We still have free speech in this country–although those like Congressman Graham and many others would like to shut us down, because they, and their actions, and beliefs cannot withstand honest discussion, analysis and criticism. Free speech carries with it some responsibility to use that free speech wisely, but if some people do not use discretion in speaking, that can never be an excuse to eliminate or narrow free speech. There are, after all, legal exceptions to free speech; if someone incites a crowd to riot, they can be prosecuted for it, if someone slanders or libels someone, a suit can be brought against them, but absent these very clearly defined crimes, speech is and ought to be absolutely free. Should the Administration want to charge the Florida Pastor with “inciting to riot” they are welcome to do so, but what they want to do is to stop him from speaking his mind on this subject in the first place, they want “prior restraint,” they want to gag and censor him on the subjects that they determine are taboo at their sole discretion.

The Left and their Muslim allies of convenience would like to limit free speech, to have speech codes and a whole roster forbidden topics and words that only they would determine, and in placing a smothering blanket of PC over our culture they have very nearly succeeded–notice, though, that this is a one way street, that those on the Left and in Islam who very consciously use speech to mock, insult, and vilify in the most savage way those things that Muslims hate and disdain–things like Christianity, for instance, or even desecrating the Bible–can do so with impunity, however, merely telling the truth about Islam and the life and deeds of Muhammad, reading from and calling attention to the actual texts of Islam, much less burning a Qur’an, is something Muslims and the Left want to stop and to penalize.

And their method? Blackmail. Stop the Qur’an burning, stop “insulting” Islam–and Muslims define “insulting” or “defaming” Islam as basically anyone even talking about Islam in less that slavishly obsequious terms, and if anybody criticizes Allah, the Qur’an, Muhammad, or Islam in any way, shape, or form and, increasingly, there will be death threats and violence by Muslims against those who dare to “insult” Islam, Allah, the Qur’an or the Prophet.

Muslims are told by the Qur’an that they are the “best of Peoples,” and that all unbelievers are “accursed” and “the vilest of creatures” and, this being so, it is the superior Muslims whose customs, and beliefs, and Shari’a law should take precedence–should dominate, override, supplant, and control all aspects of each and every unbeliever’s life. And to that end, Muslims are using the threat of force and force itself to intimidate, bully, and force us “unbelievers” to do things as they command, to adhere to Islamic practice and to Shari’a law, which bans criticism and free speech and, especially, any criticism or mocking of Allah, the Qur’an, Muhammad or of Islam.

Christians and Jews, Buddhists and Hindus, Confucians, Zoroastrians and Bahai’s do not a get a free pass on violence if someone questions, mocks or insults their religions, but Muslims want a free pass to be able to maim or kill anyone who questions or who does not bow down to Islam.

Let us all be very clear, as well, that it is the Muslims who are reacting with violence and lethal force against totally innocent people–“unbelievers” all, I’m guessing. Thus, it is Muslims who are really the guilty parties here, not the Florida Preacher.

In other news, some say that gasoline and sparks are unrelated!

Muslims dancing in the streets on 9/11, and Jihadi threats, beheading and terrorism porn is fine with Youtube, but this stuff?

Hey, we don’t want to upset our Muslim brothers, do we?

Do you suppose that these mullahs/ imams use their power to generate rage & riots as a means to political advancement in the Bizarro-world of Islam? For the imam who generates the wildest mobs “Congratulations! You are now a semi-finalist in this year’s Fiery Imam contest!”

“Ken Vogel has a piece over at Politico that conservatives, libertarians and independent political activists would do well to listen to. It has a somewhat misleading title Right Seeks Edge in Opposition Wars but the main thrust of the piece is that liberal organizations like Media Matters for America, Center for American Progress and Talking Points Memo are outflanking their political opponents and that currently there is simply no equivalent on the other side. The article mentions right-wing watchdog groups like Media Research Center, Accuracy in Media and Judicial Watch but sums them all up with this money quote….”

So I think we agree that the fundamental unifying message of the left is anti-capitalism. What the Repubs need to do then is clearly demonstrate how capitalism is good. The classic “Are you better off than you were four years ago?” does exactly this. They need to take capitalism to the public in direct examples in the same way that the left uses socialist examples to tug on heart strings; e.g., young businesswoman does well, but business threatened by regulation an taxation; black teenager starts business helping people only to by shut down by bureaucratic insurance and licensing requirements. The message is that these people are trying to build a better place through capitalistic endeavors and the nasty socialist bureaucracy consistently thwarts them and us. (How many people have made jokes about having to deal with a municipal or state bureaucracy? Explain that THIS is what the left and the unions want to perpetuate at the citizens expense).

With regard to why Wisconsin? Perhaps it’s because it was possible to engineer high profile opposition there (what follows is pure speculation). The Repub-Dem ratio was large enough to make the Dems look like beleaguered victims being pushed around by those bullying Repubs. I think being in the progressive womb, as you note, certainly has something to do with it, too. Why not Ohio, NJ? Well, the Ohio Dems were the Johnny-come-latelys; hey! Let’s try what they did in Wisconsin. NJ? Christie has (so far) successfully canceled out most attempts by the teacher’s union to block his proposals. Furthermore, NJ has seen corporationss and the wealthy leave the state, and they’ve seen it right next door in New York too (Rush Limbaugh being, perhaps, the most high-profile example). I’m guessing here, but I’d bet that the Wisconsin flight from the state has not been as pronounced as it has in Ohio/NJ; at least not yet (remember Ohio has lost the steel industry and is losing the auto industry out of Detroit–a double whammy).

The key point with respect to the significance of Wisconsin that you highlighted was that concerning messaging: The GOP needs to re-think the way it talks, and go for the gut as much as it goes for the noodle.

I’m with that 100% – I just hope that it is still possible for conservative “gut talk” to out-do liberal “gut talk.” And I’ll re-iterate simply for maximum clarity that that’s a “meta” question – in no way is it a counsel to not make the effort. There’s no choice; we have to do it. Churchill is right, then as now.

So here’s what I mean by wondering whether it’s still possible to outdo liberal emotional appeals: At a certain point conservatism always bumps up against the fact that it is pro-capitalist, and thus at a certain point the liberal gets to bang the Compassion Drum. We then have to make the people “see the unseen” – which is required to truly understand capitalism (Bastiat, broken windows, etc.) – and that, I submit, is a big part of why we tend to get too brainy and abstract.

One could point to Reagan and Kemp and a few others and say that there is a way, clearly, to make seeing the unseen have emotional force. I can’t deny it. All I’m saying is that what was true in 1984 may not be so in 2011. What worries me, and I think oblio too, is how far the left is apparently willing to go to make sure that Reagan never happens again.

The trouble, as always, is what happens when the rubber hits the road and proposals have to get specific. Simply put, the public tends to lean conservative in principle and liberal in fine – not progressive, but status quo on the administrative state. The key test will be Rep. Ryan’s attempt to sell his budget. That will tell us a lot about what we’re made of.

Finally, given what you’ve said (you = T) about this being a state issue, and noting the successful or about-to-be successful reform efforts in other states – all of which is true – I wonder why exactly the left chose Wisconsin pour encourager les autres. Fertile soil for leftist agitation? I suppose, but so is New Jersey, and even Ohio and Indiana (the latter recently subjected to a fleebagging itself) have their fair share of leftist loonies.

It could be the symbolic effect of waging the war in the womb of progressivism. If so, that’s pretty pathetic, and it would argue that the left’s behavior in Wisconsin was more of a rearguard effort than an attempt at a route. A kind of hail mary pass.

I took it as the left saying, “Folks, you haven’t even seen the half of what we’re willing to do to win this thing.” More of a warning shot across the bow.

http://www.politico.com/arena/perm/Steve_Steckler_4052652B-EF90-498C-9D86-9602DBCED7D0.html

and the operative paragraph is ( upper case emphasis mine):

“. . . the wage cuts and increased employee pension contributions being proposed in California, Maryland and New York are actually greater, on a per capita basis, GREATER THAN those being pressed by Republicans Scott Walker, John Kasich, Rick Scott and Chris Christie.”

This doesn’t mean that the war is won, but that this is happening (spontaneously?) across the nation means something. As Curtis quoted Churchill, never give in, never, never, never, never!