Scott Spiegel

In 2000 the British paper The Independent ran a story with the wistful headline “Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past.”

Faithfully advancing the theory of anthropogenic global warming like a good leftist media foot soldier, the author nostalgically declared, “Snow is starting to disappear from our lives.  Sledges, snowmen, snowballs and the excitement of waking to find that the stuff has settled outside are all a rapidly diminishing part of Britain’s culture.”

The Independent cited Dr. David Viner of the climatic research unit at the University of East Anglia, who predicted that in a few years, snow will be “a very rare and exciting event…  Children just aren’t going to know what snow is.”

That would be the same climatic research unit involved in last year’s Climategate scandal, in which a whistleblower released thousands of e-mails documenting researchers manipulating, covering up, and losing data used in the UN’s report on dangerous manmade global warming.

In The Independent’s story, one researcher at the Hadley Centre for Climate Prediction and Research envisioned a world in which British children might have to settle for experiencing online “polar scenes” or feeling “virtual cold.”

Meanwhile, in the decade since, Brits, Americans, and the rest of the world have gotten to experience actual polar scenes and feel real cold in spades.

Eight of the past 10 winters have seen above-average snowfall and below-normal temperatures across North America, Europe, and Asia, not counting the cold spell of December 2010.

The entire Eastern seaboard of the U.S., most of the Midwest, and much of the South were recently rocked with a series of paralyzing storms that stranded Christmas travelers, crippled airlines, stalled vehicles, collapsed sporting complexes, cleared Times Square, shut down New York City’s mass transit system, halted Amtrak service, destroyed marine life in the Carolinas, and cryogenically froze a functioning lighthouse on Lake Michigan.

The British Transport Secretary recently sought the advice of the UK’s top science advisor regarding whether, in light of the massive snowfall that shut down Heathrow and other major European airports last week, extra levels of preparation and spending should be budgeted in future years for harsher winters.

Just as it was becoming clear that snow was not on the verge of extinction, global warming fanatics began to air the theory that climate warming actually predicted increased snow, because warm air “holds” more precipitation.  (The same could be said for liberals’ attempts to fool the public: the more hot air they spew, the more likely they are to wallop us with a snow job.)

Note that this cockamamie notion that increased snow results from global warming was conveniently produced after the harsh, snow-drenched winters of the past few years, not before—and certainly not back in 2000.

Global warming alarmists laugh at skeptics who point out that temperatures have not increased over the past 10 years, but rather have decreased.  Though there has been no measurable global warming since 1998, Al Gore worshippers insist that trends of a few years prove nothing, and that temporary ups and downs are to be expected when addressing a phenomenon that can be measured only over decades or centuries.

This is not, of course, what the alarmists were saying in the 1990s, when they cited every melted popsicle and bare midriff as incontrovertible proof that the globe was dissolving.

So we now know that global warming can eliminate snow (pace The Independent), but can also produce more snow and gargantuan, historic blizzards.  Global warming can lead to slightly above-average temperatures (as in the 1990s), but can also result in a 12-year decline in global temperature, cold and miserable springs, and brutal winters.  (See The New York Times’ recent op-ed “Bundle Up, It’s Global Warming,” in which the author explains that “the overall warming of the atmosphere is actually creating cold-weather extremes.”)

Global warmists are quick to give birth to a litter of ad hoc explanations about why “warming” has led to cooling.  But if the past 10 winters had been unusually warm and snow-free, the warmists inarguably would have cited that data as iron-clad proof of their prognostications.

Alarmists pull after-the-fact hypotheses out of thin air to compensate for their failed forecasts, but their routine is getting old.

Manmade global warming is, given our current state of scientific knowledge, and the way the majority of the world’s climate centers and media outlets treat the evidence, an unfalsifiable theory.

In liberals’ view, the only outcome global warming can’t lead to is mankind being let off the hook from the charge of destroying our natural habitat through the sin of industrial civilization.



 Print This Post

Related articles

• NYT: “Bundle Up, It’s Global Warming” (theblogprof.blogspot.com)
• ‘Children Aren’t Going to Know What Snow Is’: A Global Warming Classic Flashback (michellemalkin.com)
• Horrid, Frigid Snowbound Winter. Must Be Global Warming. (minx.cc)
• Global Warming Skeptic Predicts Brutal Winter, Warns “You Ain’t Seen Nothing Yet” (mediaite.com)
• Monday Links: Climate Fraud Edition (nicedeb.wordpress.com)

The congenitally leftist site Media Matters regularly collects “controversial” quotes by conservative personalities and displays them on its website for liberals to gawk at.  It’s supposed to be self-evident to visitors how insane these statements are.

Evidently this soft-sell strategy works, as evidenced by the reams of snarky remarks dumped in the comments section by loyal readers.

Rush Limbaugh is of course a favorite target of Media Matters.  Please join me while I deconstruct a sampling of contentiously worded but eminently sensible recent Rush quotes (thanks to David Swindle for post idea):

“Continued unemployment benefits increases unemployment”

Rush bemoans the fact that recent Republican opposition to extending unemployment benefits has been based, not on the philosophy behind endless benefit extensions, but on the technicality of paying for them.  Rush points out the fact that it’s easier for people to accept a $325 a week check than to look for a job.  Subsidizing something (unemployment) gives you more of it; taxing something (working) gives you less of it.  Contrary to Nancy Pelosi’s claims, unemployment benefits do not increase employment.

Everything Obama has done has been “an attack on the greatness of this country”

Rush cites the following disasters in Obama’s first term: ObamaCare, intrusive financial regulations, a moratorium on drilling, bank and auto company bailouts, and the stimulus bill.  So where does Rush get it wrong?  Is it part of America’s manifest destiny to impose socialized medicine, constrict financial institutions, ban exploration of natural resources, keep bad businesses from failing by punishing good ones, and spend trillions of dollars we don’t have on projects we don’t need?

Requiring insurers to cover preexisting conditions “isn’t insurance, it’s welfare”

Eric Cantor recently announced that Republicans would not seek to completely get rid of the health care reform bill; some elements will be kept, such as coverage of preexisting conditions.  Rush argues that forcing insurance companies to accept people with preexisting conditions is welfare.  Insurance companies stay in business by getting many people to pay premiums; if they had to provide coverage to anyone who wanted it, people would simply wait until they suffered catastrophes and then purchase insurance.  Thus, coverage of preexisting conditions = free money = welfare.

“The Constitution is an obstacle to [liberals], it’s a Bible to me”

A caller wants to know how to bridge the gap between liberals and conservatives.  Rush tells him that the things the two sides want done are incompatible, and that the left is no longer on the same page as the right.  Rush is willing to compromise on policy details but not on the Constitution.  When you have Democrats being caught admitting they don’t worry about the Constitution, or trying to redefine it as involving more than protecting “negative liberties,” then there’s no room for negotiation.

Obama didn’t lobby for 2022 World Cup because he is a “guaranteed loser … talk to Chicago about that”

Obama failed to win the 2016 Olympics for Chicago, guarantee carbon emission reduction concessions at Copenhagen, help candidates in Virginia, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, and get G-20 members to agree to currency inflation.  He is, in every sense of the term, a loser.  Yes, he won the 2008 presidential election—and an electoral victory gives one power, but does not produce actual results.

Past terrorists have been “young male Muslim Arabs,” and now “everybody has to be groped”

Rush addresses dissatisfaction over the Transportation Safety Administration’s decision to use invasive full-body scanners and “enhanced pat downs.”  We know who the enemy is in the war on terror, what they look like, their national origins, their ages.  But for some reason we’re supposed to suspend logic and pretend anyone could be a terrorist.  Police officers profile suspects all the time, and residents of high-crime neighborhoods are grateful they do.  If a suspect is a young, African American male, should police waste time stopping middle-aged white men and Hispanic grandmothers to prove they’re not racist?

Some Republicans are “gun-shy about defending the rich,” but “I, of course, do not have that problem”

Rush discusses a column in which Thomas Sowell expresses concern about the GOP losing the tax extension debate.  Sowell notes that tax cuts for the rich raise revenue and create jobs.  Republicans have that fact on their side, but they have to explain it to the public.  Decades of pounding from the mainstream media have left the GOP queasy about speaking up.  Sowell notes that we just won a landslide and asks, Why are we afraid to speak up?  Rush’s answer: The GOP does need to speak up, but in the meantime, I’m going to do it for them.

“Secondhand smoke is harmless”

A recent study by a Swedish health board claims that secondhand smoke kills more than 600,000 people each year.  Rush notes that the World Health Organization conducted a worldwide study in 2001 that found that secondhand smoke has no impact on health, but suppressed the study, because its findings were politically incorrect.  Rush observes that liberals lie about global warming, DDT, and other supposed health risks in order to control people’s lives, so until there is better evidence about secondhand smoking, we shouldn’t give them the benefit of the doubt on this.

To African-Americans: “The Democrat party is the party of keeping you poor and downtrodden”

A caller asks why the media don’t focus on the fact that if the Bush tax cuts are not extended, the lowest tax rate would increase from 10% to 15%, a 50% increase, which would disproportionately affect African Americans.  Rush points out that Democrats are not the party that is best for African Americans but rather the party of segregation, Jim Crow, and the KKK.  Until FDR used electoral strategies to turn African Americans his way, this voting bloc had consistently voted Republican.  LBJ expanded this strategy with his Great Society in the 1960s, and Democratic presidents from Carter to Clinton to Obama continued it, with the result that illegitimacy and dropout rates are now higher in African American communities than in the 1950s.  So remind me: how are Democrats the party that’s best for African Americans?



 Print This Post

Related articles

• Rush Limbaugh Attacks GOP Leadership: “Where Is The Republican Vision?” (mediaite.com)
• Sharpton wants FCC to shut down Limbaugh’s ‘racist talk’ (crooksandliars.com)
• Rush Limbaugh: Adults Solve Obama’s Problem While He Shoots Hoops (mediaite.com)
• Rush Limbaugh: “Keep Your Hands Off My Teabag, Mr. President” (mediaite.com)
• Top Dem warns Obama: ‘We’ve got mutual enemies here’ (thehill.com)

On Monday a Virginia federal district court judge ruled that the primary enforcement mechanism of ObamaCare, the Minimum Essential Coverage Provision—also known as the individual mandate—was unconstitutional.

Justice Henry E. Hudson’s summary judgment did not rule on any other aspect of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and the Obama Justice Department will likely appeal the decision, but the individual mandate is key to making ObamaCare work, since requiring the purchase of health insurance by virtually all U.S. citizens is the only way the rest of the bill can be paid for.  Hudson’s ruling provides ammunition to those who argue that requiring people to purchase a product or service against their will is unconstitutional.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius took two primary lines of defense against the Commonwealth of Virginia, whose Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli filed the suit.

First, she argued that the purchase of health care insurance is an activity that affects interstate commerce, which the Constitution gives the federal government the power to regulate per the Commerce Clause and via the Necessary and Proper Clause.  She cited the cases of Wickard v. Filburn, which upheld the government’s ability to regulate farmers’ growing and consumption of wheat on their farms, and Gonzales v. Raich, which upheld the government’s ability to do the same for marijuana for medicinal purposes, as evidence that the government can regulate private individual economic activity due to its effect on interstate commerce.

Sebelius stated that the power to force people to buy health insurance “is well within the traditional bounds of Congress’s Article I power,” by which she meant of course that it’s not remotely within those bounds, but she’d throw in “well” to hedge against any doubt the court may have on that matter.

Hudson tore Sebelius’ argument apart by noting that, for starters, Wickard and Gonzales were widely recognized as being at the very outer limits of interpretation of the Commerce Clause, and that the individual mandate provision goes even further than these cases.  Hudson also pointed out a crucial difference between these two cases and the case of the individual mandate.  Namely, in Wickard and Gonzales, the federal government was regulating private economic decisions citizens had made, including purchasing a plot of land and growing wheat on it, and cultivating marijuana.

The individual mandate, in contrast, would be the first case in U.S. history in which the government was targeting a non-decision or non-action—not purchasing health insurance—as interstate “economic activity” subject to regulation.  As Justice Hudson writes, “Neither the Supreme Court nor any federal circuit court of appeals has extended Commerce Clause powers to compel an individual to involuntarily enter the stream of commerce by purchasing a commodity in the private market.”

Second, Sebelius argued that, even if the individual mandate couldn’t be regulated under the Commerce Clause, the Constitution gives the federal government broad power to tax citizens under the General Welfare Clause.  The penalty to be paid for noncompliance with the individual mandate could simply be considered a tax.

Not so fast, wrote Justice Hudson.  Taxes and penalties are different things, and calling a penalty a tax for convenience’s sake doesn’t make it one.  Taxes are used to generate revenue; penalties are used to enforce regulations.

When they were trying to sell their plan to the public, President Obama and Democratic legislators insisted to reporters that the fine was not a tax but a penalty.  An early version of the bill used the word “penalty” to refer to the fine, later versions used the word “tax,” and the final version reverted to “penalty.”  Hudson called the rebranding of the fine as a “tax” a “transparent afterthought.”

There are other revenue-generating mechanisms in the 2,700-page bill that are referred to as taxes, such as the tax on “Cadillac” insurance plans, so clearly the bill’s authors meant for there to be a distinction between its taxes and its penalties.  Finally, Hudson notes that the purpose of the fine couldn’t be primarily to generate revenue, because if the enforcement mechanism worked perfectly, the revenue collected from the fine would be zero dollars.

So kudos to Justice Hudson for yanking out the linchpin of ObamaCare, without which it cannot properly run and will fall to pieces.  Though two Democratic-appointed federal justices in unrelated lawsuits in Virginia and Michigan have found the bill constitutional, and further rulings on the bills will be handed down from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court, this is an important victory in stopping the ObamaCare Express, even if we couldn’t catch it before it left the station.



 Print This Post

Related articles

• Obamacare’s Individual Mandate Exceeds Congress’ Commerce Clause Power (redstate.com)
• Obama’s health care reforms are looking sick | Richard Adams (guardian.co.uk)
• Federal Judge Overturns ObamaCare’s Insurance Mandate (reason.com)
• Federal Judge: Health Care Law Individual Mandate Unconstitutional (outsidethebeltway.com)
• Federal Judge Strikes Down Key Part of Obama Health Care Law (abcnews.go.com)

5. Ken Cuccinelli – Virginia’s Attorney General took office only in January of this year, after the November 2009 mini-wave election that brought us Republican governor Bob McDonnell. Cuccinelli was first out of the gate nationally to file a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the individual mandate provision of the worst piece of American legislation passed in a generation, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. (ObamaCare, as it is known, is also the only significant piece of American legislation remaking large swaths of society that did not pass with bipartisan support.) Cuccinelli filed his suit on behalf of Virginia less than 48 hours after passage of the bill, and in August a district court judge ruled that the lawsuit may proceed, which most expect it to do all the way to the Supreme Court.

Cuccinelli earned his stripes for this act alone, but gets bonus points for spearheading an effort–now supported by almost 20 states–to curb the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions as a pollutant. He also scores for investigating former UVA professor Michael Mann’s role in last fall’s ClimateGate.

4. Jim DeMint – Like Sarah Palin, South Carolina Senator DeMint was both prescient and influential in hand-selecting Tea Party candidates to endorse in crucial races across the country for the 2010 midterm primaries. DeMint had a better record of picking true conservatives than Palin, including Chuck DeVore over Carly Fiorina in California and Ovide Lamontagne over Kelly Ayotte in New Hampshire.

After a six-year stint as a South Carolina Representative, DeMint was elected to the Senate and made a name for himself as one of the key Senators working to eliminate earmarks in Congress. He was a vocal opponent of the bank bailout President Bush supported and the stimulus bill Obama pushed. DeMint bucked Obama in 2009 and traveled to visit Honduran President-elect Roberto Micheletti in support of the leader’s arrest of leftist former president Manuel Zelaya. DeMint’s one downside is that he received only 33% more of the vote in his 2010 reelection bid than Alvin Greene.

3. Rand Paul – Arguably the most exciting winner in the 2010 midterms, Kentucky Senator-elect Rand Paul is both radically fiscally libertarian and less nutty and isolationist than his eccentric father, Texas Senator Ron Paul, including his opposition to closing Guantanamo Bay and his favoring military tribunals for suspected terrorists. Founder of Kentucky Taxpayers United and a self-described “constitutional conservative,” Paul weathered trivial criticisms over his ophthalmologist board certification, a college prank he played 27 years ago, and his reservations about one of the 10 titles of the Civil Rights Act. He crushed primary opponent Trey Grayson by 23% and general opponent Jack Conway by 12%.

Despite unjustified opposition to the PATRIOT Act, support for tax breaks to companies producing “alternative energy,” and other problems with his platform, Paul is unflinching in his desire to abolish the Federal Reserve, the federal income tax, and the National Department of Education. He also seeks to end federal bailouts and pass a balanced budget amendment, a moratorium on tax increases, and a “Read the Bills” Act.

2. Paul Ryan – In the dark days leading up to the passage of ObamaCare, Wisconsin Representative Paul Ryan proved himself to be, sadly, one of the few Republicans who could articulate the disastrous projected economic consequences of the legislation and reveal the sleight-of-hand Democratic legislators were using to pass the bill off as deficit-reducing. His efforts were most notable in his starring role in Obama’s embarrassing Blair House Summit in February.

Ryan also introduced the Roadmap for America’s Future, which outlined his plan for managing our country’s gargantuan deficits by addressing entitlement reform for Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid, including privatizing these programs via vouchers with declining value over time. While most Republicans are still figuring out how to repeal or defund ObamaCare, Ryan is several steps ahead, plotting how to reverse similar debacles passed generations ago and on the verge of bankruptcy.

1. Chris Christie – After winning a surprise victory over incumbent John Corzine last November, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has been the conservative politician in recent memory who has most lived up to expectations. Whether fearlessly standing up to teachers’ unions, telling off legislators or reporters who refused to face facts, slashing wasteful government programs with no concern for the self-righteous outcry from beneficiaries of this largesse, or refusing to fund unaffordable new boondoggles like the proposed Manhattan-New Jersey tunnel, Christie put his principles into action and remained surprisingly popular with voters while doing so.

Christie already had a stellar record of accomplishment as U.S. Attorney for the District of New Jersey, having won convictions for 130 public officials in corruption cases with a stunning 100% success rate. In an election year full of impressive candidates who ran and won on outstanding platforms of things they promised to do, Christie takes the top spot for actually doing them.

Honorable mentions: Andrew Breitbart, John Cornyn, Mitch Daniels, Bobby Jindal, Ron Johnson, John Kyl, Mike Lee, Ted Olson, Tim Scott, Pat Toomey



 Print This Post

Related articles

• DeMint to GOP: Give Credit to Tea Party (foxnews.com)
• Chris Christie’s Star Turn Raises National Prospects, Nearly $9 Million for GOP (politicsdaily.com)
• Attorney General Cuccinelli’s star keeps rising at Va. tea party gathering – Washington Post (news.google.com)
• Jim DeMint: Leading the Right’s Rebel Brigade (time.com)
• Rand Paul Pushes Drastic Budget Cuts (politics.usnews.com)

10. Allen West – Retired Army Lieutenant Colonel, Iraq soldier and Afghanistan advisor, Bronze Star recipient, former FrontPage Magazine Man of the Year, and Florida Representative-elect Allen West said and did everything right during his 2010 campaign.  West’s image wasn’t tarnished in the slightest by Keith Olbermann’s smears about West’s harmless firing of a gun into a barrel while interrogating an Iraqi police officer who refused to divulge information about an upcoming ambush on American soldiers.  West’s quick thinking and bold action prevented the attack, and further strikes in the region, until West retired.

But Colonel West’s finest moment was his reaction to the revelation earlier this year of Harry Reid’s “light-skinned” with “no Negro dialect” statements about presidential candidate Barack Obama, a speech that answered charges of Being Republican While Black: “Reid’s comments [are] indicative of the true sentiment elitist liberals have toward black Americans.  The history of the Democrat party is one of slavery, secession, segregation, and now socialism, born from the Johnson Great Society programs that have castigated blacks as victims…  I would rather be called ‘an Uncle Tom and a sellout’ than lose my self-esteem and be considered an inferior by liberals…  [I] shall never submit to the collective progressive ideal of inferiority.”

9. Nikki Haley – After South Carolina Governor-elect, former accountant and businesswoman, three-term state representative, fiscal conservative, and Tea Party favorite Nikki Haley received the Sarah Palin treatment, liberals thought she was going to cower in the face of malevolent mainstream media pressure.  But Haley fought off unproven allegations of extramarital affairs—conveniently produced two weeks before the Republican primary—and, with the support of the Palinator herself, moved from last to first in a four-person primary, survived a runoff election, and beat Democratic challenger Vincent Sheheen in the general election.

Haley campaigned on promises to cut and flatten taxes, simplify South Carolina’s tax structure and regulatory system, hire to regulatory boards businesspeople who understand how industry works, and reduce the unchecked power of the executive to tax citizens via ad hoc fines and fees.  Her pro-business efforts in the state legislature won her the “Friend of the Taxpayer” award from the South Carolina Association of Taxpayers in 2009 and a lifetime “A” rating from the South Carolina Club for Growth.

8. Sharron Angle – This conservative firebrand from Nevada favored abolishing Social Security, the Fed, the IRS, the National Department of Education, gun control, offshore drilling bans, global warming regulations, and U.S. membership in the United Nations.  What’s not to love?  Though she lost in an inexplicable squeaker of a race for U.S. Senate, the sclerotic Harry Reid is so tiresome and embarrassing to even his base he’ll probably do more damage to his party in the next six years than Angle could have done good for the country.

Demonstrating their self-righteous double standards, Democrats threw a fit over Angle’s “Some of you look a little more Asian to me” comment to elementary school children—made in response to a question about why an Angle immigration ad depicted only Latinos, and in support of Angle’s contention that the policy was colorblind—but defended Reid’s slimy, calculating “no Negro dialect” remarks.  Since Angle was too classy to use the leftist tactic of claiming solidarity with minority victimhood to defend herself against charges of offensive action, I’ll do it for her: Angle’s son married a Mexican woman, and she has four half-Mexican grandchildren.

7. Christine O’Donnell – You already know all the untrue, exaggerated, unimportant things about her.  How about the fact that this spunky Delaware senatorial candidate pledged never to raise taxes, supported a balanced budget amendment, a ban on earmarks, a simplified tax code, raising the retirement age for Social Security, repeal of ObamaCare, and the Tea Party’s Contract from America, and opposed off-shore drilling bans and cap-and-trade legislation?  O’Donnell helped rid us of the useless nine-term RINO Mike Castle, who was so condescending to her commando primary candidacy that he refused even to debate her.

Unfortunately, being a “bearded Marxist” isn’t disqualification enough to be elected Senator in Delaware, so O’Donnell lost to Democratic opponent Chris Coons.  Like Sarah Palin in 2008, O’Donnell’s influence was more inspirational and populist than wonky or grounded in protracted experience, but she helped engage and excite people who had never been interested in politics and served notice to establishment Republicans that conservatives were fed up with not having true representation of their beliefs in Congress.

6. Marco Rubio – “Unelectable” Florida Senator-elect Marco Rubio went from 30 polling points behind his primary opponent to demolishing his two general election opponents, and topped it off with a moving impromptu victory speech citing the immigration of his Cuban exile parents seeking the political and economic freedoms in the United States that made his candidacy possible.  Like fellow Floridian Allen West, Rubio was a perfect candidate who made not one misstep during his campaign.

During his eight years in the state legislature, tax reform whiz Rubio served as Majority Whip, Majority Leader, and even Speaker of the House, and helped write groundbreaking model legislation to counter the effects of the Supreme Court’s disastrous Kelo v. New London eminent domain decision.  Rubio staved off tanned lizard Governor Charlie Crist and prevented him from grabbing the seat, either as a Republican or an “Independent.”  And how can you resist a candidate who, based on his most recent voting record in 2008, received a 0% rating from the Florida AFL-CIO?

Next week: The nail in the coffin of ObamaCare, the Kingmaker, the Libertarian, the Navigator, and the Slash-inator!



 Print This Post

Related articles

• Midterms 2010: Marco Rubio leads successful ethnic minority Republican candidates (telegraph.co.uk)
• Sarah Palin’s Endorsements See Mixed Results (abcnews.go.com)
• Harry Reid Election Results Spur Questions About Sharron Angle’s Political Future (huffingtonpost.com)
• South Carolina’s Nikki Haley: Tea Party’s Pride Sails Through Debate (politicsdaily.com)
• Marxist NBC News Calls Black Conservative Allen West “Bigoted, Ignorant” (votingfemale.wordpress.com)