Washington (CNN) – Sarah Palin issued a warning to Mitt Romney Saturday, calling on the former Massachusetts governor to do a better job explaining his record to conservatives or risk dampening voter turnout in November if he wins the Republican presidential nomination.

In an interview with CNN and The New York Times before her speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, Palin said she was confused by Romney’s declaration here on Friday that he was a “severely conservative Republican.”

(more…)

In July 2011, I had a post on Big Government which looked at the Nevada DMV’s refusal to okay a personal license plate request worded “GOPALIN.” The gentleman who had requested the plate, Nevada resident James Linlor, had also requested “PALIN,” “PALIN12,” or “PALIN16,” and been denied on all those as well. As a result, on July 15, 2011, he filed suit in U.S. District Court alleging his rights had been violated.

At the outset it’s important to note that while the Nevada DMV tried to justify their rejection of a “GOPALIN” plate on the grounds that it was supposedly “vulgar or obscene or expressing superiority of political affiliation,” they had no problem okaying the following plates: ““GOGREEN,” “DMOCRAT,” “AL GORE,” “KERRY,” “EDWARDS,” “DEAN,” “HILLARY” and “RONPAUL”.  (Moreover, Linlor claims that when he applied for a “GOOBAMA” plate, the DMV approved it.)

The head and ultimate decision maker for the Nevada DMV is Bruce Breslow, a Democrat who holds his job at the appointment of Nevada’s Republican Governor, Brian Sandoval. And for reasons unknown (and inexplicable), Gov. Sandoval is apparently siding with Breslow on this issue, if only by the simple act of keeping Breslow as DMV Director when such duplicitous, politically-motivated approvals and denials of personalized plate requests are taking place.

Again, just think about it: “GOPALIN” could not be approved because it was too “political” but “DMOCRAT,” HILLARY,” and “GOOBAMA” were all acceptable.

(more…)

By now everyone has read news and commentary coverage of some of the most exciting debate moments in recent history: the exchange that took place between Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney concerning Romneycare. And perhaps many of you, like me, watched the debate and saw the exchange as it happened. If you did, I’m guessing those among you who are conservative found yourselves cheering for Santorum as he took it to Romney on what is surely the most dangerous aspect of a possible Romney candidacy—Romneycare.

It’s dangerous for the reasons Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh have indicated  by predicting that Obama can’t wait to face Romney because Romney WILL NOT be able to go after Obamacare with any moral integrity. As soon as he brings it up Obama will just say: “All I know is that while you were Gov. in Massachusetts, you implemented the plan we followed in designing our Health Care reforms.” And that will end the debate on Obamacare.

Santorum proved this during the debate in Florida on Thursday night, by explaining that just as Obamacare requires everyone to buy health insurance or pay a fine to the government, so too Romneycare requires Massachusetts citizens to do the same or pay a fine to the state. In other words, both plans carry a personal mandate which forces citizens to buy healthcare (or pay a fine) whether they want to or not.  And when Romney responded to Santorum by saying he was proud of what they’d done in Massachusetts and the people of Massachusetts seemed happy with it too, Santorum offered a foretaste of the way Obama is going to take Romney apart on this issue. Said Santorum:

“What Gov. Romney just said is that government-run, top-down medicine is working pretty well in Massachusetts and he supports it. Now, think about what that means.”

Romney’s position here is simply indefensible, and although Santorum is the only one to call him out so clearly to this point, Santorum will certainly not be the last. And this is why Santorum kept saying, “We cannot give the issue of healthcare away in this election.” Dan Riehl made this point clear in his post on Big Government January 27, when he quoted Paul Begala as saying that on the issue of Romneycare v. Obamacare, “Mitt still doesn’t have a straight answer. Rick Santorum skillfully dissected Romney on the topic. If Romney is the GOP nominee, you can be sure Barack Obama will do the same.”

Which brings me to my central point: Namely, that for all the good Santorum did with his line of questions and his relentless regurgitation of the facts against Romney, he still passed on his chance to throw the knock-out punch.

(more…)

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Download Podcast | iTunes | Podcast Feed

On today’s edition of Coffee and Markets, Pejman Yousefzadeh and Kevin Holtsberry are joined by Professor Darryl Hart to discuss his book From Billy Graham to Sarah Palin: Evangelicals and the Betrayal of American Conservatism, how conservatism was being undermined by the evangelical movement, and how a post-evangelical community may not necessarily be identified with the Republican party.

We’re brought to you as always by BigGovernment and Stephen Clouse and Associates. If you’d like to email us, you can do so at coffee[at]newledger.com. We hope you enjoy the show.

Related Links:

Buy From Billy Graham to Sarah Palin: Evangelicals and the Betrayal of American Conservatism on Amazon
Front Porch Republic
OldLife.org
Darryl G. Hart
Darryl G. Hart at the Westminster Seminary California

Follow Pej on Twitter
Follow Kevin on Twitter

The hosts and guests of Coffee and Markets speak only for ourselves, not any clients or employers.

On January 21, Mitt Romney went from being the presumptive GOP presidential candidate to being the guy who’s now spending dollars at a 20-to-1 ratio in Florida in an attempt to stop his meteoric plunge into the political abyss. Truth be known, the hard times began even a few days prior to January 21, when the official count in Iowa revealed that Rick Santorum had won the caucuses rather than Romney.

In a nutshell, as the nation watched the South Carolina primary approaching, Romney had two things going for him—the Republican establishment and the equally pro-Romney mainstream media. This gave him the illusion of strength: an illusion the Tea Party was able to see past (and through) as they ran to the one candidate whom Sarah Palin said she’d vote for in South Carolina—Newt Gingrich.

To put it as the UK’s Telegraph did:

The Tea Party was dead – long live the Beltway Cocktail Hour! Then came South Carolina, where religious and fiscal conservatives finally got it together and backed a candidate against Mitt Romney.

Honestly folks, even with the backing of prominent people like Karl Rove, Ann Coulter, and others, Romney only managed to win one of the first three contests (New Hampshire), and he didn’t just lose in South Carolina, he got throttled. Now, the historic fact that whoever wins South Carolina wins the GOP nomination has staggered Romney. And now he looks to Florida where Newt promises to deliver “the knockout punch.” So Romney’s handlers are circling the wagons, and talking about Gingrich the way they talked about Tea Party House and Senate candidates during the Nov. 2010 mid-term elections.

(more…)

Newt Gingrich has won the South Carolina primary. And just hours before ABC aired its interview with Newt’s ex-wife, Marianne Gingrich, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin appeared on Sean Hannity’s radio show. Gov. Palin predicted that the tabloid-style interview would only cause Speaker Gingrich’s ratings to soar.

Mocking the mainstream media, Gov. Palin said, “I call them dumbarses.”

Gov. Palin continued:

They, thinking that by trotting out this old Gingrich divorce interview that’s old news — and it does feature a disgruntled ex, claiming that it would destroy his campaign — all this does, Sean, is incentivize conservatives and independents who are so sick of the politics of personal destruction, because it’s played so selectively by the media, that their target, in this case Newt, he’s now going to soar even more. Because we know the game now, and we just won’t put up with it. Good call, media.

Good call, Sarah Palin. Debate after debate, it has been Newt Gingrich who has hammered the MSM on its preferential treatment of Barack Obama and his liberal agenda. And many conservatives across America are eating it up.

Starved for passionate expression of how the political and social dictates of the Obama “regime,” and its closely allied Media, have attempted to oppress and ridicule American voters with conservative leanings, Newt has let everyone know that the battle is on. He has articulated conservative ideas like no other candidate, though the other candidates may embrace those ideas themselves.

(more…)

Remember when Herman Cain was doing what no one thought he could do? He was beating Mitt Romney nationally, telling us that “9-9-9 means jobs, jobs, jobs,” promising to gut the EPA and repeal Obamacare, all with a southerner’s grin and a gentlemen’s manner. But as he pulled further and further ahead, and people actually wondered if he might upset Romney’s bid, a funny thing happened: there was an orchestrated attack on him based on rumors about a relationship he denied having with a woman nearly 20 years ago.

When that failed to stop him, the attacks were stepped up so as to include comments from less-than-savory characters who claimed to have actually seen Cain sexually harass that woman but who would not, or could not, provide details.  So the pile on game began, and rumors of Cain’s harassment of other women began to be floated. Some of those women were even paraded out before TV cameras in hopes of finally getting the American voter to turn on Cain. Who can forget watching Romney’s supporter-and-chief, Karl Rove, declaring Cain “finished” in late October then watching Gloria Allred parade out “a fourth accuser” for a press conference in early November?

Long story short, Cain eventually had to pull out of the race. And my point here isn’t to try and defend Cain, as much as it is to remind everyone of the tactics of the Republican establishment and their willing cohorts in the media who all want to see Romney get the nomination. (The establishment wants him to get the nomination because he’s an establishment guy and the media wants him to get it because they plan to watch Obama beat him in just the way Gov. Sarah Palin and Rush Limbaugh have predicted.)

Enter Newt Gingrich: He’s gaining on Romney not only in South Carolina but also in polls nationally. His Reagan-like statements at the GOP debate are being replayed again and again and praised for their conservative substance. So ABCNews is now debating whether or not to air an interview with his ex-wife, wherein she unloads on him.

(more…)

When Gov. Sarah Palin appeared on Sean Hannity’s television program, Hannity, last night, she discussed the recent GOP debate and the fast approaching South Carolina primary. Concerning the debate she had strong praise for Gov. Rick Perry, whom she described as “on fire” and “a true patriot.” She also spoke of how well she thought Rick Santorum did in taking it to Mitt Romney: of how Santorum “had an opponent up on the ropes,” which is “what you have to do to get to the truth.” But she reserved her highest praise for Speaker Newt Gingrich, whom she believed won the debate in South Carolina.

Said Palin:

Newt came out, just like South Carolina’s own Smokin’ Joe Frazier, he came out swinging, talking about work, talking about jobs and work ethic, and how government needs to get out of the way in order for all Americans to have a sense of opportunity to work, and I think that’s what a lot of voters have been craving.

The clip of Newt that played just before Palin said these things was of him pointing toward of the horizon during the debate and saying:

I believe every American of every background has been endowed by their Creator with the right to pursue happiness, and if that makes liberals unhappy, I’m going to continue to find ways to help poor people learn how to get a job, learn to get a better job and learn some day to own the job.

After Palin had praised Newt in this fashion, Hannity asked her if she was ready to endorse a candidate. And while she didn’t yet give an endorsement for the race in general, she did say, “I can tell you what I would do if I were a South Carolinian.…I would vote for Newt.” She went on to say that one of the reasons she’d do this is to be sure the vetting process continues for the candidates, inasmuch as the “mistake made in our country four years ago was having a candidate who was not vetted.”

(more…)

Former Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin has called for Gov. Mitt Romney to release his tax returns, as well as the data that could substantiate his claim of having created 100,000 jobs as CEO of Bain Capital.

Romney has resisted releasing his tax returns, and his campaign has thus far refused to provide the hard proof to back up his claims about Bain.

“Governor Romney has claimed to have created 100,000 jobs at Bain, and people are wanting to know: is there proof?” Palin told Sean Hannity on Fox News.

Rick Tyler, former Gingrich aide and head of Newt Gingrich’s Super PAC, has already accused Romney of having created those 100,000 jobs in Asia and Mexico. Earlier this week, Big Government pointed out that Romney’s claim to have created 100,000 jobs contrasts with claims he made during his 1994 U.S. Senate campaign, when he claimed to have created 10,000 jobs at Bain. Romney retired from Bain Capital in 1999.

Palin said that Romney needed to come clean about his record, given the likelihood that Democrats would probe the tax issue and Romney’s tenure at Bain if he were to become the Republican nominee.

The former Alaska governor also told Hannity that she did not think it was inevitable that Romney would become the Republican nominee.

“The majority has not yet coalesced around one,” she said, adding that conservatives were still searching for the right “free market, pro-military” candidate to back. (more…)

David Axelrod, chief political strategist for President Barack Obama’s re-election campaign and former White House political adviser, defended Jeremiah Wright on Tuesday evening in a speech in Thousand Oaks, CA.

Axelrod described the initial news reports in 2008 on Obama’s long-time family pastor and mentor as “ninety seconds of vitriol plucked from thirty years of sermons by some enterprising opposition researcher.”

The claim that Wright’s sermons were selectively edited by Obama’s political opponents contradicts what is known about Wright’s preaching and the radical, racialist creed of the Trinity United Church of Christ, to which Obama belonged for two decades and to which he contributed a large amount of money.

Axelrod’s claim is also contradicted by Obama himself, who has cited Wright’s enthusiasm for radical politics as the main reason he was attracted to the church.

Axelrod brought up the Wright controversy during a lecture recounting his role as the “architect” of Obama’s rise from the Illinois state senate to the presidency. Axelrod praised Obama’s infamous “race speech,” contrasting his media skills to those of GOP vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin.

Photo source: Distinguished Speaker Series

The lecture was part of the Distinguished Speaker Series of Southern California, and was delivered before a largely friendly audience.

(more…)

Although Todd Palin has chosen Newt Gingrich as his candidate for 2012, Sarah Palin has yet to make any endorsements. One thing she has done, however, is warn that the establishment candidate—Mitt Romney—has been propelled through the race thus far by people who believe he’s beatable. In other words, while the Republican establishment is pushing him as their ideal candidate, the mainstream media has come alongside them to help push him too, albeit for different reasons.

Thus, while the Republican candidates were having their debate in New Hampshire on Saturday night, Palin was on FOX NEWS’ “Justice with Judge Jeanine” contending that President Obama wants “to face Mitt Romney in the general election.”In the process, she made it clear that this is why she believes the mainstream media is taking such a kid glove approach to Romney: they too see him as Obama’s best chance for victory.

On his radio show Monday, Rush Limbaugh concurred with Palin 100%:

There is a story on the Drudge Report today from Sarah Palin in which Sarah Palin says that the White House wants Mitt Romney to be the Republican nominee. Now, not only did I tell you that the Broncos were gonna beat the Steelers, for months I have been telling you that the Democrats want Romney — and you all know it. You’ve been listening here and you’ve heard people call me and tell me I don’t know what I’m talking about, that I’m full of it, that they’re scared of Romney. “Romney is the only guy who can win.” And I have said, “No,” and I’ve stood tough, and I’ve said, “They can’t wait for him. What’s Occupy Wall Street all about but running against Romney? He’s the Wall Street guy on our roster — and then Romneycare,” and I’ve laid it all out. So here comes Palin, she says it, and makes news.

(more…)

A friend of mine called me after the Iowa caucuses and asked, “Why isn’t John Huntsman getting noticed in this race? He’s the most intelligent candidate in the field!”  I would say the GOP nominees are much like what we say in Texas about the weather. If you don’t like the weather right now, wait five minutes.

GOP insider and strategist Charles Krauthammer recently tagged the 2012 Republican candidates as “embarrassing.”  To the contrary, I believe the GOP has good candidates who have A: failed to learn from their predecessors mistakes in 2008 and/or B: suffer from a timid, frantic, backbiting GOP establishment who distrust the minds and intellect of the conservative voter and the power of conservative ideals. Therefore if Huntsman can wait on the GOP to choke on Romney he will by default he get his turn and perhaps just in time. How is that for embarrassing?

The problem for Republicans in 2012 election isn’t a fleet of poor candidates. The lack of support and backbone from the Republican establishment that would allow them to play to win is killing us. The GOP is choking. In tennis, choking happens most when the better player realizes he should and can win. Instead of going for the shots that got him in a winning position, he plays not to lose hoping his opponent will give him the match.  One backhand in the net or one forehand sailed long, and he is immediately thrown off course, convinced that he must play it safe. This has been the GOP for the past nine months which explains the ushering in and out of every running Republican candidate where no one has shown the longevity to make it to the final.

(more…)

Obviously, the American Conservative Union (ACU) didn’t get the memo. After all, Governor Palin is irrelevant, donchaknow. At least that’s what the mainstream media told me, and the mainstream media never lies.

Was that the sound of Katie Couric’s head exploding I just heard … from the set of the old Geraldo show?

The other news is that this will be the Governor’s first ever appearance at the annual three-day DC gathering of thousands of grassroots conservatives from all over the country, and the timing couldn’t be better. ACU Chairman Al Cardenas sums up why perfectly in today’s announcement:

“Few national conservative leaders in America today energize and inspire our grassroots activists like Governor Sarah Palin. Her strong record of leadership, championing of our shared principles and magnetic personality have made Sarah Palin a hero to millions of conservatives across the country.”

It would be hard to argue that the Governor’s tireless championing of the Tea Party movement combined with her presence on the campaign trail didn’t have an energizing effect on the turnout that helped to deliver the GOP’s record gains in the crucial 2010 mid-terms. No one doubts that we’re going to need that energy again in 2012 — and then some. February 9 – 12 at CPAC is where so much will begin and Governor Palin is an excellent choice to close the conference and send the grassroots home fired up and ready to go to work.

(more…)

Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) has been roundly criticized for his foreign policy. Sen. Rick Santorum neatly–and accurately–summarized Paul’s views as those of “the Dennis Kucinich wing of the Democratic Party” (at 6:02 in the video below):

Paul’s views are not just libertarian. He is not simply concerned that “an overreaching military presence around the world is inconsistent with small, constitutional government at home,” as Edward Crane recently suggested. Paul goes further, blaming the U.S. for attacks against it, both foreign and domestic. That is a posture typically associated with the radical left.

It is clear that Paul is no friend of Israel. Gov. Sarah Palin, giving him the benefit of the doubt, suggested earlier today (with more than a hint of skepticism) that Paul is pro-Israel in his own way. It’s true that Paul’s suggestion that the U.S. end foreign aid to Israel (and all nations) is theoretically compatible with support for Israel. Privately, some of Israel’s staunchest defenders might agree that Israel should strive to outgrow the need for foreign assistance.

However, Paul’s voluminous public record–including his voting record in Congress–tells the real story. In one recent example, Ron Paul was one of only three Republicans to vote against a House of Representatives resolution condemning the Goldstone Report–a slanderous United Nations slur against Israel that even the report’s author, Richard Goldstone, later retracted. (Thirty-three Democrats also voted against; a bipartisan majority of 344 passed the pro-Israel resolution.) (more…)

Mitt Romney’s weekend interview in the Wall Street Journal seems to add weight to conservative doubts about his candidacy.

Romney doesn’t seem to get it: the 2012 election is about the size and cost of government.

We already have a “smart” president with ambitious plans who thinks he knows better. That hasn’t worked for our economy, and has damaged trust in our democracy.

Romney says “America doesn’t need a manager,” but his plans reflect what the Journal euphemistically calls “positive technocratic thinking.”

Though Romney may be more “sober” than his rival Newt Gingrich (or, less charitably, more timid than the former Speaker), he evidently shares with Gingrich an enthusiasm for what the federal government could do, if only he were put in control.

Given that Ron Paul’s radical foreign policy is a non-starter, and that several other candidates–however well-meaning–could not manage the mundane task of qualifying for the Virginia ballot, or withstand the media scrutiny of a long campaign, Republicans are feeling new doubts about the current field.

They are all better than Obama; the question is–are they the best Republicans can offer?

As Republicans have wrestled with that question, a few have floated the idea of a “brokered convention,” at which the party’s nominee would be chosen through back-room negotiations and contested ballots instead of the pro forma roll calls of recent decades.

Given Romney’s struggle to provide the clear alternative to Obama that Americans so desperately need, the party should consider whether a brokered convention is feasible as a fallback option.

Here, then, are the top ten Republicans who could be nominated at a brokered convention. Some declined to run earlier, and should reconsider; all would provide a stronger contrast to President Obama than Romney or Gingrich is providing at the moment.

***

10. Rep. Eric Cantor

The Whip united the caucus against the disastrous stimulus in 2009. In the debt ceiling debate, he reportedly held out against new taxes in any final agreement. Moreover, he has made clear that his vision for the country’s future is plainly different from Obama’s.

***

9. Sen. Jim DeMint

The conservative stalwart has provided key support to Tea Party candidates, and has challenged the compromise politics of the Republican establishment.

***

8. Gov. Bobby Jindal

Recently elected in a landslide to a second term, he has fought political corruption and brought competence and leadership to a state long lacking both. Despite a rocky national TV debut in 2009, Jindal is a ruthless and effective campaigner.

(more…)

In the year since the Tea Party arrived in Congress, the movement has managed to change the debate on Capitol Hill, but not the way Washington works.

The Tea Party has stopped President Barack Obama and the Democrats from bailing out profligate state governments, from passing new so-called “stimulus” spending, and from raising tax rates. It has even begun to win bipartisan support for major entitlement reform.

However, the Tea Party has failed thus far to stop the overall growth in the size and cost of government. It passed over a dozen bills that would accelerate economic growth and create new jobs, only to see those bills languish in Harry Reid’s Senate.

In both the debt ceiling and the payroll tax debates, the Tea Party saw its sensible bills rejected in favor of absurd compromises–then found itself being blamed for congressional gridlock.

The key to the Tea Party’s fortunes has been its relationship with the very establishment it dislikes. Where it has found common ground–for example, with House budget chair Paul Ryan–it has been able to promote its agenda of limited government. But when the Tea Party has clashed with Republican leaders–starting with key Senate races in 2010–Democrats have won by dividing conservatives from moderates, House from Senate. (more…)

From The Wall Street Journal:

Mark Twain famously wrote, “There is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress.” Peter Schweizer’s new book, “Throw Them All Out,” reveals this permanent political class in all its arrogant glory. (Full disclosure: Mr. Schweizer is employed by my political action committee as a foreign-policy adviser.)

Mr. Schweizer answers the questions so many of us have asked. I addressed this in a speech in Iowa last Labor Day weekend. How do politicians who arrive in Washington, D.C. as men and women of modest means leave as millionaires? How do they miraculously accumulate wealth at a rate faster than the rest of us? How do politicians’ stock portfolios outperform even the best hedge-fund managers’? I answered the question in that speech: Politicians derive power from the authority of their office and their access to our tax dollars, and they use that power to enrich and shield themselves.

The money-making opportunities for politicians are myriad, and Mr. Schweizer details the most lucrative methods: accepting sweetheart gifts of IPO stock from companies seeking to influence legislation, practicing insider trading with nonpublic government information, earmarking projects that benefit personal real estate holdings, and even subtly extorting campaign donations through the threat of legislation unfavorable to an industry. The list goes on and on, and it’s sickening.

Astonishingly, none of this is technically illegal, at least not for Congress. Members of Congress exempt themselves from the laws they apply to the rest of us. That includes laws that protect whistleblowers (nothing prevents members of Congress from retaliating against staffers who shine light on corruption) and Freedom of Information Act requests (it’s easier to get classified documents from the CIA than from a congressional office).

The corruption isn’t confined to one political party or just a few bad apples. It’s an endemic problem encompassing leadership on both sides of the aisle. It’s an entire system of public servants feathering their own nests.

(more…)

Pundits who once pronounced Republican voters satisfied with the field of presidential contenders may have spoken too soon.

Herman Cain’s difficulties in handling a flurry of sexual harassment accusations–albeit launched by an overzealous, unfair mainstream media–have shaken confidence in his candidacy. Gov. Mitt Romney’s increasingly bold policy pronouncements may be too little, too late to convince the conservative base.

Gov. Rick Perry seems to have faded, and Newt Gingrich’s recent rise may not be big enough to establish him as the latest alternative to Romney. The other candidates are still trying to break into double digits, but aside from Ron Paul–whose isolationist foreign policy makes him unelectable–none has succeeded.

That has some analysts wondering if a new candidate might yet enter the race–and if so, who that would be.

Source: The Public Interest - ABC 9 WTVC

Let’s consider the criteria that a late entrant would have to meet. (more…)

When Barack Obama was seeking the Democrat nomination in early 2008, warnings of his inexperience coupled with the fact that he was an ideologue were ubiquitous. Again and again, the facts were placed before us that Obama’s only claim to significant leadership was as a community organizer in Chicago. Mark Levin, Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and others repeatedly said that Obama would be a reckless President who lacked governing knowledge and who was ruled only by his desire to put America in its place.

And here we are. It’s late 2011, and the Organizer-in-Chief has proven that his only strength lies in his ability to organize those who hate America—hating both the economic system embedded in her and the ideals on which she stands.

To put it bluntly, “Occupy Wall Street” is Obama’s America. He has organized it, perhaps indirectly, but has done so nonetheless via his relentless venom for “the rich” coupled with his ongoing calls for more people to sacrifice and to “pay their fair share.” Of course, he doesn’t mean the hippies and freaks in the protests should pay their share. Rather, he is fostering a feeling of betrayal in them so they will continue to “rage against the machine.”

Look at it, folks–Obama’s America. Ain’t it great? It’s a place where law is disparaged (you can defecate on police cars), capitalism is hated (“eat the rich”), and people are entitled to take money from others even if the takers played no role in earning the money they crave (especially if they played no role in earning it).

(more…)

The Internet hacker collective known as Anonymous may be on a political collision course with the #Occupy movement that it helped launch.

The anarchist, anti-authoritarian nature of Anonymous could soon place it at odds with the #OccupyWallStreet protestors, many of whom pine for a “pure” democracy in which a consensus (not a majority) defines the rules.

That clash becomes more likely as #OccupyWallStreet begins taking marching orders (literally) from Big Labor, the Democratic Party, and the institutional left.

Recently, for example, a faction of Anonymous recently told MoveOn.org to “f#@ off” (language warning):

To understand the dynamic between Anonymous and #Occupy, it is necessary to examine the history of both. (more…)