Video: The American Tank Man

Allegory: a representation of an abstract or spiritual meaning through concrete or material forms; figurative treatment of one subject under the guise of another.

Perhaps there is no allegory that better illustrates the lopsidedness that exists in the fight between government tyranny and a repressed populace, than the photo of one man - known as Tank Man - standing in front of four tanks in Tiananmen Square. That man, unidentified, defeated those tanks by taking a stand.

As the gun control debate heats up here in the United States, the Tea Party may be witnessing a re-birth. Even Bill Clinton seems to think so.

Enter one of the Tank Men from Tiananmen Square. The video below is of an activist who fought Chinese government tyranny there in 1989. Today, he is an American citizen and gun owner who explains perfectly the reason for the Second Amendment.

That reason is not hunting and it's not home protection. The reason for the Second Amendment is to shorten the odds between government tyrants and its repressed victims. The reason why Democrats in the U.S. want more gun control is very simple. They prefer those odds to be as long as possible.

In the video below, the American Tank Man gives a rousing speech, though the first paragraph was not captured by the cameraman so the opening transcript is below:

The past Monday I decided to visit the Minuteman Park in Lexington and pay tribute to Captain John Parker and his fellow minutemen. A thought came to my mind, that the founding fathers of the United States and Chairman Mao had one thing in common: they all realized that guns are important political instruments. Their similarities, however, ended there:

Chairman Mao wrote: ‘Political power grows out of barrel of a gun’, and he dictated: ‘The party shall command the gun’. James Madison and his compatriots, however, believing that the power of the state is derived from the consent of the governed, ratified that ‘the right to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed’.

Here is the video of the American Tank Man, via Blog O'Stuff (h/t Sipsey Street):

Video: North Koreans Bawl over Kim Jong Il's Death

Can the people of an entire nation have Stockholm Syndrome? Isn't it the only way to explain this reaction of North Koreans to the death of their country's brutal dictator, Kim Jong Il.

This is the opposite reaction the soldiers for the Wicked Witch of the West had after she melted.



h/t Weasel Zippers

Obama Recognizes South Sudan's Independence, Ignores Bush's Role

Again, I've been as critical of Bush as anyone but fair is fair. George W. Bush put the wheels in motion that led to the formation of a new country - South Sudan, which officially declared its independence on July 9th. Based on an aggressive policy in 2005, the Bush administration focused on liberating Sudan's Christian south. It took six years but even the South Sudanese are giving Bush 43 the credit. The president of the new nation, Kiir Mayardit, underscored the sentiment by wearing the black stetson Bush gave to him years ago.

However, while Barack Obama has been willing to blame Bush for everything that's gone wrong since the latter left office, the former refuses to give Bush an ounce of credit, even when it's over-the-top obvious.

Via IBD:

As South Sudan joyfully celebrated its independence from Sudan, President Obama hailed it as the fruit of partnership, togetherness, hope and unity. South Sudanese, however, hailed President Bush.

Proudly wearing the black cowboy hat given to him by President Bush, South Sudan's new president, Salva Kiir Mayardit, couldn't have made a stronger statement about who made his country's independence possible after 50 years of warfare.

"It was George Bush and the Christian fundamentalists who heard the cry of South Sudan," affirmed a South Sudanese man quoted by the Los Angeles Times.

But to hear the White House — in its official recognition of the new republic, as well as on the White House blog and in an op-ed published earlier this year, President Bush had nothing to do with this.

"Today is a reminder that after the darkness of war, the light of a new dawn is possible," wrote Obama, as if such events just .. . happen.

Fact is, these events didn't just happen.

In 2005, President Bush put South Sudan at the top of the U.S. foreign policy agenda. Knocking heads, he forced the murderous Islamofascist government of Sudan to negotiate with the South Sudan rebels, including their right to secede. That hard work led to today's result — and with it, the first chance South Sudan has ever had to break free of its oppression.

Obama made sure to thank the African Union, civil society groups and even Sudan itself. But recognition of President Bush was relegated to nothing more than a nameless "U.S. leadership" that "played a part." Christian groups that made it their cause were also ignored.

Just another in a long line of examples that demonstrate Barack Obama's maturity level doesn't reach above that of a child.

h/t GWP

Video: Far Leftist Noam Chomsky's Moment of Clarity Regarding Hugo Chavez

Great find by Verum Serum here. Far leftist Noam Chomsky sang the praises of Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez back in 2007 for, among other things, calling George W. Bush a 'devil.' Chomsky also bemoaned the notion that Chavez was considered a 'tin pot dictator.' This first clip is Chomsky in 2007 where he derided George W. Bush and defended Chavez on things like Venezuela's 'social programs.' It's quite obvious in listening to Chomsky here that he was having an 'enemy of my enemy is my friend moment.' His hatred for Bush was such that if someone like Chavez hated Bush too, defending Chavez was noble, using leftwing logic.

Via VS, here's Chomsky in 2007:



The admiration Chomsky shared for Chavez in 2007 was obviously mutual. Here is Chavez holding up one of Chomsky's books at the U.N. General Assembly:



Now this. Chomsky is throwing Chavez under the bus. Via The Guardian:

Speaking to the Observer last week, Chomsky has accused the socialist leader of amassing too much power and of making an "assault" on Venezuela's democracy.

"Concentration of executive power, unless it's very temporary and for specific circumstances, such as fighting world war two, is an assault on democracy. You can debate whether [Venezuela's] circumstances require it: internal circumstances and the external threat of attack, that's a legitimate debate. But my own judgment in that debate is that it does not."

Though there is a temptation to gloat from those of us on the right, we should congratulate Chomsky on this 'ah-ha' moment. There needs to be far more of this and we must admit that, at some level, this admission on the part of Chomsky is an admission that he was wrong.

Yes, it's late but it's also welcome news.

Read it all.

h/t Verum Serum

VIDEO: GLENN BECK DOCUMENTARY

In case you missed it, though not many did, Glenn Beck's documentary, "The Revolutionary Holocaust - Live Free or Die" is now up on YouTube. Having watched it, there aren't any cogent arguments that refute it, that I've seen. In fact, the ones I read were quite lame. They all included martyrs for the Democratic party. What critics will not refute is what they will not acknowledge.

Pretty hard to argue that Mao, Chavez, Guevera, et. al. are being idolized these days. Critics of the documentary don't have a leg to stand on when it comes to that.

Definitely worth watching if you haven't seen it yet.