Prepare to be SHOCKED!

You may want to sit down for this and have an aspirin ready in case you suddenly develop chest pains.

Take a moment to recover.

What, you're not completely verklempt at the sight of a minaret on the RNC's convention logo?  Somebody is going to be very disappointed:

The extremist, left-wing site Talking Points Memo (better known as TPM) thought it had a zinger of a story about the “RNC’s 2012 convention logo.” The logo, TPM crows, seems to have *GASP* a Muslim minaret in it. TPM even helpfully added a copy of the logo with a nice red arrow to the “minaret” image to help its readers determine which graphic element was the minaret (as seen to your right).

What is the subliminal message, TPM wonders? What nefarious motives could the GOP possibly have to include a Muslim icon in their logo? What is going on here TPM demands to know!

What the RNC is "up to" is accurately depict the Tampa skyline, right down to the incredibly butt ugly "Beer Can" building on the left of the logo next to the funky palm tree. 

For those of you not from around these parts, the minaret is not part of a mosque but instead graces the Henry Plant Museum at the University of Tampa.  Actually a very nice building.  The bigger question is how desperate is the Left when they stoop to trying to create a controversy out of a logo? 

Is this the level of childish dribble we are going to be subjected to for the next two years?  How lame are these dweebs?  Check out this comment from DemConWatch:

Should this become an issue with the Tea Party it will only confirm just how crazy the Republican party has become.

And if it doesn't become an issue with the Tea Party then it shows that they have no intellectual coherence.

Yeah, cause you know, a building in Tampa and the Ground Zero Mosque are like you know, same/same.  Come on, kids.  Even you can come up with something better than this.

May I be Rude?

The Democrats, who elevated "kill Bush" to the highest form of patriotism, are now calling for "civility":

Various members of the DNC — including Chairman Tim Kaine, Executive Director Jen O’Malley Dillon and Communications Director Brad Woodhouse — contacted their respective RNC counterparts this week in hopes of getting RNC Chairman Michael Steele to co-sign a document with Kaine that, in part, called for “elected officials of both parties to set an example of the civility we want to see in our citizenry.”

“We also call on all Americans to respect differences of opinion, to refrain from inappropriate forms of intimidation, to reject violence and vandalism, and to scale back rhetoric that might reasonably be misinterpreted by those prone to such behavior,” read the proposed joint statement...

The call for civility is a odd piece of disconnect coming from the people who had no problem, and in fact encouraged this:

Or as The Daily Gut points out:

-People calling Bush a Nazi
-Students and non students rioting on college campuses
-Animal rights freaks dousing rich folks with paint
-Actors wishing average folks would get rectal cancer
-Bureaucrats labeling military vets as potential violent right wing extremists
-Radical environmentalists advocating violence against loggers
-Pranksters throwing pies at conservative commentators

Bless the RNC, they politely told the DNC to take their "civility statement" and put it where the sun don't shine.

Frankly, I'm in no mood to be lectured on civility by people who have called me a racist and a terrorist.  In fact, I would tell the Democrats that if they wish me to treat them respectfully they could start by earning my respect.  The hate and name calling originated on the left.  The DNC needs to remove the log from its own eye.

In the meantime, they can kiss my lily white over-ample ass.

H/T Instapundit

Image from zombietime

Conservatives vs Moderates: Who is Purging Who?

Via Memeorandum:

Politico is calling it "an uncivil war." To understand why Conservatives are no longer in a civil mood one need look to further than the Marco Rubio/Charlie Crist primary race here in Florida.

...former Florida House Speaker Marco Rubio, a conservative who is challenging Crist for the Senate nomination. “They want us to vote for their candidates, but they don’t want us to run for office.”

The boys over at the NRSC came in to Florida and chose Charlie Crist as their man without giving the voters in Florida a voice. They told us that Rubio was a great candidate with a bright future but that Florida needs someone with broad appeal (read: moderate) who could carry the state against Kendrick Meek, the presumed Democrat candidate. How's this for broad appeal: of the twelve straw polls taken in Florida, Rubio has beaten Crist in all twelve by wide margins.

But can Rubio beat Meek? The NRSC says no, but the most recent Rassmussen poll taken says, "YES, he can." The poll taken October 20, 2009 shows Rubio leading Meek 46% to 31%.

As Rubio said above the GOP wants our support. They want our donations and our votes. They don't want our voice. They don't want our vision. They don't want our candidates. Who is "purging" who? Conservatives have been shut out of the GOP.

Conventional beltway wisdom is that Conservatives can't win. We've shown otherwise in NY23 and we will continue to show otherwise in Florida and elsewhere. Conservative candidates offer voters a clear choice and energize elections. Conservative candidates embrace their principles, the GOP runs away from them.

If there is a civil war within the GOP party it lies solely on the shoulders of the party's tone deaf leaders. Conservatives are comfortable with the decisions they've made, it is up the party to decide what direction they want to take.

Who Calls the Majority "the Minority"?

Via Memeorandum:

Consider the following from the Politico post Conservatives take aim at leaders, Charlie Crist, other races:

Numerous GOP officials have told POLITICO they worry that the party has been hijacked by a noisy and powerful minority that will keep the GOP in a noisy and not-so-powerful minority for a long time.

So, are we fringe conservative wackos really the minority or, is it simply a matter of GOP officials believing that if they say it often enough it may come true? I can understand why they would want us to go away and let them get back to business as usual but are they really so delusional that they believe that the Conservative movement represents nothing more than a "small but vocal minority"?

The latest Gallup poll tells a different story:

On the question of political ideology, 40 percent of those surveyed said they were conservative, 36 percent were moderate, and 20 percent liberal.

Conservatives, contrary to the GOP line, are neither the fringe or the minority. We are vocal, we are activists and we are a force that the GOP needs to deal with. The least of the many lessons that the GOP should take away from NY23 is that they need us more than we need them.

The GOP's assertion that Conservatives may push the Republican party in to a permanent minority status only shows how little attention they are paying. We are more than willing to work with the GOP if they return to the Republican tradition of small government and fiscal conservatism.

Politico quotes Erik Erickson of RedState:

“Republicans are going to have to come our way,” he said, before going on to trash NRCC Chairman Pete Sessions and Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele for backing Scozzafava.

Their “level of disingenuousness ... is disgusting,” Erickson said.

Politico notes that Erickson’s bombast may seem overboard, but it captures the depths of anger over the handling of this special election. It’s not just that Scozzafava wasn’t conservative — she was very liberal on abortion, unions and gay marriage and even left the impression she might join the Democrats once elected.

The anger that Conservatives feel began building long before November, 2008. The GOP's backing of candidates like Scozzafava and Charlie Crist, not to mention Arlen Specter who they stood by right up until the moment he flipped on them, has only served to throw gasoline on the fire. We have decided that principle trumps party. The ball is in the GOP's hands now.

Here Piggy!

Prof. Jacobson has an interesting take on Scozzafava's endorsement of Democrat Owens rather than Conservative candidate Doug Hoffman-it's all about the pork:

Scozafava's endorsement of Democrat Owens certainly was based on hurt feelings, but she justified it by focusing on who could bring home the federal pork to the district:

It’s not in the cards for me to be your representative, but I strongly believe Bill is the only candidate who can build upon John McHugh's lasting legacy in the U.S. Congress. John and I worked together on the expansion of Fort Drum and I know how important that base is to the economy of this region. I am confident that Bill will be able to provide the leadership and continuity of support to Drum Country just as John did during his tenure in Congress.

Jacobson continues:

It's Doug Hoffman and the philosophy of fiscal responsibility, versus Bill Owens and the John Murtha philosophy of pork-barrel politics. And with Joe Biden riding into town on Monday, Obama's big government, let someone else pay for me, policies will be put to a test.

The party lines have been blurred but not the issue. Country before pork, or pork before country? I hope the people of NY-23 choose country. We'll see.

Scozzafava definitely is a woman with an agenda and her shout out to Fort Drum may have simply been a way for her to throw her weight towards Owens without mentioning that she is also pro-abortion, pro card check, pro tax and spend and not the "moderate" that sucker punched the NRCC and the RNC. Either way, flipping on "her party" (suppressed giggle) can be summed up with a snark filled "classy."

Momma always said you can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

What is Scozzafava's Next Move?

Pat at And So it Goes in Shreveport is reporting that Scozzafava's next move may be to endorse the Democratic candidate in NY23:

Via Hot Air, Hotline reports that Dede Scozzafava and her husband are quietly endorsing Bill Owens in the NY-23 race. This comes as no real shock as they disagree on absolutely nothing with regard to policy issues.

Hotline quotes both the New York Post and the Watertown Daily Times:

First, in a Watertown Daily Times' editorial switching its endorsement from Scozzafava to atty Bill Owens (D), the Daily Times notes that Scozzafava "began to quietly and thoughtfully encourage her supporters to vote for" Owens after her withdrawal announcement 10/31.

And, according to the New York Post, Scozzafava's husband -- Central Labor Council pres. Ron McDougall -- wholeheartedly endorsed Owens late last p.m. McDougall: "As a life-long labor activist, I know that Bill Owens understands the issues important to working people. On the other hand, Doug Hoffman has little regard for the interests of workers. Hoffman's opposition to the Employee Free Choice Act, coupled with his support for the failed policies of the Bush Administration make him a poor choice to serve the citizens of the 23rd Congressional District."

Earlier I said that the voters turned to Doug Hoffman in NY23 because the Scozzafava/Owens matchup was viewd as a choice between the Democratic candidate and the other Democratic candidate. If Scozzafava endorses Owens, she will make my point for me.

Pat goes on to relate the NY23 race to the NRCC's monumental screwup in the Crist/Rubio matchup here in Florida. It makes one wonder how many "Specters" the RNC and NRCC will back before they come to their senses.

Read Pat's piece here.

How Big is the Gap Between the RNC and Reality?

Don Surber knows:

Liberals and conservatives can agree on one thing: The gap between the Republican National Committee and reality make the Pacific Ocean look like a pond.

Don gave the RNC his "Evil" rating. I'd go with evil and really, really, stupid.