The entire world was shocked last week by a series of violent murders carried out in France by Islamic fundamentalists.   The killers began their spree by slaughtering a dozen employees of the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo, which had dared to print images mocking the Islamic prophet Muhammad.  They went on to kill and injure several police officers and hostages before being killed themselves by French authorities.  By the end, 17 innocent people were murdered in three days of violence.

There can be no doubt these terrorist attacks were religiously motivated.  Charlie Hebdo was attacked for mocking Muhammad.  Hostages were taken and executed in a kosher deli because that is a place one might expect to find Jewish targets.  The terrorists shouted phrases such as “Allahu Akbar” at several moments, explained their motivations to the authorities and surviving victims, and even proudly confessed their relationship with al-Qaeda in Yemen.  This is really all the evidence we need.

Clearly, this was Islamic terrorism.

Yet still, amazingly, many on the political left are refusing to call this what it was.  Though they did identify it as a “terrorist attack”—and even the Obama administration acknowledged it as such, after French President Hollande paved the way—Barack Obama, Eric Holder, and even Hollande himself were quick to assert that the attacks had nothing to do with Islam.  Former DNC chairman and presidential candidate Howard Dean even claimed that the terrorists were, “. . . no more Muslim than I am,” which I suppose was his attempt at excommunicating them.

Indeed, every act of brutality and barbarism from Islam is granted a pass by liberals.  When known Muslims loudly commit murder in the name of Muhammad, liberals tell us it is just the act of one or two loose cannons.  When Nidal Hasan killed 13 people and wounded 32 others at Fort Hood while shouting “Allahu Akbar,” and when recent convert Alton Nolen decapitated a coworker in Oklahoma for not converting to Islam, the Obama administration told us these were incidents of “workplace violence.”

“Move along, nothing to see here.”  We are repeatedly assured that Islam is a “religion of peace.”  Granted, it is the most “peaceful” religion that will shoot you and saw your head off for doodling a caricature of one of their prophets, but we are consistently told that we must respect it.  According to Obama, Islam built “the very fabric of our nation.”  Similarly, 2016 Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton has been lecturing us that we must try “to understand, and in so far as psychologically possible, empathize with their perspective and point of view.”

Yes, thirteen years after 9-11, with hundreds of terrorist incidents since, the perspective of the Democrat party in 2015 is that we must “empathize” with the people who want to kill us.

Where this gets interesting is when you contrast this liberal tolerance with their attitude toward conservatives and Christians.  Whereas a man sawing off a woman’s head for refusing to convert to Islam is “workplace violence,” Republicans debating out-of-control spending on the floor of the senate chamber are “engaging in economic terrorism” and “holding the country hostage.”  No less than Vice President Joe Biden said this when Republicans were slow to fall in line on raising the debt ceiling.

Secretary of State John Kerry—I still can’t believe I just typed those words in that order—has been involved for months in negotiations with the Islamist terror state of Iran while they stall for time until they complete construction of the nuclear weapons they will then no doubt turn loose on the world.

Meanwhile, Barack Obama has repeatedly stated that he will not negotiate with his Republican adversaries.

Governor Andrew Cuomo (D – NY) said last year that “right-to-life, pro-assault weapons, anti-gay (Republicans) have no place in the state of New York because that’s not who New Yorkers are.”  Would Cuomo or anyone like him dare to criticize Muslims for their beliefs like they criticize Christians and conservatives?

In truth, many of the accusations Democrats hurl against conservatives are absolute lies when applied to the political right, but are perfect descriptions of the followers of Islam.

Consider Cuomo’s statement about Republicans being “anti-gay.”  While it is true that the average conservative is not on board with things like gay marriage, most are rather tolerant of their homosexual neighbors.  Despite media portrayals, Christians do not assault or attack gays and lesbians, but instead default toward the philosophy of “love the sinner and hate the sin.”  However, when they object to embracing the homosexual movement by citing religious convictions, they are mocked outright by liberals for being religiously intolerant.

Islam, on the other hand, violently kills known or suspected homosexuals.  Period.  There is no tolerance for “alternative lifestyles” among the followers of Allah.  Strangely, liberals never question this or demand that Muslims reevaluate their religion as they tell Christians to do.

Next consider the so-called “Republican war on women.”  Democrats rode this lie to a victory in 2012 on the basis that conservatives are sexist simply for attempting to defend the lives of the unborn.  Indeed, liberals have been quick to assert charges of sexism every time conservatives even offer an alternative to socialists like Hillary Clinton who happen to be women, but Democrats are allowed to go unchallenged when they flat out call women like Sarah Palin or Laura Ingraham disgusting slurs simply because they cannot beat those women in the arena of ideas.

The most popular figure within the Democrat Party for most of the last quarter of a century, Bill Clinton, is a serial philanderer who is currently embroiled in a sex scandal involving underage girls, and yet Republicans are identified as a “threat toward women” for not wanting to pay the apparently-astronomical fee for Sandra Fluke’s birth control.

Meanwhile, women in the Islamic world are regarded as second class citizens, at best, and more often as property.  Female genital mutilation is a common practice within some Muslim societies, where women are also forced to cover themselves from head to toe at all times, forced to be accompanied away from home by a male relative under penalty of death, married off as child brides, and blamed and often stoned to death for their own rape if they should suffer that.  The simple act of driving a car is denied to women in places like Saudi Arabia, yet liberals never object to that.  Most on the left simply avert their eyes from these atrocities, and you certainly never hear of it when the left is cracking jokes about Mitt Romney’s “binders full of women.”

Most telling is the subject of religion itself.  Liberals are always up in arms about “the separation of church and state,” that non-existent line in the Constitution arising from an intentional misinterpretation of the First Amendment and supposedly barring Christianity from having any bearing on the governance of our society, despite the biblical proclamations of most of the Founding Fathers.  Conservative politicians who dare to mention their faith in explanation of their values are accused of being religious zealots and mocked by Hollywood and the media on a daily basis.  We are told that public displays of Jesus or the Ten Commandments are both illegal and offensive, while publicly funded displays of the crucifix or the Virgin Mary splattered with feces are called “art.”  Don’t dare to say it is not art, or the ACLU will come after you.

This same ACLU will also come after you if you dare to defile a Quran or otherwise offend Muslims in any way.  While it is perfectly acceptable among the politically correct to insult Christianity at every opportunity, we are told we cannot dare to insult the “Prophet” Muhammad.  We are not even to illustrate his likeness in any form, and certainly not with mockery, which is exactly what got the staff of Charlie Hebdo murdered.

Unlike in western society, there exists not even a sliver of divide between church and state in Muslim culture.  Their religion defines their state, and their citizens are ruled thusly.  As Islam extends its reach into other civilizations, as it did in France, it demands special exemptions from the native laws for its own cultural practices.  In the names of “diversity” and “tolerance” and “multiculturalism,” the left has been willing to grant this, allowing Islamist bubble societies to spring up and serve as staging grounds for the sort of massacre we witnessed just last week.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration is suing the Little Sisters of the Poor, an association of nuns who are resisting Obamacare mandates which force them to violate the statutes of their religion.  The left targets, assaults, and ridicules private companies like Chick-fil-A and Hobby Lobby for attempting to stand up for their own religious values, while eagerly granting exemptions for Muslim organizations.

Barack Obama himself made a campaign speech in which he ridiculed conservatives as bitter people clinging to their “guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them.”  Well nowhere more than in the Islamic world will you find people clinging to guns and religion and “antipathy toward people who are not like them.”  Islam is nothing but antipathy toward people who are not like them.  All throughout the world, Islam offers the choice of conversion or death.

Islam is an ideology which decapitates young children simply for being non-Muslims, and the political left is upset that Christians might be “pushing” Christian beliefs on others.  Rare is the liberal who will criticize Muslims for pushing their religion.

Furthermore, when Islamists commit these horrible acts of brutality, they proudly tell us who they are and why they are doing it.  Every video of a beheading is accompanied by a speech about why it is happening.  Every shooting is to the cry of “Allahu Akbar.”  When the Charlie Hebdo killers spoke with reporters shortly before their deaths, they proclaimed their religious and organizational credentials.  And still the liberals within government and media refuse to link them to Islam.  At the very least, they tell us these “few extremists” are not illustrative of Islam as a whole.

Again, contrast this with any opportunity the left is provided to smear Christians and conservatives, even when Christians and conservatives are entirely unrelated to the story.  When Jared Loughner shot Democrat Gabrielle Giffords, Loughner was largely exempted from blame by the Democrats, who instead attributed the crime to pro-Second Amendment conservatives in general, and more specifically to Sarah Palin.  Loughner—a registered independent—also shot a Republican judge among his other victims, but that didn’t stop the media from identifying him as a “rightwing nut.”

Similarly, when another random lunatic named James Holmes went on a shooting spree in Colorado, ABC News’ Brian Ross rushed in front of a microphone to declare that he had learned Holmes was a local Tea Party activist.  Apparently, it never occurred to Ross that there might be two people in the country going by the name James Holmes, and so ABC’s intrepid journalist wound up slandering the wrong man and, conveniently, an opposing political ideology in the process.  However, just last week when asked about the link between the gunmen in France and al-Qaeda, Ross was quick to claim that, despite the words of the killers themselves, the link had not been substantiated.

It is difficult to know how much of this ridiculous double-standard is simple ignorance and how much might be intentional, but the results are the same either way.  Conservatism and Christianity stand accused of the crimes of Islam, while the very real crimes of Islam are ignored and swept aside by their willing accomplices on the political left.  It sounds like some ridiculous parallel reality, but it is the world we now live in, and it is becoming more dangerous every day.

Islam is the reality of everything liberals claim to hate, and unlike them, it knows who its enemies are.  For France, it may already be too late.  By allowing the brutality of Islam to go unchecked and by making excuses for it, liberals are digging their own graves . . . and ours as well.  Every attack, every indulgence, and every denial of the truth brings us closer to destruction.  If the left remains blinded by political correctness and refuses to see the truth, it will lead to the end of society as we have known it.

 

{ 0 comments }

The Republicans in the House of Representatives voted this week to continue to make themselves irrelevant by reelecting John Boehner to a third term as Speaker of the House.  It is safe to say we can expect Boehner—whose hobbies include kissing Barack Obama’s feet, crying repeatedly on national television, and tanning his flesh a ridiculous neon orange—to continue the sort of spineless behavior which has become his trademark.

How such a non-entity rose to such a powerful position in his party is something of a mystery, particularly when you consider how he has done nothing but squander his status.  The position of Speaker is not something to scoff at.  If Obama were ever struck by a stray golf ball and someone forgot to water Joe Biden, Boehner would even move into the Oval Office.  The Speaker’s position grants him a leadership role, a powerful microphone, and the chance to champion his party’s agenda . . . none of which Boehner seems even remotely interested in.

Boehner sought reelection.  He fought for it.  One has to assume he got himself there on purpose and that he might have some ambition beyond occupying space and holding the famous gavel.  But if he intends to accomplish anything of actual consequence, he has so far done a great job of hiding that.

Sadly, this is a pattern with Republicans in recent years.  Look at the last two presidential elections.  John McCain fought for the Republican nomination as hard as he ever fought for anything in his life.  Then, after clawing his way to the top of the Republican pile, he promptly gave up and handed the election to Obama.  I have always said that McCain never wanted to beat Obama; he merely wanted to be written into the history books as the guy who was defeated by the nation’s first black president.

Mitt Romney did better, but only slightly.  In the first presidential debate, Romney kicked Obama’s butt so badly that Chris Matthews walked away from that night with a concussion.  Everyone on the right loved it, and for a little while it looked like Romney was actually going to win the election.  But in the next two debates, he didn’t do much more than show up.  Sure, other factors like the biased debate moderators played into the outcome, but the truth is Romney didn’t fight in the general election as hard as he fought in the primary, and it showed.

Neither McCain nor Romney would have been called “the conservative candidate” in either 2008 or 2012.  Instead, they were sold to us as “the candidate who can win.”  Only neither of them did.

I remember thinking in late 2011, “I would be fine with Romney if I thought he was going to put as much effort into beating Obama as he is putting into beating the other Republicans.”  But somehow, I knew even then that wasn’t going to be the case.

John McCain barred his campaign from even mentioning Obama’s racist, anti-American pastor Jeremiah Wright, or any of Obama’s other radical friends.  Similarly, Mitt Romney seemed to go out of his way to avoid hitting Obama on his established record of presidential failure.  Romney even declined to bring up the tragedy of Benghazi when that happened less than two months before the election.  It was the perfect opportunity to use an example of just how bad an idea it was to allow Obama to go on being president, and Romney passed on it.

Maybe this sounds old fashioned, but it might be a good idea if future Republican presidential nominees were candidates who actually wanted to be president.

Amazingly, both McCain and Romney have hinted that they may each take yet another shot at losing the White House for the Republicans, and by now it shouldn’t surprise us that Establishment Republicans and Beltway cocktail party RINO hangers-on are thrilled at the idea.

Also thrilling to them is the prospect of Jeb Bush, a pro-Common Core, pro-amnesty RINO who somehow makes even McCain seem conservative.  This blog will doubtlessly rip into Jeb somewhere down the road for the many, many reasons he is already guaranteed not to be elected president, but for now we’ll just point out that his last name is Bush and leave it at that.  And, naturally, the media is already trying to help him get the nomination, just like they did for McCain and Romney.

There is a lesson to be reminded of this week with the reelection of Boehner, and that is that not all elected Republicans are good for the party, and not all of them are listening to us.  60% of Republicans across the country wanted Boehner removed from his post.  All but a few of our congressional representatives ignored the will of their constituents and voted for him anyway.  How did your representative vote?

These things matter.  Primaries matter.  If we keep electing the same Establishment Republicans who are Establishment first and Republican a distant second, they cannot be counted on to do what we need them to do.  They will look out for themselves first, their friends second, and whoever else can help them after that.  When that includes us in an election year, they might even visit our towns and tell us what we want to hear, before going back to D.C. and doing the opposite.

Jeb Bush and Chris Christie and possibly Mitt Romney are about to throw their hats into the ring to seek the presidential nomination.  Not one of them has a chance at winning the general election; I know that, you know that, and it seems hard to believe professionals like themselves and their advisors don’t know that, too.  That won’t stop them from spending the next twelve-to-twenty months crisscrossing the United States giving speeches, spending money, and slandering the image of the party.

If one of these RINOs gets the nomination, that’s where the race ends.  When Ted Cruz is defeated, when Ben Carson is defeated, when every other truly conservative candidate is defeated, that’s when they consider their mission accomplished and head off to join Boehner for a cigar at the kiddies table.

Conservatives need to learn from the past and remember these lessons as the Republican candidates start lining up.  The RINOs will fight us with all their strength just so they can hand the White House back to the Democrats.  Conservatives need to meet the attack and push back just as hard.

A conservative who wins the party nomination will win the general election.  A RINO who wins the nomination has already lost.

{ 0 comments }

The Lamest of Ducks

by Travis Sedars January 4, 2015 liberals vs conservatives
Thumbnail image for The Lamest of Ducks

Do you remember two months ago when voters across the nation swept Republicans into office in an epic landslide?  Do you remember how they ejected almost every Democrat who was up for election or reelection, in part because Barack Obama was not on the ballot this year, but they nonetheless wanted to send him a […]

Read the full article →

Now Earn It

by Travis Sedars November 5, 2014 economics
Thumbnail image for Now Earn It

Tuesday’s election was definitely a huge victory for the GOP nationwide, but it would be a mistake to believe the candidates won entirely because of their individual campaigns.  Yes, there were some truly strong candidates and many of them fought their races very well, but there are also a lot of Republicans who owe their […]

Read the full article →

A World Run By Children

by Travis Sedars November 2, 2014 economics
Thumbnail image for A World Run By Children

America made a huge mistake in 2006.  Six years into the presidency of George W. Bush, the public became impatient and decided it was time for a change.  The Democrats and their media allies had been assaulting Bush nonstop since the 2000 election, which they have still never gotten over, and the never-ending attacks—and the […]

Read the full article →

No Bad Guy Left Behind

by Travis Sedars June 5, 2014 liberals vs conservatives
Thumbnail image for No Bad Guy Left Behind

Last week we discovered the Obama administration had secured the release of U.S. Army soldier Bowe Bergdahl, who had been held for five years by the Taliban in Afghanistan, all for the low low price of just five terrorists released from our Guantanamo prison facility.  With all the publicized pomp, speeches, and photo ops in […]

Read the full article →

#AmericaSurrenders

by Travis Sedars May 21, 2014 liberals vs conservatives
Thumbnail image for #AmericaSurrenders

Watching liberals bungle their way through foreign policy, it’s sometimes difficult to tell if they are being treasonous of just dangerously incompetent.  After all, they seem to know fully well what they are doing when they get themselves elected to office and try to consolidate power in order to rule over the civilian population, but […]

Read the full article →

Donald Sterling vs Benghazi

by Travis Sedars May 6, 2014 liberals vs conservatives
Thumbnail image for Donald Sterling vs Benghazi

Is it worse for a private citizen to harbor an outdated and idiotic personal opinion which has little impact on anyone around them; or is it worse for elected officials to commit a series of actions which lead to the violent deaths of Americans citizens and then knowingly mislead the nation on the circumstances of […]

Read the full article →