He's No Partisan, Bah

I don't pretend to know much about how judges are supposed to interpret the law, or not. It's always seemed to me that the job of a judge was to hand down common sense decisions based on legal precedent. If that is not the case, then what's the point of keeping records of decisions?

Anyway, I have been only somewhat interested in the Wisconsin Supreme Court campaign between Supreme Court Justice Shirley Abrahamson and Judge Randy Koschnik. I probably should be more interested, but of late the bantering back and forth has been boring and I have three kids to raise. Still, from the little I've read I see no reason not to vote for Abrahamson. Sure, I come from a more liberal background and would likely have voted for Abrahamson if I'd read or heard nothing at all up to the moment of voting itself, but I'm willing to take a look and I have. Randy Koschnik (“I'm not a partisan”) is an extremely partisan conservative. His beliefs about free society do not match mine.

Now more so than ever. I came into possession of a letter ostensibly written by William “Butch” Johnson. Mr. Johnson is CEO of Johnson Timber out of Hayward, Wisconsin. From the content of the letter it's fair to say he's a rabid /Republican/conservative. Lot's of them out there in the deep woods, apparently. Nothing new. What's troubling is the letter is authorized and paid for by Koschnik for Justice. In the letter, Johnson is asking for $100,000 real quick; like in the next ten days (the letter was date Feb. 11, 2009 – who knows if they reached that goal). As the Illusory Tenant points out, nothing like scaring open the pocketbooks.

Knowing that Judge Koschnik had pledged to run a clean campaign (he could begin by shaving off that hideous beard) I was curious to see if the rhetoric in the letter matched his promises.

Small businesses struggle while violent criminals walk free ...

Whoa, that's quite a dichotomy. That sentence makes it sound as though Justice Abrahamson is to blame for violent criminals ravaging small business in Wisconsin. Since the letter is preaching to the choir, who cares about facts backing the nonsense.

The quiet menace of tyranny lurks in the shadows as liberal judges seize power from the people's legislature. In all of this, one common thread emerges …

Quiet menace of tyranny? Liberal judges seizing power? Those be fighting words and hardly representative of running a “clean” campaign. I wonder if Peter DiGaudio is writing for the Koschnik campaign.

As a conservative and a leader in tbe Republican Party, I believe that three equal branches of government are necessary to maintaining a functioning government capable of defending individual rights and maintaining an even hand of justice.

Well, if that were true, Johnson would be voting for Justice Abrahamson, because the Supreme Court already tilts to the conservative side of the ledger; bought and paid for by Republican extremism. This is not about defending individual rights, it's about stacking the deck so right-wing business owners in Wisconsin like Mr. Johnson are provided a free hand.

On the other hand. Shirley Abrahamson has lost sight of these crucial principles. Instead. she is leading our entire legal system down a destructive path toward her revolutionary dream of a Supreme Court with unchecked power to re-create society in its own image.

Whose image? If the efforts to seat Annette Ziegler and Michael Gableman are any indication, it's conservatives who are being revolutionary and un-democratic in their attempt to re-create the Supreme Court in their own narrow-minded image.

Shirley Abrahamson is one of the leading liberal activist justices in the entire country. Her decisions have eroded the Rule of Law, undermined our economy, jeopardized the safety of families and breached the principles of our republican form of government. Your generous gift will help Judge Koschnick defeat the leading liberal scion of judicial abuse. I hope you'll respond in the next 10 days. Thanks again!

It's rhetoric like this that dominated the eight years of the Bush administration and contributed mightily to the 2006 election results and the smashing victory for decency and American values in the 2008 election. Apparently these thugs have not learned their lesson.

Conservative Flab

Hi, I'm Patrick X. You might not know it now, but I used to be an intellectual lightweight. But then I bought Conservative Flab (available for three easy payments of $19.95) from the Charlie Sykes show and now I'm a heavyweight. Yup – I got these amazing flabs just by listening to Charlie (and other conservative talk show hosts – radio frequencies included on cd) without getting out of my chair 24/7. I can't wait to share Charlie's diet secrets with you.

Charlie will show you his "Nobama” technique for quarter barrel flabs and adding intellectual heft all over your body. And don't worry if you can't type, he'll teach you the one-handed hunt and peck technique (keeping the other free for other activities) and you'll be ready to post in no time.

Secrets to Flabs

If you buy Charlie's cds, he'll demonstrate faux outrage that will keep you glued to your chair. Remember to get mom involved. She'll need to know when to bring you those tasty barbecued ribs (featured in the Conservative Flab Cookbook) while you write.

Cardio-Carrying Conservative

This is not your liberal next door neighbors video. You'll learn how to ignore your lawn, home upkeep and annoy your libtard neighbors with the general rundown appearance of your property – it's unimportant – as you listen to Charlie extoll the virtues of personal responsibility. If only those liberals could see you now down in your basement.

Flab Sculpt

Charlie will fine tune your racist commentary with the use of code words (“they” and more) you've always wanted to use but had to get up from your chair to do so. Now you can do it without moving a large muscle group.

Step-by-Step Nutrition Guide

Charlie will also share his secrets for exposing the great liberal myth of tolerance for others. You'll be able to shatter any libtard argument and still eat the foods you love!

Hips, Buns, and Thighs

Get ready to add to those stubborn problem areas. With the help of Charlie Sykes, you'll be out of your skinny jeans in no time and will have joined the legion of conservative bloggers nationwide fighting liberals, socialists and personal hygeine.

If you don't completely transform your body within 30 days just like I did, Charlie will keep your money and chastise you personally on-line and on his radio show (hey, at least you got on). So what are you waiting for? C'mon, let's battle liberalism together.

Stratergizing Blame

Republican (conservative) strategy for placing the blame for the ills of the economy:

Blame minorities and Barney Frank (you know, because he talks funny and he's, ick, gay).

Greedy, rich, white bankers couldn't possibly share in any blame.

Unbelievable ... Well, Maybe Not

The words are just beginning to fly regarding this editorial cartoon in the New York Post. Predictably the Post is defending the cartoon saying it was a parody of the recent "Travis the Chimp" attack in Stamford, Connecticut. Apparently a chimp attacked a woman forcing police to shoot and kill the monkey. Because of this, the Post says the image has nothing to do with the President, who is we all know considered the author of the stimulus bill.

Okay, a couple of things. Why a parody of the dead chimp? I'm 100% certain the dead chimp did not provide any assistance to the writing of the stimulus package. So, the chimp is not to blame. And it is certainly not a play on the old "shoot the messenger" schtick. Another excuse being it's a play on the old infinite monkey jokes -- you know, how many monkeys would it take and how many years to write the complete works of Shakespeare. Sure.

So what is it? Who else could the cartoonist be referring to? Even obliquely. Think seriously about it. If the cartoonist was not referring to our President, it was a mightily clumsy attempt at humor. The only thing remotely redeeming about it is the quality of the drawing; not very good. No wonder the author works for the Post, not exactly top drawer in the realm of journalism.

It's really quite pathetic. One writer actually had the audacity to compare this to those calling former President Bush a chimp. Really. What racial overtone regarding chimps and caucasians am I missing?

Fess up. It's just another stupid wing-nut saying what he really believes.

Brought to You By GOP Talking Points

I don't ever want to hear how Faux News is "fair and balanced" and independent. As Media Matters points out about a recent edition of Fox News' Happening Now:

In purporting to "take a look back" at how the economic recovery plan "grew, and grew, and grew," Fox News' Jon Scott referenced seven dates, as on-screen graphics cited various news sources from those time periods -- all of which came directly from a Senate Republican Communications Center press release. A Fox News on-screen graphic even reproduced a typo contained in the Republican press release.

I'll nver buy into the conservative spiel that the mainstram media has a liberal slant, especially the way its hitting Obama (well maybe, it is more intelligent) -- if there were such a slant, it's unintentional. Unlike Faux News which makes no effort at all to disguise its bias.

Brown Sugar Unlimited

Really? Sometimes the jokes just write themselves. From the New York Times:

Michael Steele, who was recently elected chairman of the Republican National Committee, paid a Maryland company run by his sister more than $37,000 for work related to his 2006 Senate campaign, a payment that Mr. Steele’s spokesman said Saturday was entirely appropriate.

[...]

Mr. Steele did not dispute that his sister’s company, Brown Sugar Unlimited, of Bethesda, Md., had been paid $37,262 by his Senate campaign in February 2007, as federal election records show.

Pretty sweet deal for a catering and web services firm. Odd combination that.

Odder yet, she's an ex-wife of Mike Tyson. You know, the guy who used to box when he wasn't raising pigeons and biting ears off.

Buh Bye

Thanks to Tom Tomorrow.

Of Fish and Spines

I wrote the other day that the GOP vote en masse against the stimulus bill in the House was a fishy sign that Republicans were already abandoning any pretense of an attempt at bi-partisanship. A commenter by the name of Tony Turner engaged me for a number of hours in a debate over the stimulus bill and the real meaning of the GOP response. Tony's arguments were not bad. His grasp of the economics of the bill was good I should say; at least from the Republican point of view. But then, how would I know?

I had not intended to get into the meat of the package because I really didn't know what was involved; nor do I understand economics. I admit it. I take it as a given that the GOP response is a failure – it's how I'm wired after 14 years of Republican majority rule -- and I never blog about economics. Best not to if you know nothing about it (good advice for both sides, me thinks).

So my posting effort was really about motivations. However, today I found a different slant on the plan, one that I could understand and agree with. Frank Rich, a favorite columnist of mine, had this to say about the Republican vote.

The problem is not that House Republicans gave the stimulus bill zero votes last week. That’s transitory political symbolism, and it had no effect on the outcome. Some of the naysayers will vote for the revised final bill anyway (and claim, Kerry-style, that they were against it before they were for it). The more disturbing problem is that the party has zero leaders and zero ideas. It is as AWOL in this disaster as the Bush administration was during Katrina.

Ah! It wasn't fishy that no GOPer voted for the plan; they just had nothing new to offer.

I admit I am a casual peruser of only the periphery of national events; I often go by what I feel is right. So, in our mini-debate Tony told me that tax cuts are a stimulus. Why wouldn't the Dems agree to that? I couldn't say. All I knew was that I thought I'd heard differently about tax cuts. Frank Rich to the rescue.

The Republicans do have one idea, of course, but it’s hardly fresh: more and bigger tax cuts, particularly for business and the well-off. That’s the sum of their “alternative” stimulus plan. Obama has tried to accommodate this panacea, perhaps to a fault. Mainstream economists in both parties believe that tax cuts in the stimulus package will deliver far less bang for the buck than, say, infrastructure spending. The tax-cut stimulus embraced a year ago by the G.O.P. induced next-to-no consumer spending as Americans merely banked the savings or paid down debt.

Hmmm. That's what we did – paid down credit cards and we anticipate doing the same this time if the tax cuts go through. And anyway, is Tony suggesting, like Rush Limbaugh did recently that because the Republicans won approximately 46% of the national vote in the last election, 46% of the stimulus package should be Republican ideas?

Now, of course Tony is not suggesting that. I actually have a lot of respect for his foray into my blog and for his thoughts. What he had to say (even though I could not answer whether other Republican proposals were good or bad) sounded reasonable though in hindsight, much the same as has (apparently) been written and said before. But thanks are in order nonetheless. You won the debate, Tony ( I knew I was missing out in high school not getting involved in debate). We'll win the war, I hope.

Which brings me back, one more time to the cult that is Limbaugh. I commented previously about Phil Gringrey, a right-wing dust bunny. Rich takes him on, too (and other Republicans).

Most pathetic of all was Phil Gingrey, a right-wing Republican congressman from Georgia, who mildly criticized both Limbaugh and Sean Hannity to Politico because they “stand back and throw bricks” while lawmakers labor in the trenches. So many called Gingrey’s office to complain that the poor congressman begged Limbaugh to bring him on air to publicly recant on Wednesday. As Gingrey abjectly apologized to talk radio’s commandant for his “stupid comments” and “foot-in-mouth disease,” he sounded like the inmate in a B-prison-movie cowering before the warden after a failed jailbreak.

No ideas and no spines. That's all most Republicans have these days. If that's reflexive commenting, so be it. It's also the truth.

Military Pledge a Hoax

Says World Nut Daily:

A recent Internet report that a battle was shaping up between the U.S. military and the White House because of executive plans to have soldiers pledge allegiance to the president instead of the nation and its Constitution raised alarm among the patriotic this week.

But it didn't seem to include the detail that the Department of Defense knew nothing about the "issue."

[Still, I find it funny that WND claims the alarms were only raised among the patriotic. The non-patriotic not being as easily duped, I guess.]

Anyway, that didn't stop our local resident nutcase, Peter DiGaudio, from jumping all over the rumor and distorting it to read that the oath of allegiance would now be made to President Obama himself. Spouting Peter wrote this:

If Our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ Barack Hussein Obama gets His way, members of the United States military will be pledging allegiance to Him rather than the U.S. Constitution.

and

That’s breathtaking in its arrogance. It’s also reminiscent of 1930s Germany, when members of the German military had to pledge allegiance to Hitler. Here’s a draft of the new allegiance oath:

I swear by God Allah this sacred oath that I will obey without question the Führer of the German Reich United States of Obama Nation and people, to Adolf Hitler Barack Hussein Obama, Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, and that I am prepared as a brave soldier to lay my life on the line at any time for this oath.

Peter is so deluded that he now actually believes that what he wrote previously is being enacted.

I give it 24 hours before Peter pulls a Fred Dooley and sends his post down the memory hole. It's what local wing-nut conservative bloggers do when faced with -- facts and truth.

Oh, by the way, the original piece was clearly labeled satire.

When Are We Going to Get Over It

by Andrew M. Manis

For much of the last forty years, ever since America "fixed" its race problem in the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts, we white people have been impatient with African Americans who continued to blame race for their difficulties. Often we have heard whites ask, "When are African Americans finally going to get over it? Now I want to ask: "When are we White Americans going to get over our ridiculous obsession with skin color?

Recent reports that "Election Spurs Hundreds' of Race Threats, Crimes" should frighten and infuriate every one of us. Having grown up in "Bombingham," Alabama in the 1960s, I remember overhearing an avalanche of comments about what many white classmates and their parents wanted to do to John and Bobby Kennedy and Martin Luther King. Eventually, as you may recall, in all three cases, someone decided to do more than "talk the talk."

Since our recent presidential election, to our eternal shame we are once again hearing the same reprehensible talk I remember from my boyhood.

We white people have controlled political life in the disunited colonies and United States for some 400 years on this continent. Conservative whites have been in power 28 of the last 40 years. Even during the eight Clinton years, conservatives in Congress blocked most of his agenda and pulled him to the right. Yet never in that period did I read any headlines suggesting that anyone was calling for the assassinations of presidents Nixon, Ford, Reagan, or either of the Bushes.

Criticize them, yes. Call for their impeachment, perhaps. But there were no bounties on their heads. And even when someone did try to kill Ronald Reagan, the perpetrator was non-political mental case who wanted merely to impress Jody Foster.

But elect a liberal who happens to be Black and we're back in the sixties again. At this point in our history, we should be proud that we've proven what conservatives are always saying -- that in America anything is possible, EVEN electing a black man as president. But instead we now hear that school children from Maine to California are talking about wanting to "assassinate Obama."

Fighting the urge to throw up, I can only ask, "How long?" How long before we white people realize we can't make our nation, much less the whole world, look like us? How long until we white people can - once and for all - get over this hell-conceived preoccupation with skin color?

How long until we white people get over the demonic conviction that white skin makes us superior? How long before we white people get over our bitter resentments about being demoted to the status of equality with non-whites?

How long before we get over our expectations that we should be at the head of the line merely because of our white skin? How long until we white people end our silence and call out our peers when they share the latest racist jokes in the privacy of our white-only conversations?

I believe in free speech, but how long until we white people start making racist loudmouths as socially uncomfortable as we do flag burners? How long until we white people will stop insisting that blacks exercise personal responsibility, build strong families, educate themselves enough to edit the Harvard Law Review, and work hard enough to become President of the United States, only to threaten to assassinate them when they do?

How long before we starting "living out the true meaning" of our creeds, both civil and religious, that all men and women are created equal and that "red and yellow, black and white" all are precious in God's sight?

Until this past November 4, I didn't believe this country would ever elect an African American to the presidency. I still don't believe I'll live long enough to see us white people get over our racism problem. But here's my three-point plan: First, everyday that Barack Obama lives in the White House that Black Slaves Built, I'm going to pray that God (and the Secret Service) will protect him and his family from us white people.

Second, I'm going to report to the FBI any white person I overhear saying, in seriousness or in jest, anything of a threatening nature about President Obama. Third, I'm going to pray to live long enough to see America surprise the world once again, when white people can "in spirit and in truth" sing of our damnable color prejudice, "We HAVE overcome."

My mother sent me this editorial written in the Macon Telegraph by Andrew M. Manis, an associate professor of history at Macon State College in Georgia.

What Patriotism

This from the often wrong perfesser from Tennessee, Glenn Reynolds:

I think the stimulus is objectively a bad idea. But politically, opposing it seems like a no-brainer: If it passes and the economy gets better it’s old news, and who’s to say the economy wouldn’t have gotten better on its own? If it passes and the economy doesn’t get better, it’s an issue for the GOP.

So, what's good politically supersedes what's good for the country. Thanks for clarifying.

You Hate Me

From God is for Suckers. [Click on image to enlarge]

Only "Good Americans" Wanted

Can you hear the jackboots and the sound of breaking glass?

No Spine

Another demonstration of what it means to be a conservative. Kind of reminds one of local bloggers who delete posts when it's found they made a mistake.

Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA), yesterday (from Politico):

"I mean, it's easy if you're Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh or even sometimes Newt Gingrich to stand back and throw bricks. You don't have to try to do what's best for your people and your party. You know you're just on these talk shows and you're living well and plus you stir up a bit of controversy and gin the base and that sort of that thing. But when it comes to true leadership, not that these people couldn't be or wouldn't be good leaders, they're not in that position of John Boehner or Mitch McConnell."

Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-GA), today (h/t Think Progress):

“I want to express to you [Limbaugh] and all your listeners my very sincere regret for those comments I made yesterday” and “the best possible message for this country would be for every single Republican to vote against [the economy recovery package].”

California Leads the Way Again

A new smoking ban ordinance in Belmont, CA is now in effect. The effort to eliminate second-hand smoke was begun by an elderly man named Ray Goodrich who suffers from pulmonary disease and has a lifelong allergy issue. Because of his efforts and the efforts of other elderly citizens, apartment buildings have now been added to the list of places where smoking is outlawed.

And about time. Good for Mr. Goodrich and Belmont, CA. Hopefully, Wisconsin is not far behind.

Your right to smoke does not supersede my right to breathe smoke-free air. Period!

Every Sperm Is Sacred

For Steve Edlund.

Hate Club

I was zipping through TV channels last night just before going to bed when, for no reason really, I turned on Sean Hannity's new Fox television show, Hannity. Mr. “Reasonable” was sitting with his back to the camera, looking at a relatively large sound meter with a sign overhead that stated Hate Meter. In succession different voices became audible (all interestingly with what one might charitably call an Ozark accent); all ranting obscenities about Hannity which resulted in the predictable response on the Hate Meter.

Hannity finally turned to face the camera and claimed the voices were those of liberals who had been invited to call in and rant at him. It was all done altruistically, he claimed, so they could release their hate at him and not at his viewers. He then provided a phone number for future call-ins.

Aside from the fact that I think the voices were actually those of Hannity's parents, I couldn't help but recall in George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty Four something called the Two-Minute Hate. It occurred to me that Hannity (and other squawkers these days) rely on this sort of fear-mongering to incite their followers and enable them to loath and hate anyone different from them. Liberals have become Emmanuel Goldstein and it has been very successful. The word “liberal” is now conservative code word for traitor, commie, tax and spend socialist, etc.

So successful that local conservative bloggers who are losing arguments (most all) resort eventually to calling their debate antagonist a member of the hate left. One local blogger known for less than real debate has even taken to calling a local lefty the king of the hate left. It doesn't matter the subject, anyone writing anything that disagrees with most anything he writes is not only hateful, but the evil falsehoods will likely be sent on a short, quick trip down the memory hole (as does anything he writes that proves to be false).

This reinforces my belief that Hannity's show and the others like him (squawk radio host Charlie Sykes, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Savage, etc.) are merely instruments for conservative brainwashing; the members of the incurious club who are affected most then carry out the demonization of liberals on the local level.

It's sad really. They never had a chance.

Loathsome People

h/t Jay Bullock.

From the Beast, here are three of the mosty loathsome creatures from 2008. These would be my top three.

47. Michelle Bachmann

Charges: Exemplifies the simmering, all-American fascism lurking behind the forced smiles of uptight church ladies throughout “real America.” Echoing Sarah Palin’s alarming hints about “helping” the media do its job, Bachmann’s casual call for a “penetrating” press investigation into “anti-Americanism” in Congress was so fucking dumb it made Chris Matthews seem smart. Once it occurred to the Oral Roberts University graduate that calling for witchhunts against Democrats might be a tad extreme for election season, she decided to just pretend she didn’t say it, and then she blamed Chris Matthews. Then she just blamed words. Then she denied it again. Then she won. Way to go, Minnesota’s 6th.

Exhibit A: BACHMANN: Actually, that's not what I said at all. COLMES: Well, I'm just — I'm reading your exact quote. BACHMANN: Actually that's not I said. It's an urban legend that was created. That isn't what I said at all. COLMES: We have — it's on tape.

Sentence: Assigned to conduct her own “expose” on anti-American views, in Taliban-controlled Afghanistan.

I saw her on television with Mathews when she made that statement. My jaw dropped. I could not believe an American politician would say something that incredibly dumb -- and frightening. Though in retrospect, I thought, after the past eight years and after having been involved in blogging for three years and reading the tripe that passes for commentary on the right, I should not have been surprised.

33. Jeremiah Wright

Charges: It’s said that in politics, a gaffe is when someone tells the truth, like connecting 9/11 to blowback from America’s long history of Middle East meddling. But then again, sometimes they just say something incredibly fucking stupid, like that AIDS was created by the U.S. government to kill black people. Seriously, you don’t think the U.S. government could do a better job than AIDS? AIDS takes years to kill, spreads relatively slowly, and kills white people all the time. A CIA super-virus that can’t beat Magic Johnson? Unlikely. But beyond past statements of viral delusion, Wright’s weird-ass grandstanding at the height of the sound bite frenzy seemed to indicate he really didn’t give a shit whether Obama was elected president, and might even be jealous.

Exhibit A: “And I stand before you… with the hope that this most recent attack on the black church is not an attack on Jeremiah Wright; it is an attack on the black church.”

Sentence: Sickle cell anemia.

One might have thought this clown was a conservative plant.

1. Sarah Palin

Charges: If you want to know why the rest of the world is scared of Americans, consider the fact that after two terms of disastrous rule by a small-minded ignoramus, 46% of us apparently thought the problem was that he wasn’t quite stupid enough. Palin’s unending emissions of baffling, evasive incoherence should have disqualified her for any position that involved a desk, let alone placing her one erratic heartbeat from the presidency. The press strained mightily to feign respect for her, praising a debate performance that involved no debate, calling her a “great speaker” when her only speech was primarily a litany of insults to city-dwellers, echoing bogus sexism charges when a male Palin would have been boiled alive for the Couric interview alone, and lionizing her as she used her baby as a Pro-life stage prop before crowds who cooed when they should have been hurling polonium-tipped javelins. In the end, Palin had the beneficial effect of splitting her party between her admirers and people who can read.

Exhibit A: Waving her embryo-loving credentials, in the form of her Down syndrome baby, at "But ultimately what the bailout does is help those who are concerned about the healthcare reform that is needed to help shore up our economy."

Sentence: Hand-to-hand combat with Vladimir Putin and a pack of wolves.

Another example of why reasonable and well thought out conservative dialogue is necessary to America's future, if anything to shut out the claptrap from the Palins, Bachmans and most of the conservative blogosphere. Unfortunately, there are so few conservative intellectuals, and there are so many who think Palin is the hope for America.


The Beast 50 Most Loathsome People in America in 2008 was written by Allan Uthman & Ian Murphy

Woe is Us

If only we had listened to Fred, Mary, Owen, Peter, James, Patrick, daddio and the rest ... woe is us.

Thx, Tom Tomorrow.

Paul Weyrich

Paul Weyrich, whom some considered the father of the religious right and one of the founders of modern conservatism, died this morning at the age of 66.

In my mind, Weyrich is notable for a number of ideas he advanced using the Republican party as the vehicle. One was the the conservative effort at voter suppression. He said as much in 1980.

Now many of our Christians have what I call the goo-goo syndrome -- good government. They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of people, they never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.

Sound familiar? It's just one example of his anti-democratic zeal.

Weyrich was also was a homophobe as this snippet of a conversation he had with Michelle Norris of NPR in 2006 illustrates.

Weyrich: It has been known for many years that Congressman Foley was a homosexual. Homosexuals tend to be preoccupied with sex - the idea that he should be continued, or should have been continued as chairman on the Committee for Missing and Exploited Children, given their knowledge of that is just outrageous.

Norris: Now, before we go on, I think I can say, Mr. Weyrich, that there quite a few people who would take exception to the statement that homosexuals are preoccupied with sex.

Weyrich: Well, I don't care whether they take exception to it - it happens to be true.

Norris: That is your opinion.

Weyrich: Well, it's not my opinion, it's the opinion of many psychologists and psychiatrists who have to deal with them.

I'll bet they all have degrees from Liberty University.

And finally, he was a member of the Arlington Group. Abraham H. Foxman, National Director of the Anti-Defamation League said this about their agenda.

If their agenda was hidden 15 years ago, today it is in full public view. Just take a look at their Web sites, where they document in considerable detail an agenda on a wide range of issues: judicial nominations, same-sex marriage, and faith-based issues – and an agenda that, let us be clear, goes well beyond legitimate engagement in controversial social and political issues to a fundamental usurpation of all that America represents.

Among the group's members are these extremeists.

The Alliance Defense Fund - Alan Sears
Most importantly, the court victories are vital steps to keep doors open for the spread of the gospel and reclaim the legal system for Jesus Christ.

The American Family Association - Donald Wildmon
The American Famaily Association, “believes that God has communicated absolute truth to man through the Bible, and that all men everywhere at all times are subject to the authority of God’s word. Therefore, culture based on biblical truth best serves the well-being of our country."

Family Research Council - Tony Perkins
Christians can be loyal to liberal democracy as long as rights are carefully controlled by a dominant culture that directs them to the true hierarchy of ends.

Focus on the Family - James Dobson
The enemies of morality will not stop and will not back off. The Left cannot and will not change… no matter how many God-fearing and God-honoring women and men are elected and appointed to public office, until the hearts of the people change, we will not turn around this culture and restore our Biblical foundations.

The movement that Weyrich helped come to fruition is suffering through some hard times these days, but its message of intolerance for others continues on.

Still, condolences to his family.

The Chief has a look at Paul Weyrich, too.