Where should one place, on the common-usage political left/right spectrum, a party that has a strong environmental platform (supports Greenpeace, opposes whaling and even the docking of dog’s tails), opposes any privatization of medical services or public sector institutions, supports the nationalization of important economic assets, calls for higher taxes on the rich, and sees its support coming primarily from members of the working class?
Why, the far right, of course. British blogger Simon Richards takes issue with this sleight of hand:

I lost track of the number of times the British National Socialist Party was referred to by BB journalits as ‘the right wing BNP’ on last night’s woeful Euro-election programme. The BBC has a track record on this. Whenever possible, it refers to groups it doesn’t like as ‘conservative’ or right-wing. It did this in the case of hard-line Communists in the Gorbachev era, who, in BBC-land, were always ‘conservatives’.

Many on the left will argue that being a racist makes you socially right – funny how that works – and that the BNP, despite their openly socialist policies, are on the opposite end of the spectrum from the left, over on the far, far right, alongside the National Socialist German Workers Party. This ongoing claim to the word “socialist” by parties whom the left insists on deeming the “far-right” remains a sticking/sore point: British blogger the Englishman noted “the perplex on BBC’s talking faces as ‘Far Right’ Andrew Brons’ extremist past was revealed to be founded on his membership of the National Socialist Movement.”
Let’s just call the BNP what they are: racist, authoritarian leftists. Anyone who would argue that the left cannot, by definition, be authoritarian, and that the term only applies to the right, must have slept through the last century.

MSNBC’s Contessa Brewer’s recent interview with L.A. radio host John Ziegler was as fine a display of passive-aggressive journalism as you’ll ever see. The segment started with a clip of David Letterman quipping about Sarah Palin’s “slutty” look; we begin a few moments into the interview:
Brewer: Let me ask you what Sarah Palin’s problem with Letterman was; what was it about the top ten list that hurt her feelings?
Ziegler: Well, I don’t know if her feelings were hurt — you’d have to ask her. Not only did he call her slutty, you left out the part where he also joked about her teenage daughter being knocked up by Alex Rodriguez in the middle of Yankee stadium while she was at the game. By the way, I also happened to ask her about Keith Olberman blatantly lying about her allegedly plagiarizing a speech which she didn’t do, I doubt that that will come up on this particular network….
Brewer: It’s certainly not going to come up other than your mention in this particular interview because I want to ask you about David Letterman and Sarah Palin. But again, if you’d like to talk about that, I’m willing to go forward with the conversation. (Long pause) Yes? (He heartily agrees) Perfect. Good. So in this case, it’s comedy, so talk about her real itinerary in New York — it’s kinda serious, not really funny — why did she take such offense — she called him pathetic, so she obviously took offense — why was she so offended by David Letterman?
Ziegler: Well, Contessa, since you’re a female, you might be a better expert on whether or not it’s appropriate to call public figures SLUTTY for no apparent reason, and to joke about her daughter being knocked up in the middle of Yankee Stadium while she’s at the game — how would YOU feel about that?
Brewer: John, that’s actually happened to me, and I’m fine, I’m still here, I’m, I’m, I’m…
Ziegler: Really. David Letterman joked about you being slutty?
Brewer: Not David Letterman, not David Letterman, but it happened-to-me-publicly, okay, and wuh…well, we’ll change topics….
(A bit later…)
Ziegler: I urge anyone who is interested in the real Sarah Palin to go to HowObamaGotElected.com, you can listen to all 16 minutes. One of the questions I asked her was whether she felt dissed by John McCain when he went on Jay Leno — also on NBC…
Brewer: WOW. Alright….
Ziegler: ….back when he was the host of the Tonight Show, and basically dissed her, and — surprise surprise — she gave an incredibly classy answer, showing far more class than — clearly — most people on this network have.
Brewer: I…don’t really know what to do with that. You know what, I was honestly, I’m here to to give you an opportunity, I consider myself a common-sense thinker, I haven’t attacked you, and for you to come on and use those sort of insults insults ME….thank you so much for your time, I do appreciate that.
Ziegler: Well, you guys are certainly deserving of all…
Brewer: CUT THE MIC PLEASE!!!

Every ten years the U.S Census Bureau conducts a national census under the aegis of the U.S. Department of Commerce. The Census Bureau describes participation in the Census as being “in the individuals’ own self-interest“, but there may soon be other interests involved: according to judicialwatch, the Census Bureau recently gave ACORN the opportunity to “ recruit Census workers,” which will allow ACORN, in its capacity as executive partner, to “organize and/or serve as a member on a Complete Count Committee,” which will in turn help it to “develop and implement locally based outreach and recruitment campaigns.”
ACORN, for those who are unfamiliar with it, is a community activist group that has been accused of everything from racketeering to covering up embezzlement to running a protection racket. Scores of ACORN workers have been charged with voter registration fraud. Anita MonCrief notes that through their involvement in the census ACORN will not only “have access to personal information of Americans, but this info may be distributed to others.” This is legitimately concerning, because ACORN is a decidedly partisan organization: an internal ACORN document states, in specific reference to a soon-to-be-open governor’s seat, “We…need to be a player in this race. We need to raise money for our political work…based on the redistricting that will happen in our state following the 2010 Census.” The larger goal, from ACORN’s point of view, is clear:

With a common voter file, ACORN will: Coordinate voter outreach and mobilization work with other progressive organizations to maximize the power of our resources….With a voter file, we will be able to target the neighborhoods we work in most effectively (in areas) where extra voter education and mobilization work would have a dramatic impact on turnout in strategically chosen legislative and congressional races. Using precinct walk lists…the canvasser knows if the resident is registered, how often the resident has voted in past elections, the resident’s name, and other demographic data that helps them to tailor the canvass message to the individual. In addition, we will be able to take the voter information gathered from this mass canvass and add it to the voter files in order to enhance the work of partnering progressive organizations.

In short: data from the upcoming federal census, which citizens are required by law to respond to, will be collected by ACORN and then used by ACORN to “enhance the work of…progressive organizations.”
Something tells me this was not the original or intended purpose of the national census.

…as government revenue tumbles:

California’s government risks a financial “meltdown” within 50 days in light of its weakening May revenues unless Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger and lawmakers quickly plug a $24.3 billion budget gap, the state’s controller said on Wednesday.

(…)

The state’s revenues from personal income taxes tumbled by 39.9 percent in May from a year earlier while revenues from corporate taxes fell by 52.1 percent…according to a report released by (Controller) John Chiang.”

(h/t R.H. Terry Tory)

The recent outrage over the election of the BNP — a racist, whites-only party — to the European Parliament has been propelled almost exclusively by the power of the word “racist.” The word is obviously an apt description of certain BNP candidates, but it is too pat to suffice as a description of those who voted for them or for the complex social forces in play. When it comes to the BNP’s gains, the proverbial elephant in the room is not race, but rather citizens’ concerns about a creeping Islamism; the BNP is functionally the only party that — perhaps by default, or incidental to their racist ideals — addresses the issue openly.
One need only read the endless chains of comments under online British newspaper stories to know that large numbers of Brits who, by their own word, didn’t and never would vote for the BNP, have had longstanding concerns about creeping Islamism on British soil, and are angry that the ruling classes, whether out of fear or complacency, have not only comprehensively refused to acknowledge or address their concerns in any real way, but have abetted in portraying those holding those concerns as pariahs and – yes — racists; the real concerns of the citizens, in other words, are illegitimate, ill-founded and dismissable.
BNP leader Nick Griffin was charged with incitement after the BBC secretly filmed him condemning Islam. Despite being utterly unrepentant in his view at the trial, a jury found him and his co-charged not guilty. This wasn’t acceptable to those-who-rule. Mick Hume:

On hearing of this disgraceful display of independent thinking by the jurors of Yorkshire, New Labour and the rest of the anti-racist establishment immediately threw all of its toys out of the pram. No less a figure than chancellor Gordon Brown, prime minister in waiting and a man not noted for hot-blooded political speeches, immediately intimated to the BBC that this sort of thing would not be tolerated on his watch. ‘I think any preaching of religious or racial hatred will offend mainstream opinion in this country and I think we have got to do whatever we can to root it out from whatever quarter it comes. And if that means we have got to look at the laws again, then we will have to do so.’

(….)

If there is one thing worse (and a lot worse) than the feeble far-right, it is the state using that little political faction as the pretext for another political clampdown on liberty and democracy. After all, it is not the BNP that is now planning to introduce new laws further to limit freedom of expression, laying down new rules about what we are allowed to say about religion, or floating ideas in high places about the ‘problem’ of jury trials. Griffin can only vent his illiberal prejudices at private meetings of his party activists. The government has the power to try to turn its illiberal prejudices into public custom and law.

When British police take to the streets to protect mobs of men calling for the death of Jews, or dhimmis, or the Pope, while opponents of Islam are in hiding, or are charged by the government, or barred from entering the country, a certain number of citizens are going to see their only chance for representation in whoever will address the issue, however vile their other views may be. As Richard Pendlebury of the Daily Mail put it:

Almost overnight, it is no longer a matter of what the BNP is – a marginal group with a rotten ideological core – but what it is not.

It’s a lesson that the ruling class in Europe is learning the hard way.

Now is the time at SDA when we juxtapose!
Doug Saunders of the Globe and Mail:

In a startling flight to the fringes, the European Union’s 490-million citizens sent an amazing range of angry, racist, anti-European, anti-immigrant, separatist, protest and far-right parties and candidates to represent them in Brussels, a ragtag protest vote….

The Scotsman:

(BNP) leader Nick Griffin, newly elected to the European parliament, was pelted with eggs and forced to abandon a press conference.

Shouting “off our streets, Nazi scum”, demonstrators yesterday chased Mr Griffin and party colleague Andrew Brons away from College Green in front of parliament…

Demonstrators — hastily mobilised by text, e-mail and twitter — hammered on the tops of the departing cars with their placards and cheered as they saw the politicians off…

A friend just emailed me a link to a George F. Will column, in the Washington Post, which includes this amusing description of the new animated half-hour show “The Goode Family,” now airing on American network television, of all places:

Gerald and Helen Goode, their children and dog Che (when supervised, he is a vegan; when unsupervised, squirrels disappear) live in a college town, where T-shirts and other media instruct (‘Meat is murder’), admonish (‘Don’t kill wood’) and exhort (‘Support our troops . . . and their opponents’). The college, where Gerald works, gives students tenure. And when Gerald says his department needs money to raise the percentage of minority employees, his boss cheerily replies, ‘Or we could just fire three white guys. Everybody wins!’ Helen shops at the One Earth store, where community shaming enforces social responsibility: ‘Attention One Earth shoppers, the driver of the SUV is in aisle four. He’s wearing the baseball cap.’

Ah hoo ha ha ha…

The New York Times television critic disapproves. The show ‘feels aggressively off-kilter with the current mood, as if it had been incubated in the early to mid-’90s, when it was possible to find global-warming skeptics among even the reasonable and informed.’ That is a perfect (because perfectly complacent) sample of the grating smugness of the planet-savers, delivered by an entertainment writer: Reasonable dissent is impossible…

Less impossible now, apparently, even in the most public sphere. And that’s a good thing.

…and thy will be done:

Obama’s belief in dialogue, in the winning power of friendly humility, will be tested not by the reaction to his speeches, but by the success or failure of his smiling overtures to those now hostile to our country. The results so far: Osama bin Laden has denounced him, Kim Jong-Il has mocked him by launching rockets and rattling his centrifuge, Mahmoud Ahmadinijad has defied him, and European leaders have refused his requests for more NATO troops and centrally planned economic stimulus programs.

(….)

To believe that these and other such initiatives will succeed, one has to believe that other nations and peoples are motivated primarily by a desire to get along with others, and not a desire to acquire more power, land, prestige, or influence. One has to believe that the desire for power and status stems not from human nature, but from outside factors — such as a misplaced fear of American intentions, or a misunderstanding of a rival’s point of view. Fix the outside causes of their hostility, and people will revert to their natural, peaceful state.

Got peace if you want it, eh?

A few weeks ago Jasmine MacDonnell, an aide to Natural Resources Minister Lisa Raitt, left behind some documents at an Ottawa television bureau. In the storm that followed opposition members howled for Raitt’s resignation, but in the end it was Jasmine MacDonnell who lost her job.
SDA commenter batb noted as an aside that Jasmine MacDonnell happens to the daughter of Ralston MacDonell, a prominent fundraiser for Michael Ignetieff, and made the sound point that “you’d think that if your father is a fundraiser for Michael Ignatieff…you might be MORE careful in the carrying out of your duties as communications secretary for a (Conservative) MP.”
You’d think. But today, there’s a new storm: Steve Maher of the Halifax Chronicle Herald apparently got his hand of a tape on which Raitt can allegedly be heard making unflattering remarks about a cabinet colleague. Seems Jasmine MacDonnell forgot to shut the tape off after an interview, and then subsequently, according to CP’s sources, “left her tape recorder in a House of Commons washroom…”
You have to feel sorry for poor forgetful Jasmine MacDonnell, who is now seeking an injunction to prevent release of the tape.

North Korea open for negotiations:

North Korea sentenced two American journalists to 12 years in prison labor camps after convicting them of illegally entering the country, a harsh penalty handed down after a closed trial and mysterious arrest that underline Pyongyang’s reputation for injustice and its hostile relationship with the U.S.

(….)

Some analysts say they believe the sentencing marks a turning point in the reporters’ situation and that North Korea will now negotiate with the U.S. to arrange their release in exchange for a payment or a diplomatic visit. Pyongyang might seek an easing of the pressure being brought on it for exploding a nuclear device two weeks ago and firing and long-range missile in early April.

The WSJ noted in an earlier story that “Mr. Obama campaigned last year on a commitment to re-engage with regimes the Bush administration had considered pariahs.”
His commitment appears to have been been duly noted in Pyongyang.

Last Election Day in the U.S., three members of black supremacist group New Black Panthers, one of them wielding an nightstick, stood in front of a polling building in Philadelphia wearing black berets and military-type garb. The Justice Department “filed a complaint under Section 11(b) of the Voting Rights Act…after months of research and acquiring a sworn affidavit attesting to the intimidation,” although they “inexplicably…did not enter the affidavit in the court case.” Here’s what civil rights activist and attorney Bartle Bull, who is a former campaign manager for Jimmy Carter and Robert Kennedy, described in said affidavit:

I watched the shorter man with the weapon point it at individuals and slap it in his hand…I watched the two uniformed men confront voters and attempt to intimidate voters. They were positioned in a location that forced every bother to pass in close proximity to them. The weapons was openly displayed and brandished in plain sight of voters. I watched the two uniformed men attempt to intimidate, and interfere with the work of other poll observers whom the uniformed men apparently believed did not share their preferences politically….I heard the shorter man make a statement directed toward white poll observers that ‘you are about to be ruled by the black man, cracker.’

The three thugs, one of whom was a credentialed Democratic Party polling observer and “an elected member of Philadelphia’s 14th Ward Democratic Committee” subsequently refused to show up in court. On April 20 a federal judge ordered a default judgement against them — the usual procedure in such cases. Last week, though, political appointees in the Justice Department overruled Justice Office lawyers and dropped the case outright; the three men now walk away without any penalty whatsoever for either the intimidation at the polling station or their refusal to show up in court.
What happened on election day in Philadelphia was an isolated incident, but even if one charitably views the three men as having been merely overly-dramatic in engaging in what they may have seen as grass-roots activism, it’s important that there be some repercussions for the open intimidation of voters at polling stations, particularly, you’d think, in cases where the intimidators are credentialed election observers. And I don’t think it even needs to be said that if an elected member of a Republican Committee who was also a member of a racist organization had stood in front of a polling station on election day dressed in a paramilitary uniform and jackboots, tapping a nightstick in his palm and making racist remarks against Obama voters, and then refused to show up in court to address the matter, the current Justice Department would have treated the matter quite differently.
(NOTE: the comments function is now working — EBD)