• Pragerisms

    For a more comprehensive list of Pragerisms visit
    Dennis Prager Wisdom.

    • "The left is far more interested in gaining power than in creating wealth."
    • "Without wisdom, goodness is worthless."
    • "I prefer clarity to agreement."
    • "First tell the truth, then state your opinion."
    • "Being on the Left means never having to say you're sorry."
    • "If you don't fight evil, you fight gobal warming."
    • "There are things that are so dumb, you have to learn them."
  • Liberalism’s Seven Deadly Sins

    • Sexism
    • Intolerance
    • Xenophobia
    • Racism
    • Islamophobia
    • Bigotry
    • Homophobia

    A liberal need only accuse you of one of the above in order to end all discussion and excuse himself from further elucidation of his position.

  • Glenn’s Reading List for Die-Hard Pragerites

    • Bolton, John - Surrender is not an Option
    • Bruce, Tammy - The Thought Police; The New American Revolution; The Death of Right and Wrong
    • Charen, Mona - DoGooders:How Liberals Hurt Those They Claim to Help
    • Coulter, Ann - If Democrats Had Any Brains, They'd Be Republicans; Slander
    • Dalrymple, Theodore - In Praise of Prejudice; Our Culture, What's Left of It
    • Doyle, William - Inside the Oval Office
    • Elder, Larry - Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card--and Lose
    • Frankl, Victor - Man's Search for Meaning
    • Flynn, Daniel - Intellectual Morons
    • Fund, John - Stealing Elections
    • Friedman, George - America's Secret War
    • Goldberg, Bernard - Bias; Arrogance
    • Goldberg, Jonah - Liberal Fascism
    • Herson, James - Tales from the Left Coast
    • Horowitz, David - Left Illusions; The Professors
    • Klein, Edward - The Truth about Hillary
    • Mnookin, Seth - Hard News: Twenty-one Brutal Months at The New York Times and How They Changed the American Media
    • Morris, Dick - Because He Could; Rewriting History
    • O'Beirne, Kate - Women Who Make the World Worse
    • Olson, Barbara - The Final Days: The Last, Desperate Abuses of Power by the Clinton White House
    • O'Neill, John - Unfit For Command
    • Piereson, James - Camelot and the Cultural Revolution: How the Assassination of John F. Kennedy Shattered American Liberalism
    • Prager, Dennis - Think A Second Time
    • Sharansky, Natan - The Case for Democracy
    • Stein, Ben - Can America Survive? The Rage of the Left, the Truth, and What to Do About It
    • Steyn, Mark - America Alone
    • Stephanopolous, George - All Too Human
    • Thomas, Clarence - My Grandfather's Son
    • Timmerman, Kenneth - Shadow Warriors
    • Williams, Juan - Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America--and What We Can Do About It
    • Wright, Lawrence - The Looming Tower

A Look At Union Power and Wealth in Politics

Steve Malanga writes an article titled, “Union Power and the Christie Effect” found at the Wall Street Journal:

“In the midst of the contentious 2009 gubernatorial race in New Jersey, the state’s teachers union took a poll of its own members and found only a slight majority preferred the candidate the union had endorsed, Democratic incumbent Jon Corzine, over Republican challenger Chris Christie. The alarmed union, the New Jersey Education Association (NJEA), swung into action with a campaign that included phoning 100,000 of its members and urging them to vote for Mr. Corzine, according to union documents leaked last November to the Education Intelligence Agency, a watchdog web site.

Mr. Christie eventually won that election, in part because the NJEA, one of the most powerful political forces in the state, had to fight a rearguard action to keep its own membership in line. In that respect, the Jersey race may be a harbinger of the elections in November.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie took on the state’s teachers union and won.

Unions used their considerable clout in 2006 to help Democrats gain control of Congress and again in 2008 to elect President Obama. But the union movement, which spent 96% of its money supporting Democrats in 2008, is faltering this year in its efforts to help the party retain control of Congress and win key governors’ races around the country.

Instead, organized labor— increasingly dominated by public-sector workers—is facing a backlash from taxpayers because of widespread publicity about the rich pay and benefits of some government employees. That’s made Mr. Christie’s blunt campaign talk about reining in government costs a popular approach among candidates. Even old friends of labor in the Democratic Party have made public workers a target, leaving labor with fewer allies and playing defense.

In California, where unions are as powerful as in New Jersey, Republican candidate for governor Meg Whitman is taking on the unions that weakened Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger when he challenged them with reforms in 2005. One of the key players was the militant California Nurses Association (CNA), which represents some 87,000 health-care workers. The group followed Mr. Schwarzenegger around the state picketing his appearances, and when he struck back in speeches his attacks backfired and swung some voters to the union camp.

The CNA is trying the same tactic with Ms. Whitman, protesting at her home, infiltrating her invitation-only events, and portraying her in ads as Queen Meg, an imperial candidate out to hurt the working class. But Ms. Whitman has fought back by claiming, in an echo of the Jersey election, that the union leadership is out of touch with members. She obtained a database of union member addresses and mailed them campaign literature that said, “Don’t take the union bosses’ word for it . . . Learn for yourself where Meg Whitman stands.”

She’s started a group, Nurses for Meg Whitman, to counter the nurses union, and she says polls show many licensed nurses in the state support her. Facing an electorate that’s now more receptive to a message of cutting government spending and reining in worker costs, Ms. Whitman has remained neck-and-neck in the polls with Democrat Jerry Brown, who has the backing of all major labor organizations in the state.

The backlash against public unions has gone beyond heavily unionized states like California and New Jersey. One illustration is the finding of a July 7 national Rasmussen poll: Only 19% of Americans said that they would be willing to pay higher taxes to keep government workers from being laid off. Even in public safety, where Americans are sometimes reluctant to see cutbacks, the poll found only 34% endorsed higher taxes to preserve police and fire jobs.

The electorate may also be turning away from public unions because of their relentless campaigning for higher taxes. Mr. Christie has estimated that New Jersey’s public unions spent some $4 million throughout the spring on ads advocating higher taxes and railing against his budget. In California, the teachers union has kicked in $500,000 as part of a campaign to rescind business tax breaks to keep jobs in the state. Last year in Michigan, a coalition of unions engineered a campaign called “A Better Michigan Future” that advocated hundreds of millions in new taxes, which the state legislature rejected.

The prospect of ever-higher taxes has Democrats distancing themselves from labor. New York Democratic gubernatorial candidate Andrew Cuomo is preaching fiscal prudence and says public pensions are “out of line with economic reality.” In California, old allies of labor like Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa (who was once a teachers union official) are also inveighing against the cost imposed by public unions. Oregon’s Democratic Gov. Ted Kulongoski, an attorney who once represented unions, is advocating clamping down on public-sector pay and benefits to fix that state’s budget problems.

Unions are also on the defensive in the culture wars. Later this month the documentary “Waiting for Superman,” about the failings of our public schools, will debut in theaters nationwide. The film is directed by Davis Guggenheim, who earned impeccable liberal credentials as the director of the Oscar-winning “An Inconvenient Truth.” His new documentary, say reviewers who’ve seen it, places a chunk of the blame for the woes of our schools on teachers unions and in particular paints Randi Weingarten, the head of the American Federation of Teachers, as an opponent of meaningful reform.

Mr. Guggenheim’s film is likely to exacerbate growing discontent with teachers unions. In a May Rasmussen poll, only 38% of Americans said it was good that teachers belong to unions, while 62% either thought teacher unionization a bad thing or were undecided.

Labor’s clout is also suffering because of growing liberal fractiousness and disappointment that the Democratic victories of 2006 and 2008 haven’t led to more radical change. Unions spent $10 million in an unsuccessful attempt to defeat Arkansas Sen. Blanche Lincoln, whom they considered not liberal enough, in the state’s Democratic primary.

In North Carolina this spring, a coalition of leftist advocacy groups and unions led by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU), arguably the nation’s most powerful union, attempted to split from the state’s Democratic Party to form a more left-leaning third party. Although the effort failed, it has fractured the coalition that propelled President Obama to a narrow victory in that state in 2008.

Of course even with its influence waning, labor can be a powerful electoral force. The AFL-CIO, SEIU and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees have announced plans to spend about $100 million on the November elections. While that’s less than 2008, when unions gave $73 million in direct contributions to candidates and spent another $80 million independently on campaigns, the money represents a formidable commitment that could be a factor in close races.

Still, what we are seeing this year may mark a historic shift in American politics. If candidates around the country can repeat Mr. Christie’s strategy of winning office by taking on public unions, we could be witnessing a change akin to what happened in the late 1970s, when tax revolts in a handful of states created a nationwide momentum that eventually elected Ronald Reagan.

The early 21st century version of tax rebellion is a head-on collision between overburdened taxpayers and public-sector unions. The many signs of union weakness suggest that after decades of expanding power, government-worker unions may have finally met their match.

Mr. Malanga is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and the author of “Shakedown: The Continuing Conspiracy Against the American Taxpayer,” out next month from Ivan R. Dee.

More on the Imam’s Attack on Ground Zero

Dana Milbank wrote an article, “The Iman Behind the Nw York Mosque Enjoys the Microphone, some of which is posted below:

“Rauf hinted that a compromise is being worked out. “We are exploring all options as we speak right now, and we are working through what will be a solution, God willing, that will resolve this crisis, defuse it.”

This willingness to cool the tensions is of recent origin. Just days ago he was telling CNN’s Soledad O’Brien: “If we move from that location, the story will be that the radicals have taken over the discourse. The headlines in the Muslim world will be that Islam is under attack.”

There has been a general agreement across the ideological spectrum that Rauf has the constitutional right to build the mosque. I, like many others, have opposed the bigoted speech of some of the mosque’s critics. But Rauf, by exploiting the controversy, has made it worse. A new Washington Post/ABC News poll finds that 66 percent of Americans oppose the building of the mosque in Lower Manhattan (53 percent oppose it strongly), as a growing plurality of Americans hold an unfavorable view of Islam.

He further aggravated the situation Monday morning, putting opponents of the mosque on equal footing with Muslim extremists. “Every religion in the world has extremists; sadly, Islam is among them,” he said. “All faiths have among their members those who distort and twist the core values for their own agendas.” The imam, who said he had seen in recent weeks “how destructive the power of extremist acts and language can be,” pronounced that “the real battle that we must wage together today is not between Muslims and non-Muslims. It is between moderates of all the faith traditions against the extremists of all the faith traditions.”

It was a neat formulation. On one side: Osama bin Laden, Sarah Palin and Franklin Graham; on the other side, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. When Council president Richard Haas challenged this parallelism with an observation that “ninety-nine percent of the world’s most dangerous terrorists are Muslims,” Rauf blamed the Arab Israeli conflict and the “presence of our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, which has expanded the amount of terrorist acts.”

Conveniently, Rauf sees himself taking a leadership role in this fight against extremists of all stripes. He would build “a coalition of moderates from all of the faith traditions to combat the extremists — and I seek your help.”

This amounted to a commercial for the organization Rauf leads, the interdenominational Cordoba Initiative. “In every crisis,” the imam told his audience, “there’s an opportunity.” The opportunity this time: “I need a space, I want a space where the voice of the moderates can be amplified¿. In a paradoxical sense, or maybe in a poignant sense, this is an opportunity that we must capitalize on so that those who teach moderation will have a megahorn to preach.”

Rauf is already enjoying his “megahorn.” When Ted Sorensen rose to draw a comparison to John F. Kennedy’s efforts 50 years ago to build understanding between Protestants and Catholics, the imam joked: “Fortunately, Ted, I can’t run for U.S. president, since I was not born in this country.”

Certainly, the New York mosque controversy has gotten Rauf the amplified voice he seems to crave. But has it been worth stirring up anti-Muslim sentiment at home and anti-American feelings abroad?”

Comment:  And that is precisely what the Imam has done.  From my perspective I am all for this achievement, for it is about time all Americans recognize warrior Islam for what it is, and know the wolves who preach peace and compromise.

Why aren’t Christians and Jews demanding to sell and build  Christian and Jewish things in Muslimland, starting with Saudi Arabia?

Make a list of those  who stand FOR  the building of an Islamic victory statement in the space  hallowed by  Islamic wretchedness!   Know them.  Defeat them. 

What would we have thought of Persident Kennedy if he had allowed  Generalissimo Tojo’s son to build a Shinto temple a block away from the  wrecked Arizona at a time when there were a billion Shintoists in the world many, perhaps even a majority, salivating at the mouth  at the possibility of replacing American values with twelfth century  Japanese warrior culture codes?

Why do we tolerate this from President Barack Hussein Obama? 

This  Obama equates Islam with other religions.  What other religion was involved in the slaughter of 2,700 human beings doing their daily work at the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001?     

Yet he and many of his fellow Democrats accuse those who oppose the building of the Islamic victory mosque at Ground Zero, as bigots.

If someone wants to know what bigotry really is, let’s send him or her to Saudi Arabia or Iran or nearly any Islamic country of their choice as a celebration for their ignorance.   Politically active American gays and  feminists should be particularly encouraged to go for the experience.  

Islam, as practiced in most places in the world today, is the enemy of  democracy and anything associated with it, most of all, the search for truth and  knowledge,  basic in a free society. 

Why are so many Leftwing American politicians encouraging its invasion here?