…(which portsiders aren’t misguided?) get their due herein, one, a punk (I truly cannot locate, after much thought, a more accurate descriptive) whose celebre eminates from among the columns of the New York Times, from his fellow Democrat and undoubtedly the best former mayor New York has seen in my lifetime despite his political career having been spent on that side of the aisle, the other, a braying, disgusting, megablubbery, smelly looking, treasonous pig comedienne cum TV personality, from one of the more aggressive right thinking political commentators of today.

First, there is Koch on Kristof.

The hostile views that Nicholas Kristof expresses in his March 18, 2007 column correspond with those held by former president Jimmy Carter.

Kristof is distressed that the Democratic Party leadership is too supportive of the State of Israel. He says that he prefers the view of U.S. Senator and presidential candidate Barak Obama who recently stated, “Nobody is suffering more than the Palestinian people,” for which he says Obama was “scolded.”

Kristof does not mention that Palestinian suffering has in large part been brought on by the Palestinians’ own actions. Their leaders rejected the United Nations vote in 1947 dividing historic Palestine into two states: one Arab and one Jewish. They supported or actively participated in at least seven wars against Israel: the 1948 War of Independence, the 1967 Six-Day War, the 1968 War of Attrition, the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the 1982 Lebanon War [1] and the 2006 Lebanon War [2]. Their leadership declared two intifadas (insurrections) in 1987 and in 2002, which still goes on.

Imagine that! Another liberal who is comfortable with ignoring the facts in order to press a political agenda. Of course, he and his fellow members of the anti-Israel persuation have no choice but to employ the communistic technique of sweeping the truth under the rug in order to replace it with propaganda for consumption by the masses. If you simply gloss over the realities, you don’t have to work all that hard at revising history, modern or otherwise — sort of like lefty teachers do in schools these days, but let’s not digress, for once (that means you, Seth).

Kristof denounces Israel’s building “a better fence” or seeking “more weaponry.” What does he mean? That in his opinion Israel may not erect a fence to help keep the terrorists out? Does he suggest that the U.S. should deny the sale of new weapons to Israel unless it also makes them available to the Palestinians? Kristof’s tortured reasoning led to the fall of the Spanish Republic to which we would not sell arms to defend itself from Franco’s fascist armies which were supported by Hitler and Mussolini.

Liberals, who yearn desperately for the implementation of that provenly oppressive failure called socialism to “come to our rescue”, never miss an opportunity to opine that any and all democracies should bend over backwards to sabotage themselves in the face of the enemy. Thus the leeches over at the ACLU, for example, are forever using the courts in an attempt to erode the security measures the United States Government takes to repel terrorism from our shores, and the liberal anti-Israel crowd demands that the Jewish state tie their own hands and that the U.S. turn our backs on them in order to allow the forces of their terrorist enemy to destroy them.

Kristof clearly wants the U.S. and the Democrats seeking the presidency to end what every president since John F. Kennedy has called “a special relationship” with Israel — that of an ally — and create a new climate of neutrality. Even the Arabs have accepted that special U.S. relationship with Israel; nevertheless, they have asked the U.S. to take the role of mediator/broker, knowing that only the U.S. would be able to get Israel to make concessions based on hopes and promises rather than concrete confidence-building measures by the Palestinians and their supporters.

Emphasis mine.

************

The second subject of conservative OpEd attention is a truly twisted soul who is the epitome of ugliness inside and out, and who embodies treason in a most abrasive and wingnutty way, from a forum that used to be (prior to her arrival) a light hearted, acceptable-to-all political groups, womens’ talk show.

Here is O’Reilly on O’Donnell.

Armed with propaganda and dangerous with passion, Rosie O’Donnell has turned a morning coffee klatch TV program into Al Jazeera West. Where once “The View” dealt with menopause and shopping tips, the program now routinely assassinates the characters of anyone Ms. O’Donnell finds objectionable….

Read the entire column here.

All I can say about O’Donnell is that I find her to be one of the most offensive, disgusting TV personalities in existence and one who truly doesn’t merit citizenship in our great nation. I really don’t like to say derogatory things about women (no chauvenism intended, just a conservative Jewish upbringing and a profound appreciation and respect for the female of our species) but that horrible creature is a real toilet cake.

To that end, Thespis also has a thing or two to say regarding O’Donnell that aren’t exactly rosie (pun intended)…

I was perusing the comment section at another blog yesterday and read a liberal’s comment that made me thankful he and I were not in the same room — had we been, I probably would have strangled the son of a bitch out of sheer frustration. My own comment, in reply to his, was as restrained as possible, I believe it remained within, though pushing the envelope, the boundaries of respect due the owners of that most excellent site.

I mean, these people (not the owners of said most excellent site, but liberals) are such — such varmints!

Look.

They claim to be champions of human rights, for example. Here in America, human rights are honored more than they are anyplace else on earth. Freedom of speech? C’mon. Here, you can shout obscene jokes about the President from the rooftops if you feel like it.

In the Soviet Union, you’d have been hauled off to the Lubyanka, or perhaps Lefortovo Prison, in a heart beat, and not seen again for quite some time, if at all.

If they needed information they thought you might possess, there was none of this patty cakes BS like water boarding or playing loud music at you, they were somewhat more practical — maybe running some electricity through your genitals, or shooting you up with interesting chemicals like lysergic acid mixed with amatol that might get you to babbling, but might also scramble your brains permanently. Then again, permanently might have only meant a couple of hours, anyway.

So what did American liberals do? They extolled the virtues of communism in all its grand superiority over capitalism, even as they enjoyed instant gratification at the local mall while Soviet citizens were standing in bitter cold, in four and five hour lines, to buy a potato.

North Vietnam, an oppressive communist regime, invades the south, and our country defends the South Vietnamese against the north and its VietCong terrorist apparat. Liberals at home fight tooth and nail against the conflict. They influence politicians, who influence the war effort itself, prolonging it by several years. They eventually succeed in getting our troops pulled out. They rejoice. Ho Chi Minh’s communists sweep into South Vietnam and butcher hundreds of thousands of innocent people, then they enslave the country under said oppressive government.

Meanwhile, here in America, the liberals are celebrating their “victory”. They could care less about the fates of those poor souls thousands of miles away, human beings they’ve helped murder as surely as if they’d been there, splattering brains across the ground.

In the 1990s, there was brutal conflict in the Balkans. Muslims were slaughtering Christian Serbs, and Milosevic’s people were killing Muslims.

The EU, led by Germany, exploited the violence in order to get a foot in the door for influence in the Balkans. They altered intelligence reports and manipulated the media to paint a gruesome picture of Muslims being victimized via
“ethnic cleansing” by Milosevic’s people. Peaceful, nonviolent Muslims, victimized!

Then-boss liberal Bill Clinton bought into it and got us into it, and we helped eliminate a lot of obstacles al-Qaeda and fellow travellers faced in the day-to-day ethnic cleansing operations they were engaged in over there.

Milosevic was arrested and tried for his “crimes” — and died in custody five years later without ever being convicted of anything.

Muslims in the Balkans continue murdering Christian Serbs to this day.

Onward to Iraq, and to the global war we are waging to defend ourselves against the abolition of liberty under Islamic rule.

There we are again — which side are liberals on?

The other side, of course, as usual!

America’s enemies, any enemies, have never had a better friend than a liberal.

You want some liberal friends? Just declare war on the United States and they’ll be coming out in droves to shake your hand or, if requested, stick their noses wherever you wish.

Liberals….

Certainly not on our side, ever, yet when you state this obvious truth, they will actually argue the opposite, as often as not with that smug smirk that brings out the strangler in many of us….

Not too long ago, I posted about the coming of the North American Union, an agenda which, much to my chagrin, is being engineered by the man I voted for twice for President and his counterparts in Mexico and Canada.

Some commenters took this either with a grain of salt, some with a degree of alarm, some, I thought, may have humored me with their comments.

As they say, it’s all good. The very concept sounds both farfetched and absurd, like the plot of a Robert Ludlum novel or the fantasies of a serious paranoid.

After all, conspiracy theories abound, right?

I had thought my research on the subject was pretty extensive, in fact, somewhere along the line I was reminded of my ex-wife’s own “ravings”, back in the days of the Carter Administration, when she talked about then National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski’s ambitions toward what was called the Trilateral Commission.

In those days I was still kinda’ sorta’ liberal and pretty laid back, and to tell the truth, couldn’t give the proverbial “flying fuck” about such things. Please excuse mah French (spit!)….

In the comments section of my post on the North American Union ambitions of those involved, the forever awesome Always On Watch suggested that I contact a great blog called Sixth Column, who had been following the NAU proceedings for some time. I did.

We resolved to share information on anything our respective research unearthed on the subject. In that quarter, they have thus far kicked my ass, LOL.

An emailed article I recently received provides the entire history, names, methods, intentions, chronology and all, of events leading up to what is now the plan for the North American Union. It is lengthy and will require some time, but I urge you to read it in its entirety.

It should convince you, in alarming detail, of what is to come in the next four years, no matter what else occurs in the political spectrum of the United States of America.

It is here.

As I said last time out, we are indeed in grave trouble, because our very sovereignty is about to be sacrificed on the altar of corporate expediency. While our future Congresses and POTUSes will govern our country, they will be like state legislatures, while extranational congresses determine the details of our economy (a collective with Mexico and Canada), eventually becoming part of a global collective consisting of the EU, the NAU, the SAU, the AU, etc….

We are in big trouble here, a world government awaits just around the corner, and most unfortunately, the politicians who might be able to prevent it are being kept outside the loop.

As I said in my previous post about this, the involved congresses/parliaments, etc involved herein have been kept in the dark about it, as has the media.

I am wondering whether we are going to wake up and deal with this, or whether we’re simply going to drift into it in blissful ignorance, becoming an entirely different country….

ULTRA-MAJOR and MEGA-GRATEFUL hat tip to CUBED!

And the Democrats wanted to elect John Kerry to be the President Of The United States?

As Big Dog so rightly asks, do the words of the Senator and former Presidential candidate from Massachusettes reflect his own thoughts, or those of the Democratic Party as a whole?

I mean, they did nominate and support him in his bid to become the leader of the country….

Well, they’ve done it again.

The ACLU and fellow traitors to America, getting no satisfaction from Congress in the way of sabotaging our country’s self defense capabilities against terrorism, have once again resorted to finding a sleazy leftist federal judge to employ as a pro-tem, one person legislature, a judge appointed by former President Jimmy Carter — I know, that’s pretty surprising, right? Not! — no less — to declare the NSA’s warrantless wiretapping operation — the very type of protective measure that only just saved thousands of people from being blown up on trans-Atlantic flights — illegal.

It’s truly amazing what kind of crud finds its way onto the federal bench, just look at the 9th Circus Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco — well, don’t look at it if you have a weak stomach, like viewing the judge in question, Anna Diggs Taylor, looking at it might inspire vomiting from any patriotic American. It’s interesting that the traitoress is in Detroit, one of our domestic enclaves of large Islamic population — Islam is, after all, the enemy she seeks to aid and abet.

We can at least be grateful that President Taylor’s judgment won’t be the last on the matter. The Justice Department immediately announced it will appeal and the injunction has been stayed for the moment. But her decision is all the more noteworthy for coming on the heels of the surveillance-driven roll up of the terrorist plot in Britain to blow up U.S.-bound airliners. In this environment, monitoring the communications of our enemies is neither a luxury nor some sinister plot to chill domestic dissent. It is a matter of life and death.

{Emphasis added mine}

I like the way the author of the Opinion Journal piece refers to the treasonous twit as “President Taylor” — it seems that a lot of liberal judges these days are electing themselves to high office, though usually promoting themselves only to the level of congressional majorities. The political left has been abusing the courts thus for some time now, using them to “legislate” dubious agendas they are unable to obtain from the people we elect to address the very same issues. What judges like Taylor need is to be hauled before Congress and slapped down on C-Span, put firmly in their places on national television, reminded that they are judges, not senators, representatives or the President.

Whatever happened to, “Hey, bitch, this is my corner!”?

Luckily, the self important Anna Diggs Taylor (it’s good that somebody digs her, no country loving American would) hardly has the final say in the matter — a higher court will undoubtedly give her ruling short shrift.

So let’s set aside the judge’s Star Chamber rhetoric and try to examine her argument, such as it is. Take the Fourth Amendment first. The “unreasonable search and seizure” and warrant requirements of that amendment have their roots in the 18th-century abuses of the British crown. Those abuses involved the search and arrest of the King’s political opponents under general and often secret warrants.

Judge Taylor sees an analogy here, but she manages to forget or overlook that no one is being denied his liberty and no evidence is being brought in criminal proceedings based on what the NSA might learn through listening to al Qaeda communications. The wiretapping program is an intelligence operation, not a law-enforcement proceeding. Congress was duly informed, and not a single specific domestic abuse of such a wiretap has yet been even alleged, much less found.

As for the First Amendment, Judge Taylor asserts that the plaintiffs–a group that includes the ACLU and assorted academics, lawyers and journalists who believe their conversations may have been tapped but almost surely weren’t–had their free-speech rights violated because al Qaeda types are now afraid to speak to them on the phone.

Heh heh.

Update: Old Soldier has a great post up on this also, with links to still other posts.

It’s truly amazing how far a failed liberal ex-President will go to try and claim a favorable place in the history books, isn’t it?

Jimmy Carter: Punishing Innocent Palestinians is a Crime

By
Jimmy Carter
7 May 2006

This article was published in the May 7, 2006, issue of the International Herald Tribune

Innocent Palestinian people are being treated like animals, with the presumption that they are guilty of some crime. Because they voted for candidates who are members of Hamas, the United States government has become the driving force behind an apparently effective scheme of depriving the general public of income, access to the outside world and the necessities of life.

Overwhelmingly, these are school teachers, nurses, social workers, police officers, farm families, shopkeepers, and their employees and families who are just hoping for a better life…

Right, but unfortunately, the vast sums of aid money these folks are suddenly not receiving are not sent directly to the recipients indicated in the former single-term President’s Op-Ed, they are entrusted to the political leadership above the people Mr. Carter refers to, and disbursement is left up to those same leaders. The leaders are terrorists. They would get a good deal here, pay the health care, education, law enforcement professionals, the social and farm workers and all, and also buy explosives, RPG-7s, Stinger units and missiles, ammo, AKs, etc.
Use some of the money to compensate families for members who blow themselves up to kill people they don’t even know. What a deal!

It is almost a miracle that the Palestinians have been able to orchestrate three elections during the past 10 years, all of which have been honest, fair, strongly contested, without violence and with the results accepted by winners and losers. Among the 62 elections that have been monitored by us at the Carter Center, these are among the best in portraying the will of the people.

Yeah, Jimbo, that’s why Hamas and Fatah members are blowing each other away, even as we speak.

One clear reason for the surprising Hamas victory for legislative seats was that the voters were in despair about prospects for peace.

Yes, indeed, what better way to achieve peace than to vote terrorists into positions of political leadership? Do you know, Mr. Carter, that I was a Democrat, and a pretty liberal one at that, until your Presidency turned me into a Republican?

The day after his party lost the election, Abbas told me that his own struggling government could not sustain itself financially with their daily lives and economy so severely disrupted, and access from Palestine to Israel and the outside world almost totally restricted. They were already $900 million in debt and had no way to meet the payroll for the following month. The additional restraints imposed on the new government are a planned and deliberate catastrophe for the citizens of the occupied territories, in hopes that Hamas will yield to the economic pressure.

Yo, Mahmoud, I have suggested this in a previous post or two: The late Yassir Arafat’s wife has inherited a large fortune paid out of Swiss banks, pilfered funds her corrupt career terrorist husband diverted from the same moneys you want us to keep giving you — why don’t you sue the embezzled bucks out of her?

With all their faults, Hamas leaders have continued to honor a temporary cease-fire, or hudna, during the past 18 months

Aha! So that’s why all those Jews died or suffered permanent injury in the course of a Pesach(Passover) bombing! It’s because you were honoring a “cease-fire”! I knew there had to be a reason!

Regardless of these intricate and long-term political interrelationships, it is unconscionable for Israel, the United States and others under their influence to continue punishing the innocent and already persecuted people of Palestine.

You mean…. We should feel guilty about not financing terrorism? Why, Mr. Carter! You’re such a liberal!

There is no way to predict what will happen in Palestine, but it would be a tragedy for the international community to abandon the hope that a peaceful coexistence of two states in the Holy Land is possible….

So we keep on financing terrorism, and perhaps eventually things will work themselves out.

Nothing like the practicalities of liberal reasoning.

The entire Jimmuh Cahtuh Op-Ed is here.

One major hat-tip to the illustrious Melanie Morgan. The alert from which the above fisked article emerged is an element of a well conceived program to censure Jimmuh Cahtuh for his profoundly anti-American diatribes in foreign countries. Here’s a so-called “statesman” who travels the globe badmouthing the very country that once trusted him(wrongly, as it turned out) with its leadership.

Below is the text of Melanie Morgan’s message:

Just when you thought Jimmy Carter couldn’t sink any lower, he has hit a new low.

In a newspaper OpEd piece published this weekend, former President Jimmy Carter has pathetically attacked the United States and defended the terrorist group, Hamas. Carter says we have engaged in a “crime” in our tough stance against these terrorists and he calls America to task.

Please realize that Hamas is the most deadly and bloodthirsty Palestinian terrorist group in the world.

You should read Jimmy Carter’s OpEd that was published over the weekend. It will help you to understand just why it is that we have launched the “Censure Jimmy Carter” campaign [website: http://www.CensureCarter.com] . When a former President writes that America is wrong, and the terrorists are right, then he sends a message to the rest of the world that undermines the mission our men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces are serving in.

Read Carter’s Op Ed:
http://www.cartercenter.org/doc2337.htm

OK, so did you read his “OpEd” - do you now understand how dangerous and destructive an influence Jimmy Carter has become?

Should you have any doubts about the deadly nature of the terrorist group, Hamas, then maybe pictures will help set things straight for you. Here’s a sampling of pictures of recent Hamas-led terrorist strikes.

NOTE: Some of these photographs are rather graphic, so please do not open them if you aren’t sure whether you can cope with the honest, brutal images of what terrorist attacks can do to innocent people.

http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/terror_96/photo5.gif

http://www.peacewithrealism.org/images/busbomb2.jpg

https://www.aipac.org/hamas/gallery/images/HamasSlideshow_03.jpg

Enough is enough. We cannot allow Jimmy Carter to continue to hurt America and set back our war against terrorism. We cannot sit idly while he rallies the world to oppose U.S. policies in the fight against terrorism.

It is time once and for all for the Congress to issue a resolution of Censure against Jimmy Carter, condemning him for his shameful conduct and letting the rest of the world know that his views do not represent the thoughts and feelings of the American people.

Please, support our Censure Jimmy Carter campaign.

SIGN THE PETITION:
http://www.CensureCarter.com

SUPPORT OUR TV AD CAMPAIGN (to get the message out):
http://www.CensureCarter.com/contribute

Jay, over at Stop The ACLU, reports that the American Civil Liberties Union(spit) is now suing the National Security Agency over their electronic intelligence gathering programs made public by the New York Times in recent weeks.

ACLU Sues NSA

by Jay on 01-17-06 @ 12:53 am Filed under ACLU, War On Terror, News
Another Big Hat tip to AJ Strata

Is the ACLU in contact with terrorists overseas? Well, of course they are! Now it seems they are paranoid of getting caught!

Saying that the Bush administration’s illegal spying on Americans must end, the American Civil Liberties Union today filed a first-of-its-kind lawsuit against the National Security Agency seeking to stop a secret electronic surveillance program that has been in place since shortly after September 11, 2001.
“President Bush may believe he can authorize spying on Americans without judicial or Congressional approval, but this program is illegal and we intend to put a stop to it,” said ACLU Executive Director Anthony D. Romero. “The current surveillance of Americans is a chilling assertion of presidential power that has not been seen since the days of Richard Nixon.”

The lawsuit was filed on behalf of a group of prominent journalists, scholars, attorneys, and national nonprofit organizations (including the ACLU) who frequently communicate by phone and e-mail with people in the Middle East. Because of the nature of their calls and e-mails, they believe their communications are being intercepted by the NSA under the spying program. The program is disrupting their ability to talk with sources, locate witnesses, conduct scholarship, and engage in advocacy. The program, which was first disclosed by The New York Times on December 16, has sparked national and international furor and has been condemned by lawmakers across the political spectrum.

In addition to the ACLU, the plaintiffs in today’s case are:

Authors and journalists James Bamford, Christopher Hitchens and Tara
McKelvey

Afghanistan scholar Barnett Rubin of New York University’s Center on
International Cooperation and democracy scholar Larry Diamond, a fellow
at the Hoover Institution

Nonprofit advocacy groups NACDL, Greenpeace, and Council on American
Islamic Relations, who joined the lawsuit on behalf of their staff and
membership

“The prohibition against government eavesdropping on American citizens is well-established and crystal clear,” said ACLU Associate Legal Director Ann Beeson, who is lead counsel in ACLU v. NSA. “President Bush’s claim that he is not bound by the law is simply astounding. Our democratic system depends on the rule of law, and not even the president can issue illegal orders that violate Constitutional principles.”

Note special emphasis on this line:

“Because of the nature of their calls and e-mails, they believe their communications are being intercepted by the NSA under the spying program.”

So, while our military fights the good fight, the ACLU are sueing over an inconvenience in its ability to talk to the very people who want to kill us all. Like I said before, the ACLU’s slogan of “Keep America Safe and Free” is an absolute lie. They care more about the imaginary rights of our enemies than any kind of safety for America. They have done absolutely nothing for America’s safety, and everything in their power to fight the efforts to protect America!

The American Civil Liberties Union undoubtedly speaks for someone, but not for the American people nor for the American way of life.

Nor, evidently, for the preservation of American life.

As I’ve opined in several posts in the past, being a journalist carries with it certain responsibilities, such as fair, unbiased, accurate reporting, of which, along with any vestige of personal honor among journalists, there is a paucity in today’s mainstream media. They are, after all, the people from whom the public expects to receive an accurate picture of current events, not the left-biased, incomplete accounts provided in order to make President Bush and his administration appear incompetent, evil tools of Haliburton and the rest of “Corporate America.”

But such is life, the only ethics followed by liberals are those that help them achieve whatever “ends” they want to achieve. What Clinton was able to do with impunity is a heinous crime if Bush does anything like it.

Another responsibility of an American journalist, and indeed of his or her entire organization, is to use common sense when deciding upon whether to print or broadcast a news item whose impartation to the public might engender a threat to the security of the nation and the very lives of its citizens.

The New York Times’ decision to inform the world of Bush and the NSAs’ monitoring of telephone calls between known or suspected al-Qaida contacts in the U.S. and people outside the country was the result of just such a decision. As the President told the Times a year ago, such action would do significant damage to the fabric of our homeland security structure.

Yet, in the interests of starting a politically partisan fueled brouhaha aimed at Bush, they went ahead and published the story.

I don’t care how they spin their “the people have a right to know” BS{that sentiment doesn’t seem to appear in the Constitution anyplace, only in the minds of the media), the bottom line is that, along with their as yet undiscovered inside informants, they have committed treason. They are traitors.

The New York Times reporters who broke the Bush “Spygate” story, as well as the paper’s top executives who approved its publication, face the very real prospect of criminal indictment by the Bush Justice Department - a lawyer involved in the 1971 Pentagon Papers battle is warning.

With a full-blown Justice Department investigation now underway, Harvey Silvergate tells the Boston Phoenix: “A variety of federal statutes, from the Espionage Act on down, give Bush ample means to prosecute the Times reporters who got the scoop, James Risen and Eric Lichtblau.”

Only time will tell if this really comes to pass, but I’d be behind it one hundred percent if it did, as it’s time some lessons were learned and some memories refreshed about the value of patriotism and the importance of preserving the republic over that of scoring cheap internel political victories.

Over at Stop The ACLU, Gribbit provides some background on founders of the ACLU that should be of interest to those who still believe that organization to be acting in, or ever having acted in, America’s best interests.

The ACLU - The Founding Fathers of Degeneracy & American Communism
by Gribbit on 01-05-06 @ 1:02 am Filed under ACLU, News

We at the Stop The ACLU blog and BlogBurst have been founded with the goal of bringing public awareness of the Anti-American activities of the American Civil Liberties Union. The fact is, the only thing about the ACLU that is American is the first word in the title of their organization. And this has been true since their founding.

We have been focused on the two prominent co-founders Roger Baldwin and Crystal Eastman; but the truth is that there were 7 others. People like Upton Sinclair and Clarence Darrow just to name a couple. But the most notorious of the founding “fathers” of the American Civil Liberals Union (no I didn’t spell that wrong) was Elizabeth “Gurley” Flynn.

Ms. Flynn was the co-founder who ended up being the National Chairman of the Communist Party in the US. A devout Communist who made several trips to the Soviet Union after the denunciation of Communism by Roger Baldwin in 1940. A move which had motives other than those publicized.

The public appearance of the denunciation was to give the illusion of distancing active members of the Communist party from the ACLU. When in fact it was a statement meant to be felt by Josef Stalin. Stalin enjoyed the support of people like Baldwin in the United States before the outbreak of war in Europe. Baldwin and Eastman being the strict pacifists that they were, had a total opposition to the Soviet Union entering the war. But they also saw the Soviet-German non-aggression treaty as a crime against the good Soviet people. So Flynn expulsion from the Executive Committee was a farce.

Flynn was indoctrinated into the Socialist mindset by her parents. At the age of 16 she gave her first speech on socialism entitled “What Socialism Will Do For Women.” A speech which subsequently got her expelled from high school.

At the age of 17 Flynn became an organizer for the International Workers of the World (IWW) and her career as a full time Socialist began. In 1920 she joined forces with Roger Baldwin, Crystal Eastman, Upton Sinclair, Clarence Darrow, Norman Thomas, Jane Addams, and John Dewey to form what we now know as the American Civil Liberties Union.

In 1936, Flynn joined the Communist Party in the United States. She wrote a feminist column for the Communist propaganda sheet the Daily Worker. Two years later, she was elected to the National Committee.

During World War II, Flynn worked tirelessly to get equal pay for women and establish day care centers for working mothers. Efforts which we here at Stop The ACLU applaud. Because contrary to the popular leftist belief, we here have strong feelings about the true equality of men and women of all races, creeds, and religions.

In 1942, she ran for Congress At-Large in New York and received only 50,000 votes.

After the war in 1948, 12 members of the Communist Party were arrested for plotting to overthrow the government by use of violence. Flynn attempted to gain their release but in 1951 she was arrested in a “second wave” of arrests and charged with violation of the Alien Registration Act and sentenced to 5 years at Alderson Women’s Penitentiary.

During her sentence she wrote a book entitled The Alderson Story: My Life as a Political Prisoner (1955).

Soon after her release from prison in 1961, Flynn was elected National Chairman of the Communist Party in the USA. She made several trips to the Soviet Union where in 1964 during a visit she died. She was given a State Funeral in Red Square then returned to be buried with her subversive friends Eugene Dennis, Bill Haywood and the Haymarket Martyrs.

These are they types of people that we are dealing with. This is the type of beginning that the ACLU was given. This is why they have been focused on ending American traditions and changing the structure of our government as founded in 1789.

…and we won’t be until everybody in America knows what a lying, treasonous, shameless, bogus, idiotarian, leftist propaganda generating, thoroughly liberal-biased source of disinformation you have become, abusing the reputation you earned back in the days when you were a respectable newspaper.

Columnist and blogger extraordinaire Michelle Malkin puts in her two cents, as succinct and on-point as always.