So Jodie Evans, one of the founders of anti-American hate group Code Pink, who told a Gold Star mom that her son deserved to die in Iraq, is hosting a fundraiser for Jerry Brown, Democratic Party candidate for governor of California.

It's amazing the double standards Democrats/liberals seem to get away with. (See, for example, Obama, Bill Ayers and Jeremiah Wright).

Just try to imagine if Meg Whitman, or any other Republican candidate, were to attend a fundraiser hosted by Fred Phelps of the "Westboro Baptist Church" (he's a Democrat, but leave that aside for the sake of argument). Her political career would end that day. Yet Jerry Brown will remain a viable candidate.

Michael Medved has a good column today refuting many of the myths from supporters of redefining marriage.

The decision by federal judge Vaughan Walker to invalidate California’s Proposition 8 both recycles and revives some of the tired, misleading clichés regarding the same sex marriage controversy. These distortions demand direct, concise correction and rebuttal.

Read the whole thing here.

President Obama on the Gulf oil spill:

"We will not rest until this well is shut, the environment is repaired and the cleanup is complete."

Just Words.

Here is a good rebuttal to the Washington Post's propagandizing against the new school curriculum standards in Texas. Another day, another effort to stir up hysteria against some policy that goes against the liberal grain. Maybe Los Angeles and San Francisco will add Texas to their list of states to boycott.

From The Washington Post:

A St. Louis scientist who was among a select group picked by the Obama administration to pursue solutions to the Gulf of Mexico oil spill has been dropped because of controversial writings on his website.

So much for free speech.

What happened to President Obama's pledge to separate ideology from science? These were evidently just more empty words.

It looks like crushing any opposition to certain left-wing political views is a higher priority for some than stopping an ongoing environmental catastrophe (even, like here, when those political views have nothing at all to do with the issue at hand). And unlike "climate change", the oil spill isn't some theoretical future threat, it's happening right now, and it needs to be cleaned up, right now. But the Obama administration would apparently rather cater to extremist ideologues than do everything to facilitate that cleanup. The Left's war on science, reason, and freedom continues...

Byron York at The Washington Examiner made a top ten list of the dumbest things people have said about the new law to fight illegal immigration in Arizona. It must have been tough to pick only ten.

In the interest of bipartisanship, he might have included this bit of hysterical idiocy from Republican Congressman Connie Mack of Florida.

Silver lining: All the hysterics and demagoguery have failed to convince a majority of Americans. By 51% to 39%, people support the new law in Arizona.

At a commencement speech today at the University of Michigan, President Obama said, "...what troubles me is when I hear people say that all of government is inherently bad..."

Some enterprising professional journalist, if there are ever any around the president some time, ought to ask President Obama for a specific example of someone who said that all government is inherently bad. We hear the tea partiers saying that the government ought to be limited to its proper constitutional role. If President Obama can back up his assertion with some facts, he should do so. Reporters should do their job for a change and press him to do so. This seems to be nothing more than another example of the president simply making things up for rhetorical effect.

The president also said, "Throwing around phrases like 'socialists' and 'Soviet-style takeover,' 'fascists' and 'right-wing nut' — that may grab headlines" But it also "closes the door to the possibility of compromise..."

We'll see if the president's fellow Democrats will listen to his advice and tone down their hysterical and extreme rhetoric that's been directed at the fine citizens of Arizona for the last week. We'll see what kind of rhetoric comes from the illegal alien marches scheduled for today in several cities.

When leftists/Democrats get backed into a corner, you can always expect them to play the race card. We now have allegations from a few Democrats that racial and other slurs were shouted at congressmen by a few people in the crowd protesting against the impending takeover of America's health care system. The Democrats' propaganda wing of leftist blogs and media outlets like MSNBC have gone into high gear pushing the story, trying to smear all the protesters as extremists, bigots, etc. A few thoughts:

• Without evidence, we don't accept the allegations. The Democrats and their media allies have not provided any evidence. There's lots of video of the protesters, and none so far backs up the charges.
• We don't know who the people are who allegedly shouted these slurs. They could have been plants from some left-wing group. Anyone can show up at a public gathering.
• If the allegations are true, the people who shouted are despicable. The (not alleged but actual) attempts to smear all the protesters and the entire tea party movement based on allegations about a few people in a public crowd are also despicable. Calling a black congressman the "N word" because he supports a bad piece of legislation is evil. Calling people racists because they oppose a piece of legislation is also evil.
• None of this has anything at all to do with the massive fraud that the Democrats in Congress appear ready to inflict on America.

Via Yahoo Finance:

The Congressional Budget Office said Friday that rolling back a programmed cut in Medicare fees to doctors would cost $208 billion over 10 years. If added back to the health care overhaul bill, it would wipe out all the deficit reduction, leaving the legislation $59 billion in the red. The so-called doc fix was part of the original House bill. Because of its high cost, Democrats decided to pursue it separately.

This is just one more example of the total fraud and gimmickry that make up Obamacare. This is like saying that if I have a $300 per month car payment, it will be cheaper if I send two checks for $150 each. It's a total scam. This is the kind of financial trickery that people in the private sector go to jail for.

At a rally today in Ohio pushing for his planned health care takeover, President Obama said:

"...this proposal would make preventive care free so you don't have to pay out-of-pocket for tests that keep you healthy."

Does the president, who is known for saying anything to make a point without regard for the facts, really believe that, or does he know it's ridiculous, but is saying it anyway? Which is the scarier proposition?

This has to be one of the most biased "news" items ever from the AP, and that's saying something.

It begins:

"A far-right faction of the Texas State Board of Education succeeded Friday in injecting conservative ideals into social studies, history and economics lessons that will be taught to millions of students for the next decade."

Really? A "far-right faction"? Sounds almost like there's going to be some sort of military coup at the next Texas State Board of Education meeting.

Later in the article:

Ultraconservatives wielded their power over hundreds of subjects this week, introducing and rejecting amendments on everything from the civil rights movement to global politics.

Oh my! Not just conservatives, but "ultraconservatives"! You can almost smell the extra evil.

This "news" item reads almost like a post on some nutty left-wing blog like the Daily Kos or Think Progress.

So what does this sinister, "far-right faction" want to teach our kids? According to the AP:

Teachers in Texas will be required to cover the Judeo-Christian influences of the nation's Founding Fathers, but not highlight the philosophical rationale for the separation of church and state. Curriculum standards also will describe the U.S. government as a "constitutional republic," rather than "democratic," and students will be required to study the decline in value of the U.S. dollar, including the abandonment of the gold standard.

....

According to the AP, "Another amendment deleted a requirement that sociology students 'explain how institutional racism is evident in American society.'"

Just try to find an AP news item, referencing events in the United States, that refers to Democrats or liberals as "far-left" or "ultraliberal". Notice that the writer doesn't seem to find anything politicized or "far-left" in teaching children about "institutional racism." For liberals, liberal views are just normal and apolitical, it's only conservative (or simply non-left) views that are suspect and need to be labeled or critiqued. That would be just fine in an editorial piece, it has no place in a supposedly objective news item.