The left’s “guilt-by-association” hypocrisy

Christine Flowers gets to the heart of the matter:

[Pro-lifers] may not have liked what Tiller did, but we absolutely didn’t want to see him dead. Roeder was not one of us. He was a psychopath, a man whose demented mind led him to commit a crime that is, essentially, the antithesis of what the pro-life movement represents.

But that’s not the way it’s being played on the editorial pages of the New York Times, the Washington Post and our sister paper here in Philadelphia. Somehow, Tiller’s blood is on the hands of all of us who ever wore a rose in our lapel, protested in front of an abortion clinic, criticized Roe v. Wade or sent money to crisis pregnancy centers.

WHICH IS really interesting because those same opinion pages loudly lamented any demonization of Muslim-Americans after 9/11. They were appalled that a whole group of people could be blamed for the criminal acts of 19 men. They took great pains to call Islam a religion of peace and distinguish it from the violence of extremists.

And they condemned guilt-by-association.

They’ve even downplayed the fact that the killer of a soldier outside of an army recruitment center was a Muslim convert who spent time in that favorite vacation destination for budding terrorists: Yemen.

But when it comes to the pro-life movement, there isn’t the same attention to detail.

Yep. Consistency isn’t exactly a hallmark of the left, especially when it comes to conservatives and Christians.

And wouldn’t it be nice if the left put 1/100th of the effort into helping in the fight against Islamofascism that they have fighting for the right of abortion providers to do “their business” free from harassment and violence? :-?

State media: Ahmeanie wins reelection in Iran

The results aren’t official yet, but here’s the latest, via Reuters:

TEHRAN (Reuters) – State media declared President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad the winner of Iran’s election but challenger Mirhossein Mousavi alleged irregularities and claimed victory for himself.

The state election commission said early Saturday that Ahmadinejad, a hardline conservative, was ahead with 66 percent of the votes in Friday’s election after 21 million ballots were counted.

Ahmadinejad’s main challenger, moderate former prime minister Mirhossein Mousavi, had 31 percent, according to the commission, which is part of the Interior Ministry. It said 61 percent of all ballot boxes had now been counted.

The official news agency IRNA said: “Dr Ahmadinejad, by winning most votes at the 10th presidential election, has secured his victory.” It said results would be announced at 8 a.m. (0330 GMT).

A bitterly fought campaign has generated intense excitement inside Iran and strong interest around the world, with policymakers looking for signs of a change of approach by Tehran, whose ties with the West worsened under Ahmadinejad.

Mousavi had earlier tried to pre-empt official announcements by calling a news conference at which he alleged there had been irregularities, including a shortage of ballot papers.

“I am the definite winner of this presidential election,” he declared.

It was unclear how his supporters, who thronged the streets of Tehran nightly in the run-up to Friday’s vote, might react to an Ahmadinejad victory. U.S. strategic intelligence group Stratfor called the situation “potentially explosive,” with a considerable risk of unrest.

The Guardian is liveblogging the goings on in Iran surrounding the election, as is the “Tehran Bureau” blog.

Quote of the day

Right on:

Even on freedom of religion, Obama could not resist the compulsion to find fault with his own country: “For instance, in the United States, rules on charitable giving have made it harder for Muslims to fulfill their religious obligation” — disgracefully giving the impression to a foreign audience not versed in our laws that there is active discrimination against Muslims, when the only restriction, applied to all donors regardless of religion, is on funding charities that serve as fronts for terror.

For all of his philosophy, the philosopher-king protests too much. Obama undoubtedly thinks he is demonstrating historical magnanimity with all these moral equivalencies and self-flagellating apologetics. On the contrary. He’s showing cheap condescension, an unseemly hunger for applause and a willingness to distort history for political effect.

Distorting history is not truth-telling but the telling of soft lies. Creating false equivalencies is not moral leadership but moral abdication. And hovering above it all, above country and history, is a sign not of transcendence but of a disturbing ambivalence toward one’s own country.

Charles Krauthammer on Barack Obama’s dangerous penchant for moral equivalency, 6/12/09

“Change” you can believe in

Ed Morrissey details yet another example of Barack Obama’s duplicity on the issue of “abuse of power.” This time it’s over the issue of Obama’s forceful removal of the AmeriCorps Inspector General … over an investigation into a Obama supporter and Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson “into the misuse of federal grants by a nonprofit education group that Johnson headed.”

The AP reports:

Walpin was criticized by the acting U.S. attorney in Sacramento for the way he handled an investigation of Johnson and St. HOPE Academy, a nonprofit group that received hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal grants from the Corporation for National Community Service. The corporation runs the AmeriCorps program.

“It is vital that I have the fullest confidence in the appointees serving as Inspectors General,” Obama said in a letter Thursday to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Vice President Joe Biden, who also serves as president of the Senate. “That is no longer the case with regard to this Inspector General.”

The president didn’t offer any more explanation, but White House Counsel Gregory Craig, in a letter to Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, cited the U.S. attorney’s criticism of Walpin to an integrity committee for inspectors general.

“We are aware of the circumstances leading to that referral and of Mr. Walpin’s conduct throughout his tenure and can assure you that the president’s decision was carefully considered,” Craig wrote.

Grassley had written Obama a letter pointing to a law requiring that Congress be given the reasons an IG is fired. He cited a Senate report saying the requirement is designed to ensure that inspectors general are not removed for political reasons.

Grassley said Walpin had identified millions of dollars in AmeriCorps funds that were wasted or misspent and “it appears he has been doing a good job.”

Messages left for Walpin seeking comment were not immediately returned.

The IG found that Johnson, a former all-star point guard for the Phoenix Suns, had used AmeriCorps grants to pay volunteers to engage in school-board political activities, run personal errands for Johnson and even wash his car.

Even more intriguging is the fact that there could be a Michelle Obama connection to all this.

Didn’t the Obamessiah repeatedly pledge last year to “end business as usual” in Washington, DC? Who’da thought this was the way he planned to do it? 8-|