Yesterday I predicted a leftist assault on Joe the Plumber.  You simply do not challenge The One without facing the wraith of his accolades.  WaPo goes for the red herring, hoping to distract from the issue by questioning Joe’s plumber bonafides:

Joe the Plumber’s story sprang a few leaks Thursday. Turns out that the man who was held up by John McCain as the typical, hard-working American taxpayer isn’t really a licensed plumber. And court documents show he owes nearly $1,200 in back taxes.

…The burly, bald man acknowledged he doesn’t have a plumber’s license, but said he didn’t need one because he works for someone else at a company that does residential work.

But Wurzelbacher still would need to be a licensed apprentice or journeyman to work in Toledo, and he’s not, said David Golis, manager and residential building official for the Toledo Division of Building Inspection.

State and local records show Wurzelbacher has no license, although his employer does. Golis said there are no records of inspectors citing Wurzelbacher for unlicensed work in Toledo.

Typical liberal reasoning.  If you don’t have government papers, you aren’t legitimate.  I don’t want to get into the folly of government licensing and how it’s used to protect businesses from competition rather than consumers, but it’s enough to point out that a government certificate is not the determinate of one’s occupational status.  Nor does this have anything whatsoever to do with Obama’s declaring he wants to “spread the wealth.”  His statement is no less socialistic for Joe not having a plumber’s license.

Liberals on the web have, not surprisingly, taken an even lower road, and are engaged in a furious verbal assault (via Moonbattery):

Joe the Plumber is the typical selfish American voter who only cares about his own personal situation and not the big picture. […] Guys like these disgust me.

[M]aybe Joe [the] Plumber and Joe Sixpack can meet up in Northwestern, New Hampshire with the Mooselady and talk about faucets!

I bet JOE PLUMBCRA^K has a criminal background. […] How was it that McCainRat knew what JOEA^ssCra^k said to Obama, if he was none other than a PLANT?

So the white guy is the only measure of this economy? I’m so sick of everyone else’s welfare being measured against the white guy.

You know what, screw Joe the plumber and Joe the electrician.[…] They all wanted to drive BMW’s and buy homes that were bigger and more expensive at 25 than their parent’s homes that they bought at 50.

Screw those guys! They won’t to do well for themselves, and they must be stopped!  Yeah, Obama will do wonders for the economy, let me tell you.

Also from Moonbattery:

Having moved beyond sneering at him for probably liking beer at Huffington Post, the vermin at Daily Kos have tried publishing his address, tacitly encouraging Obamunists to throw Molotov cocktails through his windows or terrorize his family.

But the attack isn’t limited to sallow adolescents conducting a People’s Revolution from their moms’ basements. Left-leaning officials are moving to drive Wurzelbacher out of work on bureaucratic technicalities as punishment for not extolling their messiah’s smash and grab economic policies.

Welcome to the new tone of Hope and Change.

The outcry over the infamous New Yorker cover has provided snobbish left wing commentators yet another opportunity to confirm their own enlightened status by condemning all us plebes who cling to our guns and bibles.

Madison Powers at CQ Politics frets:

The potential consequence of a synoptic image of this sort explains why it’s the New Yorker’s own demographic who are upset. They get that this is but the latest instance in which the mainstream media unwittingly contribute to the perpetuation of a deliberately created myth emanating from the lesser regions of the new media.

What about those who perpetrate the laundry list of falsehoods? If they are supposed get their comeuppance, it’s really hard to see how. The defense is that it has to be seen in context, and that only those ignorant of the context are flummoxed. The problem is that the New Yorker’s context is not the same as the context in which others see it. The message travels far beyond the Hudson into places the messenger probably does not.

Not only is this an example of the kind of rejection of intentionalism which Jeff Goldstein observed, but the basic assumption behind the author’s view is that us simple folk are simply too stupid to get it.  Furthermore, it’s become automatic for these writers to state with authority that such views about Obama are widespread and more than just the usual internet nonsense found on all matters.  This view is entirely unsubstantiated.

On the flip side, none of these enlightened individuals express much concern over the pervasive belief on the left that Bush was behind 9/11, a view held for no other reason than that these people really, really want a good reason to justify their hatred of Bush.  Contrary to how their disinterested pretensions, these writers don’t care a whit about ensuring truth wins over rumors; they care about tarring republicans and protecting Obama.  But anyone who is familiar with the left side of the blogosphere knows that rumors and falsehoods are far more likely to gain the status of conventional wisdom within the left, while the right is actually willing to dispel and condemn such things within its own community.  Don’t let the snobs browbeat you into believing any different.

What’s wrong with this picture? Hint: We’re all gonna die!

Answer: A double dose of fear mongering and blatant hypocrisy. The Truth website got to it faster than me and got a better screen capture, see here.

Hat Tip: The Truth

What do Hamas and the liberal blogosphere have in common? They expressed similar disdain over Barack Obama’s recent AIPAC speech. Speaking before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, Obama declared that “Jerusalem will remain the capital of Israel, and it must remain undivided.” The remark pleased his audience, which took it for a greater level of support than he, and the democratic party in general, has offered in recent years.

Not pleased was the terrorist organization Hamas, which rescinded its endorsement, and various liberal bloggers.

Obama’s AIPAC Speech Riles Palestinians

Sen. Barack Obama’s speech to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) on Wednesday shocked many Palestinians, who had hoped he would be a sympathetic advocate for the Palestinian cause in the White House.

Ayman abu Syrieh, 45, owns a grocery store owner in the Old City of East Jerusalem and has been following the campaign on a daily basis. “Every time Obama was on TV, I asked everyone to be quiet, so I could listen to him,” Syrieh said. “When he was talking, he represented hope for me and I believed that he would be the one to bring real peace between Palestinians and Israelis.”

But Syrieh’s feelings changed after Obama stressed his support for Israel in the AIPAC speech.

…Obama’s speech to AIPAC on Wednesday was a disappointment, if not a shock, to Hamas, a group considered a terrorist organization by the United States. Hamas, in the past, has expressed support for Obama – support that Obama has rejected.

Hamas now sees no difference between Obama and McCain:

Sen. Barack Obama’s speech to AIPAC has convinced Hamas that he and Sen. John McCain are interchangeable. If the group had its druthers, neither one would win.

“Obama’s comments have confirmed that there will be no change in the U.S. administration’s foreign policy on the Arab-Israeli conflict,” Hamas official Sami Abu Zuhri told Reuters in Gaza.

One would think that something which upset a terrorist organization in such a manner would please Americans, but that’s probably expecting too much from liberals. They were equally dismayed by the speech.

FreeBubba at TPM decried the speech as “beneath contempt” and mourned the bursting of the “change bubble.”

Greg Kafoury frets that Obama is “turning right.”

Writing at HuffPo James Zogby, founder of the Arab American Institute, described the Jerusalem reference as “deeply troubling,” as well as “unnecessarily provocative and contradictory.” He went on to note that Arabs and “Israeli peace activists” (a euphemism for terrorists and their useful idiots) were “deeply disheartened.”

The comments to Zogby’s article were even more hysterical:

With his Jerusalem comment, Obama may have just destroyed our relations with moderate Arabs.

Honestly not a very smart move by Obama.

Obama speech today let the whole world down. He is only fooling himself pandering to AIPAC.

Obama has dissapointed me, he sold out to AIPAC. I donated three times to his camapign, I called I asked what his position was on the Palestians, I got no response. I dont think it was a mistake either. We need to organize and stand up as a group. How many American Arabs are in this country? Lets show our voting skills…

So much for the new politics of change. Sounded like old fashioned pandering to me.

arrgghh…this is SO dissapointing Mr. Obama. Hopefully Jimmy Carter will give you the cahones to correct yourself. BTW why is AIPAC the ONLY lobby that Mr. Obama feels the need to pander too????? I have supported him, but this statement breaks my heart.

Not surprisingly, Obama has already begun to backtrack in the face of this convergence of terrorist and left-wing criticism.

Some moron named Ryan Yeomans writing for the Central Connecticut State University newspaper ponders which is the worser evil, Bush or Bin Laden? For some reason, the word dhimmitude kept popping in to my mind while reading this article.

As of late, if you were to bring up the president in a discussion you would find that many Americans disapprove of the decisions he has made. At the same time, Osama bin Laden presents many good arguments against the president and many of his reasons for disapproving of Bush are similar to those of anti-Bush Americans.

No kidding. Alert analysts have been pointing out the convergence between leftist and Islamist ideology for years. That last sentence could also be read “many of the liberals’ reasons for opposing Bush are similar to those of bin Laden.” To a sane person this should raise serious red flags about who it is we’re sharing our voting booths with. But to moonbats, it merely adds to bin Laden’s credibility.

He continues:

Would it be wrong to assume that there is some kind of connection between feelings of the American people and those of Osama bin Laden?

Not if by American people he means the disaffected America-hating slime that passes for the left.

He then goes on to say that he would make this connection (as if he hadn’t already) if only doing so wouldn’t cause Bush to label him an enemy of the state. Finding himself stuck between a rock and a hard place, wondering if flat out expressing his convictions would make him look too much like a terrorist, the author finally questions who has done the most damage to America, Bush or bin Laden.

I can’t really blame him for asking. I’ve asked myself a similar question. Which is worse, Al Qaeda or the Left? One is a group bent on destroying our freedoms and way of life, bringing the whole planet under its rule, and forcing upon us the dogmatic views dictated by its twisted ideology. And the other is a terrorist organization.

The answer to Mr. Yeomans’ question is simple really. “Neither Bush nor bin Laden.” It’s the liberal ideology which has done the most damage and continues to be the greatest threat to America. Great civilizations are destroyed from within, not without. Bin Laden would have no power if not for like-minded fools in this country sharing his goals and exaggerating his successes while stymieing all efforts to oppose him.

Hat Tip: The Shield of Achilles

U.S. Border Patrol agents seeking to secure the nation’s border in some of the country’s most pristine national forests are being targeted by illegal aliens, who are using intentionally set fires to burn agents out of observation posts and patrol routes.

The wildfires have destroyed valuable natural and cultural resources in the National Forest System and pose an ongoing threat to visitors, residents and responding firefighters, according to federal law-enforcement authorities and others.

In the Coronado National Forest in Arizona, with 60 miles of land along the U.S.-Mexico border, U.S. Forest Service firefighters sent in to battle fires or clear wild-land fire areas are required to be escorted by armed law-enforcement officers.

Armed smugglers of aliens and drugs have walked through the middle of active firefighting operations, the authorities said.

The Border Patrol”s Tucson, Ariz., sector, which encompasses most of the Coronado National Forest, has the highest incidence of cross-border violators in the nation. Nearly 500,000 illegal aliens were apprehended last year ? more than 30,000 a month. In addition, nearly 100,000 pounds of marijuana, with a street value of $200 million, was seized as it was hauled through the Coronado National Forest.

Last month, the Border Patrol ? in a single operation targeting illegal aliens causing what Forest Service officials called “significant damage” to the Coronado National Forest ? apprehended more than 300 illegals along just a three-mile section of U.S.-Mexico border in Arizona and confiscated 600 pounds of marijuana in a 10-day period.

At least five fires were set below a Border Patrol observation post during the operation in an effort to burn the agents out, according to a Forest Service report. The fires were extinguished, and no one was arrested.

Wildfires are being set by alien and drug smugglers, authorities said, to create a diversion in an attempt to gain undetected access across the border. The fires correspond to a dramatic rise in assaults against Border Patrol agents ? up more than 100 percent over last year.

It’s at moments like this that I really don’t envy the libs. Imagine reading this story if you define yourself as both a environmental activist and an open borders multiculturalist. How many trees will we need to plant to offset the carbon released in these fires? But not even black Americans will plant trees so we’ve got to have the Mexicans to do it. It’s enough to make your head explode. I mean, who are you supposed to direct your anger at?

Hold up. Silly me.

The answer is obvious. In fact, it seems it’s automatic in most cases.

Blame America. It’s our fault they’re crossing the borders. So it’s our fault they’re setting the fires.

I tried to confirm this theory by looking at what blogs de liberal are saying about this story. But none of them have commented on it. Imagine my surprise.

Vice President Cheney has been diagnosed with a blood clot in his leg, a potentially serious and lifethreatening condition.

I went once again to The Huffington Post to test the waters. But it seems like they’re not taking any chances this time around.

Comments for this post are now closed

More like never open to begin with.

What are they afraid of? Liberals are loving, happy people who would never say something to be ashamed of. At least not the important ones…right?

The anger and obscenity routinely exhibited from the left-wing blogosphere has been quantified and compared to that of the right, and the results are not in the least bit surprising. The News Buckit did a search of the seven words identified by George Carlin as unutterable on television and compared the number of hits found at different websites. Probably not a very true representation of “anger”, it is at least a crude measure (holy pun, batman!) of obscenity on various sites. The left-wing blogosphere, which had 4 fewer blogs surveyed than the right, was still found to out-curse us by a margin of 18-to-1. When forum sites like the DU and FreeRepublic were counted, that grew to an oustounding 41-to-1 ratio. The measure does not distinguish between comments and main posts.

Unfortunately, there’s no simple way to compare death threats and the many other personal attacks that are most often found on the left, but all this does seem like a really good idea for a poli sci paper.

It seems that the Taliban took a shot , so to speak, at Vice President Dick Cheney. But they missed - a fact which seems to trouble many on the left.

Here’s the reaction from the Huffnuts:

“Cheney’s spokeswoman said he was fine” F**k.

So Cheney is personally responsible for the deaths of 14 innocent people…and then he waddles off to lunch!! What a piece of sh**!

They missed! Too bad.

To bad they missed!!!!!!!!!!!!

If at first you don’t succeed …

Better luck next time!

What a different world we would be living in today if they had succeeded.

Dr Evil escapes again…damn.

Sounds like a bullsh** attempt. The VP is inside some sort of compound and they blow up a bomb at the front door? Christ, at least lob a few grenades INTO the compound. [ed. Can you beleive this? They’re unhappy that the terrorists didn’t launch a broader attack upon our forces. If this isn’t treason, treason no longer exists.]

They missed?? Dammit. I hope they try again before he leaves.

Who’d have thought that Afghanistan would make such a valiant attempt to save the United States of America? [Once again, the left showing itself to be united with the terrorists in a common cause]

It’s good to see this asshole living in the world he has created. All I can say is “better luck next time”. [Right. Cheney created Islamic extremism. I thought Afghanistan was the war everyone supported? Not the case?]

Bush and Cheney have enough blood on their hands. We don’t need to lose credibility by behaving like Republicans and using hyperbolic bullsh** that makes us FEEL good but is false. [They’re not behaving like republicans, they’re behaving like crazed liberals.]

Just can’t get good bombers any more!

[Here someone dares to criticize the others for showing such sadistic delight in an attempt on the duly elected VP of the U.S., and is quickly shot down.]

Sinkablehail55 says:

“C’mon guys lets have a little bit of honor, no one deserves to die in a bomb blast. Yes, even Cheney. You may have many reasons to hate this man and he is pretty repugnant, but that’s hardly the reason to wish that he would die, which might I add is equally repugnant.”

F#$% Cheney. It’s called poetic justice. This no good MF is complicit in sending thousands to their deaths via bomb blasts and you expect sympathy for the cretin. Karma’s coming to get that rat basturd.

Get over yourself. What you see here is a spontaneous expression of rage and frustration. Perfectly appropriate, given the circumstances.

I hope he at least needed a big, painful jolt from his defibrillator.

It’s just as well they missed. We wouldn’t want to owe the Taliban such a debt of gratitude.

Hopefully you get the point so I can stop defiling this sacred place of reason and learning with this filthy liberal inhumanity. This is what I got from the first two pages. At the time of this posting, this went on for another 10 pages.

Update:

The hate fest now inhabits 18(!) pages of responses, mostly all of them dissapointed that Cheney didn’t meet his demise.

Here’s the post that takes the cake though:

I am amazed at all the hatred being Commented here except for Thalia.

These trolls and some of the other Commenters are pouring pure bile into this topic which makes everyone look like total fools. Some silly fools want other concerned citizens to go to jail. INSANE! And typical of Bush/Cheney supporters who yearn for a police state with their sad little egos in charge.

Hating is my job! And none of you are very good at it.

Punks!

By: getoffmedz on February 27, 2007 at 11:23am
Flag: [abusive]

It’s hard to tell because of his poor composition and lack of contextual continuity, but it appears that this fellow believes those who are opposing the Cheney hate speech are trolls, and that they’re the ones spewing hate and bile. In other words, hating on Cheney is justified. Anything else is unacceptable.

Incredible.

Update:

And now the Huffington Post admins are deleting posts left and right. Nearly every post I quoted above has been eliminated. They deleted so many posts that the number of comment pages have gone from 18 to 13. Can’t have these kinds of opinions attributed to the liberal base. People might get the wrong idea.

Update:

VIA Michelle Malkin, most of the comments section has been preserved to forever haunt the patriotic left here.

Matt Browner Hamlin, contributor at the Huffington Trough comments on the Pandagon/Edwards Campaign scandal:

The rightwing blogosphere has tried to set the bar for what disqualifies a blogger from working on a political campaign so low that they’ve set themselves up to knock almost every single Republican staffer out of contention for their views. While attention is being brought on the Edwards campaign has started to gain traction, I have to wonder why Republicans are given such a free pass on their personnel decisions.

He claims that we will reap what we sow and that every republican staffer will go down, as if they are all just as nuts as Marcotte. But even with the thousands of republican staffers he could have supposedly skewered here, he only manages to give three examples. And all three work for RINO John McCain. But do his three examples really merit a comparison to the Pandagon bloggette Amanda Marcotte?

To establish a basis for comparison, you can view some of Pandagon’s philosophy outlined here.

On to the republican staffers.

He starts off with Patrick Hynes, who according to Hamlin deserves to be disqualified from political employment for daring to suggest that America was founded as a Christian nation and for slinging mud at liberals. Shame. On. Him.

Next is Trey Walker who was “investigated for election fraud in 2003″. Investigated. That’s the worst he’s got on him.

Here’s where the blog takes a turn for the mindless, as Hamlin then spends four paragraphs (and a subsequent update) pounding on Bill Donohue, who to the best of my knowledge is not a Republican staffer.

Then it’s on to Terry Nelson. A man who liberals love to point out is an unindicted co-conspirator in the TRMPAC scandal. What does that really mean? Unindicted co-conspirator - meaning there was no evidence that would give a prosecutor cause to drag him in front of a grand jury. Even a jury shopping political hack like Ronnie Earle who took three grand juries to get charges brought against Tom Delay, the most serious of which which was thrown out. Even if he had been indicted, an indictment is the furthest thing from proof of guilt. This is the worst they have on this guy? There wasn’t enough evidence to even refer to him as a full fledged indicted co-conspirator (in a word, innocent), but the accusation alone is enough to compare him to the repugnant Marcotte?

This is insane. The leftwing bloggers have taken offence at Marcotte’s comeuppance and now people like this Hamlin fellow are lashing out at any republican whose name comes up in a google search for “dubious republican staffer”. Good luck to them. While Amanda Marcottes are a dime a dozen in the liberal blogosphere, Republican bloggers are far fewer and overwhelmingly superior morally to those found on the left. I’ll be watching intently to see how many conservative-blogger turned Republican-staffers Hamlin is really able to find who reside with Marcotte in the sludge at the bottom of the barrel. My guess is - not many. And not even close to the number he apparently wishes were there.