Ted Nugent has a well deserved (and proud) reputation for being loud, crude and crazy, but here, he makes a calm, reasoned and very sensible case for gun rights.

This is several years old, but still relevant.

The title seems glib but sadly it is true.  According to some of the Democrats, having the audacity, the sheer gall to protest about Health Care means you are a political terrorist and are working out of the Nazi playbook:

Taking a page right out of Nancy Pelosi’s playbook of stating that town hall meeting protestors are sporting swastikas thus implying that they are Nazis, low rated radio host Bill Press is now accusing them of using Nazi tactics in a sanity-challenged column. This follows on the heels of Press’ attack on the protestors on Fox News as reported earlier this week by Seton Motley here in NewsBusters. Here is Press going completely over the edge on the subject of the protestors in his column:

…Taking a page right out of a Nazi playbook, organizers bus in professional protestors and arm them with instructions on how to take over meetings, shut down discussion, shout over any pro-health care reform speakers, and then post video of the resulting chaos on YouTube. It’s mob rule, pure and simple.

Source:  Hot Air via Clever S Logan (great name)

Trackposted to The Right Nation, Nuke’s, The Pink Flamingo, third world county, Woman Honor Thyself, and The World According to Carl, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.

I could not make any of the local Tea Parties, to my great disappointment.

So rather than try and express my own thoughts, I collected links from the day, via Memeorandum.

These links are the good, the bad, the positive and the negative and the fair and the biased.  Browse to your hearts content.

My only comment is that the tea parties made a huge impact, not just on the people bragging about them, but also on the liberals belittling them.

In other words…they worked. I have rarely seen this many links on a single topic…

Scenes From the DC Tea Party: More Photos! — Here’s a supplement to Aaron’s great photo spread from this afternoon’s rally. — Remember: Fox News reported on these rallies. It didn’t promote them! — This was a popular theme, along with references to images of President Obama’s bow to the King of Saudi Arabia.

A NASHVILLE TEA PARTY PICTURE from InstaPundit reader Kathie Fuston

Amanda Terkel / Think Progress: DC Tea Party Protesters Agree: ‘Chairman Maobama’ …

Amanda Marcotte / pandagon.net: Royalists want a little revolutionary action of their own

The title may sound a bit tongue in cheek, but it is serious.

In WW2 after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, we as a nation interned those whom we identified with the enemy.  We had the best of intentions of course, but it was still wrong to preemptively act against those who had not acted against us.

So after 9/11, we didn’t round up all the Arabs or Muslims, and intern them  We watched.  And we got dinged by the ACLU and other groups for profiling

The argument was that just because we had been attacked by young male Muslims we had no right to be suspicious of other young male Muslims.

Perhaps they were right, though I think there are nuances to the discussion that bear further consideration.

But lately another group is under fire for being dangerous and is being watched closely:  White supremacists.

It is really a no brainer.  They are hostile to blacks, we just elected  a black president, so there is no real surprise that they will be watched with the gimlet eye, waiting to see if their inherent hatred of non whites will spur them to try and take action.

This is par for the course for atheists:  Take a practice that harms no one and try to suppress it because  it might force them to confront the fact that some Americans believe in God.

The head of an atheist group that has filed a lawsuit against prayer at Barack Obama’s presidential inauguration says the government is picking a winner between “believers” and “those who don’t believe” and subjecting atheists and agnostics to someone else’s religious beliefs.

Let me take a moment and note that watching someone pray is not subjecting them to religious beliefs as much as it is allowing them to practice their beliefs, which is supposed to be a part of our freedoms.  The person who should make the call is the guy getting sworn in, who wants the prayer, no one else.

No one can force an atheist to pray, and you would think that decency and respect would suggest that the atheists might just be quiet.

But no.

Dan Barker, co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation, has joined with Michael Newdow, who fought to have the words “under God” removed from the Pledge of Allegiance, in a federal lawsuit seeking to enjoin the Presidential Inaugural Committee from sponsoring prayers at the official inauguration. 

So as I read through my many daily reads, there were too many stories I wanted to talk about to do them all, so here is a quick mask up.

Suppression of free speech in New York?

Apparently.  Specifically this is a buffer zone for protesters, and mandatory prosecution of harassment.  Of course this is all those rabid anti war nutbags protesting the Military recruiters, right?  No, it is to praying abortion protesters at abortion clinics.

You can stand in front of a church yelling “Mormon scum,” but if you pray in front of a taxpayer-subsidized abortion clinic, watch out.

Emily L. e-mails:

I thought you might find this interesting. NYC is considering legislation to create a 15 foot buffer zone between abortion protestors and the clinics. The legislation would also enable the clinics to press harrassment charges against protestors, even if the patients don’t wish to pursue charges. This is one opinion piece about the proposal: link.

Even more interesting was the flurry of Letters to the Editor sent to the Daily News today. This is from Planned Parenthood:

Free choice protected

If you connect the dots between racism, sexism and democrats you end up with one word:

Hijacked.

In both cases we had serious social issues.  We had serious social revolution.  We had real change and social enlightenment.

And we ended up with both issues being hijacked by the democrat party for political gain, with many of the advances and changes being lost in the betrayal.

In both cases equality and empowerment were traded for victim hood and entitlement.

I am no social expert on either topic.  But I can speak to change because I have seen change.

I have seen peoples attitudes shift and their determination to be fair and to ignore race and sex.

But I have also seen opportunists.  People who stir the flames of distrust to gain power and prestige.

I have seen racism and sexism offered as default explanations to imaginary problems.

I have seen white males herded into an atavistic corner, and told they are racists and sexists and that they can never change because of institutional discrimination and white male privilege.

Yes indeed, it is clearly happening, that fact is not being disputed.  The only real question is “by who”.  This, by the way I regard as a serious issue.  I left Blogger 3 years ago to give my blog more creative control and security, and now I am even more glad I did.

We start at Sister Toldjah:

Just another example of how far some far left Obama supporters are willing to go to shut down criticism about the Obamessiah? Bloggasm and Stop The ACLU take a look.

I haven’t had much of a chance to dive too deeply into the controversy, but it wouldn’t be surprising to find out this indeed was happening, considering how so many far left Obama supporters react at the slightest hint of criticism of Barry Oh.

Yea, that much is certainly true.  The supporters of Obama defend him with a religious fervor.  Those who criticize him are essentially heretics.

Even denying Global Warming is a lesser sin then doubting Obama.

Stop the ACLU continues:

Google Shuts Down Anti-Obama Sites on its Blogger Platform

Props to the Dutch Court for not folding under Islamofacist pressure.

Dutch court: Geert Wilders has free-speech right to criticize Islam

Amazing, the things that are litigable these days. This wasn’t the public prosecution hinted at by the Dutch government last week but “merely” a private suit filed by the Netherlands Islamic Foundation to have criticism of Islam deemed an “incitement” under Dutch law and thereby worthy of being censored. Note the rationale:

The NIF wanted to know if Wilders had broken the law with his public declaration in August last year that the Koran is a fascist book and comments that Mohammed was a barbarian.

According to the judge, the term fascism must be seen in a broader context. The NIF associated it with the Holocaust and ‘other evil practices from Nazi Germany’. But fascism should, said the judge, be seen as ‘a collective term for ideologies which fundamentally embrace a totalitarian political system which leaves no room for people with other ideas’.