When I take a look at the future I am very scared for my children and grandchildren.

No it isn’t president Obama’s economic stuff or the gay marriage stuff etc…This stuff can be opposed or even repealed.

It is the fight with radical Islam that worries me. I’m afraid that my sons will have to choose between the submission to Islam (unthinkable), dhimmitude in Islam (horrible),or the destruction of Islam (soul destroying). The best chance to avoid this future is the reform of Islam and that can only be done from within. So stories like this give me hope:

‘I will give £5 to anyone in Britain who wants to live under Sharia law,’ he declares. ‘It will help pay for their ticket to Sudan, Yemen, Pakistan, or wherever it is customary to live under Sharia law.

‘Please, please go and leave us alone. This is Britain, not 10th century Arabia!’

We are indeed sitting in a bar, on a busy main road in Oxford.

But the man before me is no stereotypical Islamophobe.

For one, he is sipping a glass of water rather than something more inflammatory.

More importantly, though by no means obviously, Dr Taj Hargey is himself an Islamic cleric; perhaps the most controversial imam in Britain today.

And is theology basis? faith and reason

For many Muslims, the hadiths are a fundamental guide and part of their faith. For Hargey, they are often unreliable and an obstacle to the integration of Islam into contemporary society. He believes the Koran is all.

‘This is a big fight for the hearts and minds of Islam. There is nothing in the Koran which is incompatible with (living in) British society, unlike what I call “Mullah Islam” and their reliance on hadiths.’

And so he explains his position: ‘These people say they have a right to stone adulterous women. We say show us where it says that in the Koran.

‘The Koran must have precedence. It must be sovereign. Everything else is supplementary or subservient. All that stuff about jihad, women’s rights, apostasy, all these issues come from the hadiths.

‘We do not say get rid of the hadiths. But we do say that every hadith must pass two litmus tests.

First, it must not conflict with the Koran. Second, it must not conflict with reason or logic.

It is people like this that can save us from a horrible future. These are the guys we need to support.

My post earlier this week about the worm turning managed to get more hits than anything I put up since the Boston teaparty photos or my instalance.

I’d like to think its because the conservative troops not only can be rallied but WANT to be rallied. They know that in the end reality trumps a facade, they are spoiling for a fight and just need to be pointed in the direction to do so. Well apparently the Sundries Shack via the green room sees the same potential that Rush and I do:

The thing is, the left hears the distant rumble of America’s real muscle and they are worried. You can see it, if you brave the shrill bloviations and glib japes and get close enough to look in their eyes. They feel the real change coming and they know. That’s why they’ve gotten louder and more shrill and are taking shots at anything that moves. The gnawing feeling in their guts is telling them, more and more, that they don’t have the stranglehold on us they think they do.

And part of fighting back, of being Conan instead of Captain America? Calling them on things:

Hold Obama and his Administration in toto to standards we’d expect and demand from friends, neighbors, businesses we deal with, or our own children, ourselves. You get the picture.

If Obama says there will be transparency in governance and government…OK, Mr, President…where is that transparency?

If Obama and Pelosi and Reid claim their’s is or will be the most ethical ever…hold their feet to the fire. Not one step backward. Push back. Make it clear to the American people where the threats are and who is aiding and enabling those threats to grow. I am not willing to bet my life, nor that of my children, nor my grandchildren, on the misteps and platitudes of this Administration. Are you?

Not one step backward!

Calling them out is easy. When a “feminist” or a liberal attacks a woman because of her appearance call her out. Remember there were feminists during the last election that knew candidate Obama for was he was is. And others discovering his promises are smoke. An honest feminist or liberal will call out a misogynist no matter their politics or sex.

When the president says he wants a dialog take him up on the offer. And when he ignores it ask: why? Remember how many months has it been since Rush offered him time on his show to debate the issues with him and the White house still has its tail between its legs? Note the dismissive comments at the Tea Party Site by the brave acolytes of this White House. They know their leader’s strength is image not reality so his followers make excuses and insults. This is called fear.

Remember these guys over reach. Don’t forget the feared John Stewart was given a spanking by Bill Whittle and he apologizes publicly.

The worm continues to turn. We just have to keep fighting.

Update: The other McCain get it on the Misogyny bit:

Please remind me of this video, next time a feminist calls me a misogynist.

And he fights!

I’ve always been a DC comics kind of guy, but on occasion I would really enjoy a marvel story and after reading John Hawkins article I thought of What If 43: What if Conan was stranded in the 20th century?

The story was interesting and if you want more detail to the story you can check out this blog, but there is one particular moment that really strikes home.

During the course of the story Conan forms a gang and they break into a museum. When the alarm goes off Captain America shows up and the fight begins.

Captain America being Captain America kicks, punches and hits Conan with his shield. It rocks Conan something nasty. Conan being Conan has a different strategy.

What happens when you come to a swordfight without a sword.
What happens when you come to a swordfight without a sword.

Conan and his gang escape and Captain America is left bleeding at the scene.

This comes back to the Jacksonian way of combat:

Jacksonian America has clear ideas about how wars should be fought, how enemies should be treated, and what should happen when the wars are over. It recognizes two kinds of enemies and two kinds of fighting: honorable enemies fight a clean fight and are entitled to be opposed in the same way; dishonorable enemies fight dirty wars and in that case all rules are off.

Our friends on the left tend to use jacksonian tactics against us on the right while trying Wilsonian tactics abroad. We tend to do the opposite because frankly we see our countrymen as…our countrymen.

Politically this can’t continue as Hawkins notes:as Hawkins notes:

For example, look at the media jihad that was shamelessly launched against Sarah Palin’s family. There was a not-so-subtle message being sent: if you’re a Republican woman, you better stay in the shadows or we’re going to destroy your family to get you. The left gave the same kind of intrusive, public scrutiny to “Joe the Plumber,” a private citizen who merely asked an inconvenient question to Barack Obama. While conservatives defended both Sarah and Joe as we complained incessantly about the way they were treated, the reality is that the Democrats paid no price whatsoever for the out-of-bounds attacks.

Instead of continuing to complain, here’s a better idea. Why don’t conservatives do opposition research on the journalists endlessly running stories about Bristol Palin and Joe the Plumber? Have they ever been arrested? Whom do they own property with? Have they ever been paid to do a speech for someone and then run a favorable news story about him? Certainly Keith Olbermann’s personal life is just as newsworthy as Joe the Plumber’s, and the details of Maureen Dowd’s life are just as noteworthy as those of Bristol Palin — are they not?

I think Hawkins is right it’s time for us to be a lot less Captain America politically and a lot more Conan. Otherwise we are going to get a sword in the arm.

How does the congress prevent Arlen Specter’s defection from allowing republicans from blocking judicial nominations? You change the rules of course but Legal Insurrection says not so fast:

I don’t think it is likely that the Rules will be amended for a particular nomination. First, the rule requiring a minority vote only comes into play if Republicans decide to fight a nominee to the bitter end. Assuming Souter is replaced with a roughly equivalent moderate liberal, I don’t see Republicans picking this fight. The existence of the rule itself should have a moderating effect on the choice made.

Second, changing the rules mid-session would itself be the cause of opposition to a candidate, and would taint any nomination before a vote of the full Senate. Remember, as of now the Democrats still do not have a filibuster-proof majority in the entire Senate, and even if Al Franken eventually gets seated, it would take only one of the handful of moderate Democrats to oppose a nominee for the filibuster to succeed. By forcing a nominee through committee by changing the rules, the administration would be increasing the likelihood of a problem.

Third, Harry Reid shot himself in the foot on rule changes by insisting that Roland Burris could not be seated without presenting the necessary Secretary of State certification. Reid’s words about the sanctity of Senate Rules would come back to haunt him if the Senate changed the Judiciary Committee Rules just to force through a nomination.points out this is a statement that Harry Reid should have taken to heart.

Harry should have taken President Coolidge’s words to heart but the real killer is #1. Every left wing pressure group will be looking for the big payoff in judicial nominations. They will be pushing the president to nominate someone as far left as possible. That increases the chances that republicans with frankly nothing to lose will play every card they have in the deck.

Via Laura at the Green room come a link to this incredible story:

The cause gained momentum in August 2007 when Obama, then an Illinois senator, introduced Pigford legislation about six months into his presidential campaign.

Although the case was hardly a hot-button political issue, it had drawn intense interest among African-Americans in the rural South. It was seen as a way for Obama to reach out in those areas, where he was not well-known and where he would need strong support to win the Democratic primary.

The proposal won passage in May as sponsors rounded up enough support to incorporate it into the 2008 farm bill.

Except for now the president is opposing his own bill and trying to limit claims. As Laura says:

If Obama gets his way, those black farmers who he himself said were unjustly victimized by the USDA will now get about $1500.

He’s just blown over three trillion dollars and is poised to spend even more. Another three billion is a drop in the bucket. He could allow banks to pay back their TARP funds if he’s too short on cash to repay debts that he said just a year ago the federal government legitimately owed.

He disproportionately taxes the poor. He didn’t race to the scene of a natural disaster. He refuses to spend money on black students and now on black farmers. So according to the rules and standards set by the left over the last eight years, doesn’t Obama qualify as a racist?

The head of the National Black farmers association John Boyd is confused:

“You can’t blame it on the Bush administration anymore, I can’t figure out for the life of me why the president wouldn’t want to implement a bill that he fought for as a U.S. senator.”

I can. This president has been compared to Abe Lincoln an awful lot but he is like Lincoln in only one way; Lincoln was famous for keeping a promise only as long as he considered it was worthwhile: “Bad promises are better broken than kept.” he said.

A lot of Americans are going to be finding out over the next 3 3/4 years how many of this president’s promises he considers “bad”.

The Souter resignation does several interesting things.

First of all of course President Obama is going to pick a liberal jurist to the court. With the more of Sen Specter there is absolutely no chance of blocking it even if they wanted to. He could pick Ward Churchill or Bill Ayers and we couldn’t block him.

It is inconceivable that this pick will not enrage and energize conservatives and republicans. If I wrote the worm turning post today it would be the newest item.

Second of all it demonstrates that elections matter! John McCain was not the ideal candidate but I held a sign for him for 7 hours on election day and I’m proud of it. If you are a conservative that stayed home or voted for President Obama remember if this liberal pick stays on the court for 30 years…you helped do this.

Third of all in terms of an indirect proof. This is going to highlight the pro abortion credentials of President Obama in the strongest terms possible. It is the single biggest disaster for Fr. Jenkins at Notre Dame that could happen. This highlights the unsuitability of President Obama for ND. It also puts Doug Kimec and the phony Catholics at Catholics United in the limelight, what will they say.

This is the type of thing that God does, he gives people opportunities to aid in their salvation. A situation is given where people have a chance to make the right choice. Catholics United, Doug Kimec, Fr. Jenkins and even President Obama have all been given the chance to do the right thing. That chance is a gift from God (all those ND Rosaries didn’t hurt either)

What is done with that chance is where the rubber meets the road.

Update: Legal Insurrection via the green room says president Obama’s candidate for the court might be blockable by republicans after all. Thanks to …Arlen Specter

Now this is interesting. Specter could allow a nominee out of committee if Specter was a member of the Republican minority, but as part of the majority, he’s just another vote. Here are the other Republicans: Orrin Hatch, Chuck Grassley, Jon Kyl, Jeff Sessions, Lindsey Graham, John Cornyn, and Tom Coburn.

The weak link is Lindsey Graham, who was a member of the Gang of 14. If Graham says the course, the Republicans may not be able to stop runaway spending, military retrenchment, and an interrogation witch hunt. But Specter may have handed Republicans a gift.

Has Specter’s changeover become official? Can republicans pull him from the committee because of his announced change. It will be interesting to find out.

Slept in today

7:05 a.m. News of the affair made her sick, oh that’s why the media didn’t report on the affair, because they didn’t want to make Mrs. Edwards sick

7:09 a.m. Interesting perspective on now trying to push Kennedy.

7:12 a.m. I’m telling you what he meant to say. What would we do without Jake Tapper.

7:23 a.m. All I’m hearing is identity identity identity. It’s as if jurisprudence doesn’t matter at all.

7:35 a.m. Name a white conservative that objects to Clarence Thomas.

7:37 a.m. Smiley says that there is a black man on the court even one he doesn’t like, but no Hispanics and it isn’t fair.

8:10 a.m. Doesn’t the US need to stop leading? What an insane idea.

8:13 a.m. Hey this guy is bright, lets find a new dictator to give Iraq to, everyone at the table agrees apparently.

8:15 a.m. Gleb seems to forget how many of the liberal either didn’t support the cold war or who were on the other side.

8:22 a.m. I don’t think that Mark Levin is going to be talked about this week on the New York Times book review.

8:24 a.m. The idea president Obama is like Johnson is only true in terms of the wind blows business.

8:34 a.m. The Biden flu, wonderful.

8:43 a.m. Supporting vets good.

8:59 a.m. Happy early birthday Mika.

I haven’t even finished today’s Impromptus column and it is necessary to link to it and quote two bits of it.

First on Sen Specter:

Beware the politician who needs the office.

Second on Perez of Israel:

I want to examine something that appeared in an Associated Press report, here. We read, “Peres, a Nobel Peace Prize laureate, is a world-renowned Mideast peacemaker, while Netanyahu has a hawkish reputation.”

1) Peres is a renowned peacemaker, is he? Okay: What peace has he made? Ms. AP Reporter, please tell me what peace he has made. People in the Middle East will be curious to know, too.

2) Sometimes the hawks are in the best position to make peace — see Menachem Begin.

3) Peres and Rabin shared the Nobel Peace Prize with Yasser Arafat — lest one has forgotten.

Okay, I think three’s enough points for now.

Awesome, simply awesome. You want principled conservatism and straightforward truth? Here it is.