You normally wouldn't expect to find me at the HuffPost -- unless someone over there was attacking me, that is. 

But when my good friend Jose Vargas left the Washington Post to help launch HuffPost Technology and asked me to write a guest post about conservatives winning online, how could I say 'no'? 

Here's an excerpt of my post:

If politics is war, and words are weapons, then Twitter can only be compared to the AK-47. The weapon, of course, was revolutionary specifically because of its simplicity. While Americans made superior weapons, the rugged AK became a revolutionary icon. The reason, of course, was because anyone -- a farmer, a new recruit -- sadly, even a child -- could learn to use it in a matter of minutes.

Twitter is the same way. While liberals have invested countless dollars and hours creating "superior" infrastructure, Twitter essentially did the legwork for conservatives, building platform for conservatives to exploit.

Read the whole thing here.

The bitter campaign for Texas governor grew even more heated this week when Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison's campaign was accused of dirty campaign tactics, some are saying has become a pattern.

First it was the unquestionably bad use of hidden code words on the Hutchison campaign website, such as "Rick Perry Gay"  -- now the campaign has been caught posting a video edited to take out of context a recent speech made by Governor Rick Perry.

Here's the story.  Texas has been recognized as a guidepost for how to minimize the negative affects of the bad economy. Now,  according to an HIS Global Insight report, Texas is being heralded as the state to lead the recovery from the recession.

It’s a point Governor Perry has understandably been trying to highlight in remarks around the state.  But Perry may have made a mistake in talking up the recovery too much, when he said:

"Why is Texas recession-proof?” ... “Just today, I think, Michael, you said someone had put out a report that the first state coming out of the recession is going to be the state of Texas, and I said, ‘we’re in one?’

On the surface, this makes Perry appear out of touch.  The problem, though, is the video leaves out the part questioning if Texas is in a recession thus putting the remarks completely out of context.  As KHOU.com reported,

A spokesperson for Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison confirmed that her campaign videotaped a speech by Gov. Rick Perry in Houston Thursday, and released [only] a section of video in which the Governor questioned whether Texas is in a recession.

Was it a dirty trick, or just a case of normal campaign protocol?  After all, everyone -- including bloggers -- edits for time and content. That’s the question liberal-leaning blogger Paul Burka of Texas Monthly posed, himself (read his full comments by clicking on the link):

The tape was unquestionably edited after “Are we in one?” to eliminate the words, “but seriously….” So the answer to the [question] “Is the Perry videotape a dirty trick?” is yes.

As KHOU also reported, state senator Dan Patrick, who was at the event, agreed the KBH campaign distorted the message intentionally:

“Don’t take ten seconds out of a 30 minute speech and say ‘that’s what he meant,’” Patrick said. “What he was saying tied into what he said earlier-- that we created more jobs in 2008 than all other states combined, that Caterpillar moved its headquarters here and that 1,500 people a day move to Texas. He was talking about how Texas is still in relatively better shape than almost any other state.”

Campaigns have been known for “selective editing” of opponents speeches, but one would not expect this type of mistake being made by a senator who has been in politics most of her adult life. It only goes to highlight the perception that her campaign is either in trouble or that one part of the staff doesn’t know what the other part is doing. Either way, this coming to light cannot be good for Senator Hutchison...

Calling themselves, "Christian Leaders for a Nuclear-Free Iran," several prominent social conservatives have signed a letter to Members of the U.S. Congress, urging tough sanctions on Iran.

Signers include such luminaries as Pat Robertson of Christian Broadcasting Network, Charles Colson of the Prison Fellowship Ministries, Richard Land of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention, Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family, Bill Donohue of the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights, Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America, Gary Bauer of American Values, and Dr. John Hagee of the Conerstone Church in San Antonio -- and many more.

The letter urges,

"immediate action to address Iran’s program to develop and deploy nuclear weapons by imposing economic sanctions on foreign companies that: export refined petroleum products, including gasoline, to Iran; help maintain Iran’s domestic refining capacity; provide ships or shipping services to transport such products; underwrite those shipments; or finance or broker those shipments. The U.S. should also immediately initiate a boycott of any arms sales to Iran."

You can read the full letter here.

... This is interesting to me for several reasons, not the least of which is that during the Cold War, the three-legs of the conservative movement (social conservatives, fiscal conservatives, and national security conservatives) all found unique and legitimate reasons to unite around a shared objective:  Winning the Cold War. 

This letter, signed by numerous prominent social conservatives, implies the conservative movement might once again find a way to coalesce around a common foreign enemy.  At least, this letter implies there is potential for that to occur...

During an interview with Katie Couric, Glenn Beck said he may have voted for Hillary Clinton had she won the Democratic nomination.  What is more, he says he thinks "John McCain would have been worse for the country than Barack Obama"...


Watch CBS Videos Online

The full interview is set to run at CBSNews.com on Tuesday at 7 p.m., EST.

Without a doubt, my favorite part of President Obama's interview yesterday with George Stephanopoulos was when Stephanopoulos pointed out that, according to Merriam-Webster's dictionary, ObamaCare is a tax increase (start watching at around 3:10 mark) ...

TRANSCRIPT (begins at the 3:10 mark on the above video)

STEPHANOPOULOS:  ... during the campaign.  Under this mandate, the government is forcing people to spend money, fining you if you don't.  How is that not a tax?

 OBAMA:  Well, hold on a second, George.  Here -- here's what's happening.  You and I are both paying $900 bucks on average -- our families -- in higher premiums because of uncompensated care.  Now, what I've said is that, if you can't afford health insurance, you certainly shouldn't be punished for that.  That's just piling on.

   OBAMA:  If, on the other hand, we're giving tax credits -- we've set up an exchange, you are now part of a big pool, we've driven down the costs, we've done everything we can, and you actually can afford health insurance, but you've just decided, "You know what?  I want to take my chances," and then you get hit by a bus, and you and I have to pay for the emergency room care, that's...

STEPHANOPOULOS:  That may be, but it's still a tax increase.

OBAMA:  No.  That -- that's not true, George.  The -- for us to say that you've got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase.

What it's saying is, is that we're not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you any more than the fact that right now everybody in America, just about, has to get auto insurance.  Nobody considers that a tax increase.  People say to themselves, that is a fair way to make sure that, if you hit my car, that I'm not covering all the costs.

STEPHANOPOULOS:  But it may be fair, it may be good public policy...

OBAMA:  No, but -- but, George, you -- you can't just make up that language and decide that that's called a tax increase.  Any -- if I -- if I say that right now your premiums are going to be going up by 5 percent or 8 percent or 10 percent next year, and you say, "Well, that's not a tax increase," but, on the other hand, if I say that I don't want to have to pay for you not carrying coverage, even after I give you tax credits that make it affordable, then...

STEPHANOPOULOS:  I -- I don't think I'm making it up.  Merriam- Webster's dictionary:  Tax, "a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes."

OBAMA:  George, the fact that you looked up Merriam's dictionary, the definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you're stretching a little bit right now.  Otherwise, you wouldn't have gone to the dictionary to check on the definition.  I mean, what...

STEPHANOPOULOS:  Well, no, but...

OBAMA:  ... if what you're saying is...

STEPHANOPOULOS:  I wanted to check for myself.  But your critics say it is a tax increase.

OBAMA:  My critics say everything is a tax increase.  My critics say that I'm taking over every sector of the economy.  You know that. Look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we're going to have an individual mandate or not, but...

STEPHANOPOULOS:  But you reject that it's a tax increase?

OBAMA:  I absolutely reject that notion.

Over at World Magazine, Ken Blackwell pays homage to the doyenne of modern-day American conservatism.

Back in June, CIA Director Leon Panetta suggested former vice president Dick Cheney was almost "wishing" for another terrorist attack on the U.S. 

Panetta's argument hinged on this premise:  Because Dick Cheney warned us that President Obama's policies made America less safe, Republicans might benefit politically if, in fact, Cheney were proven right.  And so, Panetta concluded that Cheney was probably hoping for another attack...

Of course, despite what Panetta may think, warning that Obama's policies might invite attack is entirely different from wishing for a terrorist attack.  In Panetta's world, warning something might happen is tantamount to rooting for it to happen.

Panetta's argument also cynically assumed Dick Cheney would rather lose 3,000 plus fellow Americans than to be wrong (though avoiding another attack does not prove we are less safe, anyway).  ... Still, that didn't stop the CIA Director from making such an irresponsible suggestion.

Fast forward to last week when, presumably referring to town hall meetings, protests, and talk radio, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said,

“I saw this myself in the late ’70s in San Francisco,” she said, referring to anti-gay laws and demonstrations. “It created an environment in which violence took place.”

She was, of course, referring to the assassinations of Mayor George Moscone and Supervisor Harvey Milk, and warning that similar violence might take place today.

... While I would never suggest such a thing, logic seems to dictate that if Panetta believes Cheney's warnings mean he is "wishing" for a terrorist attack, then Pelosi's warnings might also mean she is "wishing" for violence.  After all, it is reasonable to assume that Democrats would benefit from her being proven right.  (Again, this according to Panetta's logic -- not mine).

The truth is that if anyone has incentive to avoid political violence -- particularly anything specifically aimed at the president -- it is conservatives.  As Glenn Beck recently said, "just one lunatic, like Timothy McVeigh, could ruin everything that everyone has worked so hard for, because these people in Washington won't pass up the use of an emergency. "

As liberal blogger Taylor Marsh wrote when applauded Pelosi, "Let it be noted for the record, with the gauntlet thrown down. Wingnuts who incite violence will be responsible."

The last thing conservatives want or need at this moment is to create martyrs, to be portrayed as extremists, and turn public opinion against them.  Conservatives are winning the debate, why would they want to spoil that?

Glenn Beck is the cover story of the new TIME magazine.  This is, no doubt, a sign of his amazing rise in popularity -- and his effectiveness.  But it seems like I've seen this all before ...



Hmmmmmm.....

 

They seem to be giving him The Limbaugh Treatment!

Just in time for the new semester, The Leadership Institute, America's premiere conservative training organization, has launched CampusReform.org -- a new site designed to turn the tide against liberal bias on college campuses.

According to a release, CampusReform.org will include:

• "a subsite for each of the 2,376 four-year colleges and universities in the country,"

• "tools for student activists to review biased textbooks, rate leftist professors, and report liberal abuses on campus,"

• "access to information on national conservative groups and legal organizations providing programs and services to students,"

... and much more.

According to Rasmussen, "Republican Kelly Ayotte leads Democrat Paul Hodes by eight points in an early look at New Hampshire’s 2010 race for the U.S. Senate."

Hodges is a Member of Congress who has recently taken heat for failing to hold any health care town hall meetings.  He also referred to opponents of ObamaCare as members of the "flat-earth society."

Every senate seat is precious these days, so Republicans are, no doubt, talking solace in the fact that they have a good shot at retaining the Gregg seat.