Well, I wish I woulda had the Au Gratin, thems mash taters shaw lookin’ rottin’, look away, look away, look away, ohhhh shut the f**k up.

Every once in a while things go astray and the people take notice. Now is such a time. We The People are about the business of whipping the servants back into line. Take heart my friends. These tinpot dictators stand about as much chance as the Brits, the Nazis and the Japs. Buh bye!

In a way, this is all an eye-opener in the manner of the Danish Cartoons Affair. Just as the Muslim riots were impossible to explain away (contrast 9/11 and the Blowback Narrative), here is concrete proof of media partisanship, solid evidence for what is otherwise usually dismissed as conspiratorial paranoia.

And there is a larger lesson:

The words of the best rhetor, be it Michelle Malkin (I think just about every conservative has seen her amazing riposte article) or the stalwarts of Israel’s case, are as valuable as sawdust if there are hostile gatekeepers on their way to the public.

It’s not about this vote or that vote, it’s about undoing the entire Gramscian “March Through The Institutions;” taking the media outlets and education centers back from the Commies. Everywhere. On this issue, America, the European states, Israel and even India (according to pro-Hindutva posters who occasionally visit FrontPage Mag) are in the same boat. If you don’t take your country back from the Reds, you’ll live to see your nation in shreds.

The anti-Semites did not themselves use the phrase “blood libel” — as though they’d roll into town, chant “Blood Libel! a time or two, and off to the pogroms we go! Rather, the term “blood libel” is the general descriptive-term applied by we anti-anti-Semites to denoted a specific sort of act and claim made by those seeking to instigate pogroms.

THUS, Palin’s use of the term “blood libel” to denote how the leftists, and their “liberal” enablers, attempted to make political hay of the original moral outrage of the mass-murders, was exactly the right phrase to use.

Given Obama’s associations with Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, “palling around with terrorists” is quite accurate. It is rather ironic that you consider “palling around with terrorists” to be “incendiary,” given that Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn were among the four coauthors of Prairie Fire [link below], published in 1974. The book advocates dictatorship of the proletariat for the United States. The book is dedicated to “political prisoners,” among whom the book lists Sirhan Sirhan, the assasin of Robert Kennedy.

Bill Ayers hasn’t changed in any significant manner, as shown by his here kissing up to Hugo Chavez, Venezuela’s dictator, in a speech Ayers gave in 2006.

President Hugo Chavez, Vice-President Vicente Rangel, Ministers Moncada and Isturiz, invited guests, comrades. I’m honored and humbled to be here with you this morning. I bring greetings and support from your brothers and sisters throughout Northamerica. Welcome to the World Education Forum! Amamos la revolucion Bolivariana! …..
Capitalism promotes racism and militarism — turning people into consumers, not citizens…..
This is my fourth visit to Venezuela, each time at the invitation of my comrade and friend Luis Bonilla, a brilliant educator and inspiring fighter for justice. Luis has taught me a great deal about the Bolivarian Revolution and about the profound educational reforms underway here in Venezuela under the leadership of President Chavez. We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution, and I’ve come to appreciate Luis as a major asset in both the Venezuelan and the international struggle–I look forward to seeing how he and all of you continue to overcome the failings of capitalist education as you seek to create something truly new and deeply humane. Thank you, Luis, for everything you’ve done.

It is no accident that Bill Ayers kissed up to the latest left wing dictator de jour.

I would rephrase it to “palling around with F#%$K#%&G commies.” As I grew up in a small town with a number of refugees from Communism, I have very little tolerance for someone who has advocated dictatorship of the proletariat for the US and who kisses up to the latest leftwing dictator.

If anything, Sarah Palin was mild in her language regarding someone who would associate with the likes of Billy Boy and Bernadine.

http://zombietime.com/prairie_fire/ Prairie Fire
http://billayers.wordpress.com/2006/11/ Bill Ayers speech in Venezuela

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2314

“But it is not enough for the organizer to be in solidarity with the people. He must also, said Alinsky, cultivate unity against a clearly identifiable enemy; he must specifically name this foe, and “singl[e] out”[44] precisely who is to blame for the “particular evil” that is the source of the people’s angst.[45] In other words, there must be a face associated with the people’s discontent. That face, Alinsky taught, “must be a personification, not something general and abstract like a corporation or City Hall.”[46] Rather, it should be an individual such as a CEO, a mayor, or a president.”

“Wrote Alinsky:
“Liberals fear power or its application.… They talk glibly of people lifting themselves by their own bootstraps but fail to realize that nothing can be lifted except through power…. Radicals precipitate the social crisis by action — by using power…. Liberals protest; radicals rebel. Liberals become indignant; radicals become fighting mad and go into action. Liberals do not modify their personal lives[,] and what they give to a cause is a small part of their lives; radicals give themselves to the cause. Liberals give and take oral arguments; radicals give and take the hard, dirty, bitter way of life.”[13]

“Alinsky summarized it this way: “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it…. [T]here is no point to tactics unless one has a target upon which to center the attacks.”[47] He held that the organizer’s task was to cultivate in people’s hearts a negative, visceral emotional response to the face of the enemy. “The organizer who forgets the significance of personal identification,” said Alinsky, “will attempt to answer all objections on the basis of logic and merit. With few exceptions this is a futile procedure.”[48]”

Jared is said to be smirking in his cell, he must think he is crazy like a fox. I think Jared was significantly more “political” than anyone realizes (admits), and clearly understood who the audience was that he was playing to for his fifteen minutes…