herself later to pick a fight with Buraq and leave the Cabinet on a “matter of principle” in a probably successful effort to vaccinate herself against Husseinitis. She can command page one headlines any time she wants merely by resigning with a splash. None of these considerations would obtain had she remained in the Senate; she’d just be one more backbencher carping at the boss.
Joining the Cabinet was therefore a smart move, and for me a heartening one in a dark time, because it showed that the Clintons had taken Buraq’s measure and figured he would crash and burn before long. (Otherwise this move made no sense.) Look for Buraq to get primaried next year, with a “principled” Hillary “regretfully” answering her party’s call to come back from private life and lead them from the wilderness.
The game is afoot, as of Wednesday. The irony is that Hillary is probably hoping for an epic Republican beatdown even more than we are. Her whole future rides on it.
Occam’s Beard Says:
October 28th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
Rush Limbaugh has been saying exactly that.
Rick, I’ve never listened to Rush, but obviously should.
The writer is outraged that the Obama campaign used every dirty trick printed in Alinksy’s “Rules for Radicals”, but he seems to be unaware that Hillary Clinton is also an acolyte of Saul Alinsky. In fact, Hillary wrote her Senior Thesis on Alinsky–a thesis which she (successfully) suppressed until after the Clintons left office.
The whole thing does feel a bit odd. But if he is honestly relating his sincere reaction to the situation since 2008, I suppose it would have to be a bit odd.
I think there’s more of this going on than is at all apparent. I did some “canvassing” for Republicans in a local community a couple of Saturdays ago; here are some handouts I made myself out of my own ideas:
http://www.wesurroundthempa.org/?p=2070
Anyway, I ran into a woman (mowing the lawn at the time) that I have known my whole life; I’ve known her family my whole life. She has always been a very staunch Democrat and, not being one to keep her opinions to herself, everybody knows that.
I said I’m asking people to consider voting for the Republicans for a change. And she motioned to her husband and said, “Mick switched his registration from Democrat to Republican this summer, and our son just did too.” She didn’t say she was going to do so herself, but it sure sounded like it’s coming sooner or later.
What the Democrats have been doing in DC really got to them. But, in her case, there is something else, too. IIRC, she had been in favor of entitlements because, as she used to put it, “We’re all in this together.” But she said the other day, “I used to be all for entitlements, but not any more.” She explained how her eyes got opened: “I’ve worked for the United Way for 17 years now, and I’ve seen how entitlements make people think they shouldn’t have to do anything for themselves.” And she related a story about how she got a phone call from a woman who wanted to “report” a charity… for not paying her gas bill!
In summation, my conversation with her is one of the biggest surprises I’ve had in many a year.
He is not naive. It’s the people on this side who are [pleasantly] surprised who are naive.
Hillary was planning this comeback since she lost the election in’08. I think even in threads on this site we’ve spoke about it.
She is a shrewd sly patient strategist and she lay low for a while exactly for this moment; she is prepared (not less than Obama) to toss him under the bus, and for this goal any tactic that seems appropriate at the moment will do – even fraternizing (for a short time) with Rush.
He cohorts are molding themselves after her; I would not believe that guy – from Chicago! – does not know about Hillary’s communist sympathies or didn’t notice similarities between her and Obama’s healthcare bills; and his railing against unions is just too transparent a hook for Rush readers to be conned.
Oh, please.
pst314: I have heard over and over that Hillary wrote her thesis on Alinsky, therefore is an Alinsky disciple.
It’s certainly possible that she wrote an admiring treatise on Alinsky. But just the fact that she wrote on the subject does not make her a disciple. She might be, she might not be. I would prefer to read the work before I made that judgment. I have certain studied, and written about, plenty of things and people I don’t admire or follow or advocate.
And believe me, I am no Hillary fan. But I have never seen anyone write about what is actually in the thesis. It’s all speculation, as far as I know. Have you actually read it? Or read something by someone who has?
Tatyana: I’ve been reading his work for several years now. Not based solely on this letter at all, I believe he is quite sincere. He does not support Hillary for president, either. He, however, is definitely inconsistent in his beliefs; to me they don’t quite add up, either.
Speaks for itself:
Greatest_Movie_Line_Ever.wmv
1088K Download
These guys are legit. But, as many commentators have noted, they (like many “PUMAS”) still hold Hillary on a pedastal, which is too bad. None-the-less, the Hillbuzz guys like many “PUMAS” have been on the front lines of political action for the past couple of years, working like dogs for conservative candidates and trying to expose the hyposcrisy and corruption on the left. Many people wonder how a person could go from being liberal to being conservative, from supporting Hillary to supporting Sarah. The motivations vary for many former Dems, but 2008 was a genuine wake up call for many (myself included) and for lots of us, there is no going back. I only wish people in the ranks would stop seeing Hillary with rose colored glasses. She’s as much of a danger as the rest of the liberals and if former Dems can’t see that she proved herself to be an opportunist, it’s a shame. But it doesn’t take away from the incredible political activism they engage in every day. Better late than never to wake up. And a lot us did.
This is great news. Just today I was worrying that with all the Tea Party candidates that might win, we were still stuck with the Republican staffers. The same ones who are trying to sabotage the tea party at every turn. And really it is staff on the Hill that gets the things accomplished. This letter tells me there is a different talent pool to move things along. The experienced Dem talent pool if we judge by the amateur hour that the Dems have been since Obama took over. There’ll be conflicts but properly managed, the two minion pools could be balanced to keep things in the middle.
Another “wow” via instapundit:
WOW: Charlie Cook moves Barney Frank’s seat from “likely Democratic” to “lean Democratic.” Plus this: “Remember, as of just a few weeks ago, this seat wasn’t even on the board.” Frank’s opponent, Sean Bielat. seems to be surging.
Posted at 8:38 pm by Glenn Reynolds
It started as a “safe” seat.
annonymous Says:
October 28th, 2010 at 8:57 pm
Welcome aboard, annonymous! Have a seat and make yourself at home.
Google search of “Open letter to Rush Limbaugh” for the last 24 hours now up to 10,100 hits from 544 in only 5 hours. No lamestream media sites yet.
neo, Hillary’s thesis supposedly can be found online, here for example.
Neo: The title of Hillary’s senior thesis was “There Is Only the Fight…”: An Analysis of the Alinsky Model.
Google should find copies around the web.
Glad to see so many are skeptical of DuJan’s ‘road to Damascus’ moment as I am. Hillary was no prize, as much a socialist as Obama, maybe with a little more tact. But just a little. Hillary’s college thesis was on Alinsky. Now who uses his tactics? Right, Obama.
I get the feeling that if Hillary had won, and was just as horrible a president as Obama, DuJan would be right there calling us sexists, Rethuglicans, tea baggers, and the rest of the litany of insults the left throws at us for disagreeing with Obama’s policies. I find DuJan to be a bit of a hysterical phony.
The masthead for Hillbuzz still has a photo of their sainted Hillary on it. Tells me all I need to know about this co-called new found conservative. Old habits are not broken.
There is plenty of behavioral evidence to strongly support the belief that Hill’s Alinsky thesis was in favor.
Saul A. was a hot ticket item for the Dems and RINOs in the ’60s and ’70s, when Hillary was young and impressionable. The Rochester NY city council brought him to town after the black riot of ’64 incinerated many city blocks. Rochester was then a Kodak+Xerox company town with many new millionaires; guess it had to do their new-found guilt at being in the money.
Tom: I just quickly skimmed Hillary’s thesis. What a bloody bore! Reminds me of all those awful sociology texts I had to wade through in college; couldn’t stand them then, and can’t stand them now.
I agree that it is at least somewhat admiring. The context seems to be this: Alinsky’s a proponent of “democracy” and empowering the poor to help themselves. None of this is surprising; we certainly know that, although Hillary began as a Goldwater supporter, by the time she was a senior in college she had become a liberal/leftist. She met Alinsky in high school, however, when she was a conservative. Her pastor introduced them.
I’ve been reading stuff at Hillbuzz periodically (but infrequently) over the past two years, and I also want to vouch for DuJan being sincere. Are there internal contradictions? Absolutely, but this is not uncommon for people who are waking up to a different world than their previous worldview had led them to believe in. My disillusionment with the Democrats began during the Clinton years, but even after that, I still thought of myself as a “moderate” for a long, long time.
For those who are skeptical of Hillbuzz and are judging based on quick impressions (such as their masthead, which I agree needs to be updated, along with, perhaps, even their name, or this one letter), you are truly missing the bigger picture. These guys have been on the front lines of political activism solid, non-stop for the past couple of years. And conservatives should thank them for their efforts. Their lives have been threatened and they have suffered in many ways because they have “come out” as anti-Dems (as it were; my word) in a very liberal town, with liberal friends, co-workers, etc. As neo noted, humans are not always consistent. Again, big picture, these guys are the real deal and they have devoted more time, energy, and money (non of which they have readily available) to support conservatives. It’s no small thing when someone’s entire world view shifts in a major way AND they go to bat for the new team. Immediately. With great passion, commitment, and drive. This isn’t about flash-in-the pan. It’s about a very real journey that has brought a lot of good folks to the conservative side.
Rewarding discussion!
One American Thinker commenter on KD’s HillBuzz essay thought KD was a hypocrite for endorsing dirty tricks while he was a Clinton operative, yet is now exposing those same tricks as a conservative operative/activist. And he is teaching his fans to apply the same tricks for the conservative cause!
Good point. How does a professional political operative or activist deal with moral/value issues? Does he/she just disregard these issues and go for the perceived higher benefits to self and/or cause-of-the-moment?
I can see where neocons (recovering Democrats?) such as our hostess here and KD-and-crew there could get into terrible knots as to where their truths and their loyalties actually rested.
And what of my own values? Granting my hope that socialists everywhere would self-destruct, does that give me moral high ground?
Is political morality an oxymoron?
annonymous Says:
October 29th, 2010 at 12:19 am
I’ve never read Hillbuzz much, unless I saw it linked from somewhere else. I’ve never been a Hillary Clinton supporter. At all.
I don’t know whether you’re associated with that site, or how you came to this site. I don’t know whether you’ve spent much time reading this site.
But if you’re really in the process of breaking away from the left/liberal plantation, then you couldn’t have come to a better place. This blog’s proprietress, Neo, along with a number of commenters including myself, are ex-liberals and even ex-outright leftists.
See Neo’s collection of posts in the “A mind is a difficult thing to change” category in the right sidebar.
In my case, I discovered Ayn Rand in the late 1990s and read everything I could find by her. I especially recommend her nonfiction essays. The way I like to describe her influence on me is “She systematically demolished my most cherished beliefs and assumptions, and then proceeded to rebuild them on a stronger foundation.” It was actually fairly easy and painless.
So good luck and happy reading!
The great Wretchard suggests that the Obamites are conducting a reverse purge. Hillary’s team may believe that they are crippling the Democratic machine and setting up Hillary for revenge in 2012, but the Left activists will be left in charge of the Party apparat. Will Hilary be interested in waiting until 2020 for vindication? Hard to imagine.
Oblio:
That’s interesting. I’ve read that the Tea Party is giving the Republican Party one last chance to get its act together, and it it doesn’t, it will go the way of the Whigs in 2012.
If the Democrat Party turns into a far left wing party, then presumably lots of middle-of-the-road Democrat voters will wash their hands of them.
Could we see two new parties in 2012? I’d be up for that.
Neo,
There is one more thing about the Hillbuzzers: they all are huge supporters of Sarah Palin.
Kevin DuJan even blogs at Conservatives4Palin nowadays!
And you assume much. I started reading Hillbuzz back during the ’08 campaign, and commented infrequently. Been reading it less and less of late until I finally deleted their bookmark. I increasingly found them to be self-important with articles full of catty innuendo (pun intended).
So yes, the masthead speaks for itself, or rather for them. As for the name of the site, that is easily morphed into a political blog about Capitol Hill, and would not be a problem. But the picture of Shrillary is saying we still love her, warts and all. That means they haven’t really changed one bit, haven’t gone the full David Horowitz. Actions speak louder than words.
I have been reading the hillbuzz site since the Presidential election, and yes Kevin Dujan is absolutely sincere. The hillbuzz guys are disgusted with the Democratic Party and they are currently doing everything in their power to help elect the conservative candidate in Chicago, Joel Pollak.
And yes, as someone who was a liberal until the 2008 Presidential primaries and has now ONLY voted for Republicans since then, political conversion is possible. Do they still view Hillary with rose colored glasses? Yes, but even that may change. They say that in a race between Palin and Hillary they would go with Palin.
As far as being “catty” yes, they can be sometimes. That would describe a number of gay men I know and like-and no, I don’t know them personally. That would make them like some women I know-and even some men. There ought to be a masculine equivalent to “catty”.
This is not naivety, this is the power of denial. I met Communist Party apparatchiks who look both sincere and intelligent, should be also well-informed about dirty secrets, but sound naive like babies. But important aspects of reality were obscured from critical analysis for them, explained away by childish arguments which no objective thinker could accept. The need to keep their identity and beliefs intact overwheighted elementary logic. My grandmother, Bolshevik since 1917 (even before they raised to power), a historian and Arabist, worked in Komintern and later in Kominform, a propaganda branch of the Party. She knew quite well what medieval Asian despoty is and how propaganda is done, but refused to apply all her formidable knowledge to Stalin regime. Almost all her collegues perished in purges, she should have known that they were innocent, but denied this too. Only after Khruchshev dismounting of Stalin cult, she accepted the reality, and became very vocal about it. She explained to me in early 60s: “I just forbade myself to think about certain questions”.
Look, the guy is just confused as to which side he wants to play on.
🙂
Only 18,400 hits on “Open letter to Rush Limbaugh.” Regardless of whether or not KD is sincere, knowingly sincere, or whatever, this letter, man, website, and effort reveal the one message we should be hammering: Obama is not who he says he is. He is a liar.
I came to Hillbuzz because of their apology letter to Pres.Bush.It brought tears to my eyes.You can find it on their site.IMO, they helped Scott Brown get elected.I sent him money because of them.Kevin is sincere in my view and can help the Conservative cause in many ways.
Yowzzaaaa…Fascinating. thanks for posting this one, N-Neo.
Kevin sounds like a fellow who thought he went to bed with nice Doctor Jekyll last night. . . .
. . . and woke up with MR HYDE!
I know how he feels. I had the same sickening feeling when I realized in 2001, even before the Muslim massacres, that the Demos, my then-party, were willing to burn down the nation’s trust in our election system to the ground, all to one of their guys into the White House.
That enraged me. It didn’t make me a Republican, though. That took a few more shocks: seeing their Quisling behavior after Sept. 11th, seeing them sheath the Racism sword for only a month, tops, before drawing it again, and so forth and so on.
I realized I didn’t have any idea who I’d been sleeping with. Here I thought they were good guys who were taking care of the little fellow, protecting our animal friends, and ensuring that the fanatical Puritans didn’t recriminalize abortion.
I suspect that this fellow won’t be a conservative, but he may be marooned between the boats.
I can see why many here are skeptical, but you must make allowances for new generations who are only taking the red pill now. Kevin is only in his early 30s, and was raised entirely within the dem bubble, like so many people, like me. You may be familiar with the decades of skulduggery, the tactics, the incidents, the coalitions, the methods and the ideology of the Left with the proper understanding of them as hyper destructive manipulators, but the newly awakened suckers have everything to learn. You can be sure their manipulator masters weren’t cluing them in. Please think in terms of teaching and sharing what you know. These are survival skills.
In 2007, I was a low-information typical woman democratic voter. I bought what the LSM peddles. Then I became interested in the primaries and checked out BO who I instantly (yes instantly) marked as an NPD. I know NPD because my dad was one and I spent several years studying it in order to fend him off. Right away I could see the implications of an NPD president and it scared the **** out of me. It was then that both my political awakening and political involvement began. Never would have believed I would end up within 2 years shunning LSM, studying up on conservatism, and sending monetary support to republican candidates.
Now, as to democratic dirty tricks. Is it morally impure to know and understand what those tricks are? How will you stop them if you refuse to know what they are doing, with whom and how? What will that get you? Whipped, that’s where.
On the other hand, it is a separate thing to say that DuJan is encouraging his readers to employ the same tricks. As a hillbuzz reader I disagree. He is hardly advocating, for example, vote fraud. He is much more interested in busting vote fraud by raising awareness that these things do go on and need to be documented. The Left is constantly doing the elephant in the living room dysfunctional family trick of pressuring people to disbelieve in reality.
But if I go to a dem survey and fill it out in a misleading fashion, or if I join OFA and claim to make calls, or claim to have certain ‘organizing’ successes or find other ways to actively undermine them, well, so sorry. I always admired Odysseus’s wits. One could split hairs over how he handled the Cyclops and whether it was morally pure – all the way until monster lunchtime. By monster lunchtime you will be on the menu and on his timetable and your chance to act will have passed.
There is a brillint analysis of the Left dillema by Wretchard:
http://pajamasmedia.com/richardfernandez/2010/10/28/revolt-on-the-left/#more-10831
avery, what is “NPD”? Neo/New Progressive Democrat?