In his September 1 Washington Times column, Jeffrey Kuhner wrote that Martin Luther King Jr. "deserved much praise" but had a "dark side" which included being a "radical leftist." Kuhner further claimed that "King's legacy has been a double-edged sword: He both liberated and imprisoned black America." From the Washington Times:
[T]here was a dark side to King and it should not be ignored. Its effects continue to plague our society. Contrary to popular myth, the Baptist minister was a hypocrite who consistently failed to uphold his professed Christian standards. His rampant adultery and serial, life-long womanizing revolted even some of his closest associates. Large parts of his doctoral dissertation were plagiarized. He had numerous ties with communists and Soviet sympathizers. Then-FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover knew this, which is why he considered King a "fraud."
Moreover, King was a radical leftist. He promoted socialism, pacifism and the appeasement of totalitarian communism. He opposed the Vietnam War and even openly supported the Viet Cong and North Vietnam's Marxist dictator Ho Chi Minh, praising them as anti-imperialists battling Western occupying powers. Yet, these Soviet-backed communists would eventually impose a murderous police state upon the Vietnamese. Kingembraced the 1960s New Left's hatred of America. In their eyes, the United States was an evil empire driven by white oppression, militarism and capitalist exploitation. King openly promoted the anti-colonial "liberation" movements engulfing the Third World. For example, he defended Ghanaian strongman Kwame Nkrumah, excusing his authoritarian rule and forced nationalization.
King's legacy has been a double-edged sword: He both liberated and imprisoned black America. As we celebrate his achievements with the new memorial in the nation's capital, for the sake of future generations, let us remember too how King erred. In order to truly create a society where all citizens rise to the height of their potential, we must discard the shackles of affirmative action and the welfare state.
In his August 25 Washington Times column, Jeffrey Kuhner denied the serious effects of climate change, calling climate science "the greatest hoax of our time," "not real science," and "a novel weapon with which to attack the free market." From the Times:
This is liberal fantasy masquerading as science. Here's a news flash for Mr. [Shawn Domagal-] Goldman [of NASA's Planetary Science Division] and his fellow "researchers": The aliens aren't invading. The report is risible, even comical. Yet behind it lies a deadly serious problem - the dangerous politicization of scientific inquiry. For years, the green lobby has claimed that Earth is going to boil over. Carbon emissions supposedly imperil humanity's future, causing Earth's atmosphere to heat up to the point of global catastrophe. Ice caps are melting, polar bears are dying, sea levels are rising, coastal cities will be flooded, droughts will scorch large swaths of Earth, and billions will die or be driven from their homes. It will be the end of days - the apocalypse.
In fact, the opposite is true: Earth's atmospheric temperatures have cooled during the past decade; the polar bear population is growing; the Arctic ice caps are not melting; sea levels have remained relatively stable; and hundreds of millions in countries such as India, China and Brazil have been lifted from grinding poverty. The greenhouse-gas theory is evaporating into thin air. Climate change has been the greatest hoax of our time.
From the outset, the debate about climate change was driven by fear and hysteria, not real science. With the end of the Cold War, the internationalist left sought a novel weapon with which to attack the free market. The exploitation of the working class was replaced by a new paradigm: the capitalist plundering of the environment that eventually would trigger world socialism. Karl Marx was superseded by Mother Earth. Dialectical materialism gave way to global warming. The old red became the new green.
In an August 11 Washington Times column, Jeffrey Kuhner called President Obama "a campus radical" who is "inflicting severe, almost irreparable damage" on the country. Kuhner went on to call Obama "the most arrogant, self-absorbed and self-obsessed president in U.S. history." Additionally, Kuhner encouraged Americans to "forge a mass grassroots movement" in order to "[d]rive him from office." From Kuhner's column:
Mr. Obama, however, is a campus radical in the White House. He is inflicting severe, almost irreparable damage. His administration is so inept it can barely perform basic functions. Lifting the debt ceiling - something that was routine for presidents from Ronald Reagan to George W. Bush - was turned into a national nightmare, as Mr. Obamaplayed a game of brinkmanship. In the end, the borrowing limit was raised, the reckless spending spree continues, and more unsustainable debt has been saddled upon future generations. The president's demagoguery - his false warnings of a default, his threats to withhold Social Security checks, his inflammatory attacks on Tea Party Republicans - only served to unnerve global economic markets, fostering an atmosphere of immediate panic and crisis.
Mr. Obama is the most arrogant, self-absorbed and self-obsessed president in U.S. history. Nothing is ever his fault. He blames everyone and everything for America's economic woes - Tea Partyers, Wall Street, Japanese earthquakes, insurance executives, oil companies, millionaires and corporate jet owners. He lashes out at imaginary enemies without ever taking personal responsibility. In his mind, he is - and always will be - the Anointed One.
There is only one solution: Drive him from office. Americans should forge a mass grassroots movement demanding that Mr. Obama step down - immediately. Through bumper stickers, picket signs, posters, T-shirts and rallies, tens of millions of citizens should express the same message: Leave. It is highly unlikely he will step aside, but such a movement would cripple the president's authority and possibly blunt him from doing further harm. It also would puncture his boundless ego. A widespread manifestation of no confidence would break him - politically, morally and psychologically - in order to save America. Mr. Obama is out of his depth. He lacks the character, intelligence, skills and experience - the basic competence - to be the leader of the free world.
Resign, Mr. President.
Washington Times columnists are rarely shy about using strong language to attack their opponents, from Democrats to the LGBT community to the Obama administration.
So it was somewhat surprising to read columnist Jeffrey Kuhner's August 4 op-ed, in which he attacked Democratic politicians and pundits for some of the inflammatory rhetoric they've been using to describe the tea party:
Vice President Joseph R. Biden believes Tea Party Republicans are right-wing jihadists. Following the debt-ceiling deal, in a private Democratic Caucus meeting, Mr. Biden joined several Democrats in accusing conservative House Republicans of behaving like "terrorists."
"We have negotiated with terrorists," said Rep. Michael F. Doyle of Pennsylvania, according to a report in Politico citing several sources in the room. "This small group of terrorists have made it impossible to spend any money."
According to Politico, Mr. Biden responded by saying: "They have acted like terrorists." The White House has tried to walk back those statements. Mr. Biden claims he never said them. President Obama's press spokesman eventually called such inflammatory rhetoric "inappropriate." For the record: I don't believe Mr. Biden. This is a man with a long, well-documented history of mendacity, plagiarism and making irresponsible statements. He said it, and he knows he said it. Multiple sources confirmed it.
Moreover, it is part of a larger liberal pattern of smearing the Tea Party movement during the debate about raising the debt limit. It was not just Mr. Biden and Mr. Doyle who declared small-government Republicans to be the American equivalent of the Taliban or Hezbollah. MSNBC host Chris Matthews likened Tea Partyers to "terrorists" and "hostage-takers." Newsweek's Tina Brown called them "suicide bombers." In short, for the Democratic left, the Tea Party is evil incarnate.
There's certainly a debate to be had about whether or not such name-calling crosses the line. However, Kuhner goes a step further and suggests not only are liberals being hypocritical, but that they also might be inciting violence with their strong words. Kuhner writes that such "degrading comments" are "slander[ing]" and "dehumaniz[ing]" tea party members and that "liberals ... are paving the way for potential political violence":
Contrast this to the shooting of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, Arizona Democrat, which triggered a huge -- and largely manufactured -- debate about the devastating effects of incendiary rhetoric. In particular, the media and political class blamed Sarah Palin, conservative talk radio and the American right for the tragedy -- especially their alleged over-the-top use of metaphors in excoriating opponents. Never mind that the act was perpetrated by a lone madman who hardly ever listened to Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh or Mrs. Palin. He was driven by pathological malice, not politics. The liberals' narrative was clear: The Tea Party was somehow to blame. Mr. Obama even urged a new "national discourse" based on "civility." That was then; this is now.
Leftist expediency now requires that the most heinous, reckless and degrading comments be used. Tea Partyers are not simply being slandered, they are being dehumanized. Ironically, it is liberals who are paving the way for potential political violence. Terrorists, hostage-takers, suicide bombers, neo-Nazis, the Christian Taliban -- all of the epithets regularly thrown at Tea Party members by rabid progressives -- eventually foster one overriding emotion: hatred. It is not much of a leap for some deranged Democratic activist to conclude that the only way to defeat the phantom specter of marching right-wing jihadists is to slaughter them. The Black Panthers, the Weathermen, the Symbionese Liberation Army, the Unabomber -- the U.S. radical left has been littered with violent movements marked by the irrational loathing of a menacing Middle America.
Weird -- Kuhner is mocking the "largely manufactured" debate about "incendiary rhetoric" that followed the Tucson shootings, yet he's also claiming that such rhetoric can bring about dire consequences.
By his own logic, politicians and pundits of all stripes should stay away from such extreme verbal attacks, lest "deranged" activists decide the "only way to defeat" their opponents is "to slaughter them."
OK. Let's review some of the things Kuhner has written about those he labels his opponents.
In a Washington Times column, Jeffrey Kuhner downplayed the economic consequences of not raising the debt ceiling, claiming that the "sky will not fall if an agreement is not reached by Aug. 2" and accusing President Obama of engaging in "shameless demagoguery." In fact, economists agree that failing to raise the debt ceiling could have significant negative effects on the economy.
In a July 12 Washington Times column, Jeffrey Kuhner wrote that "Republicans have a golden opportunity to break Barack Obama's presidency" and that the debt ceiling crisis will be Obama's "Waterloo," claiming: "Ambition cost Napoleon his empire. For Mr. Obama, the 'big package' strategy is the moment of colossal overreach. He wanted too much, too soon. Now comes the long, humiliating and fatal retreat." Kuhner further claimed that Obama is "not serious about confronting our debt bomb; rather, he seeks to consolidate his socialist revolution, paying for the expansion of the entitlement society."
From Kuhner's column, headlined, "Obama's Waterloo":
Republicans have a golden opportunity to break Barack Obama's presidency, ensuring he will be a one-termer. Mr. Obama has backed himself into a corner on the debt-limit talks; the GOP can smash his re-election prospects if they have the will -- and intelligence -- to do it.
However, [Obama] understands one fundamental reality: European-style spending eventually requires European-style taxation. His aim has been to pile up such high deficits and debt so he can force America to accept massive permanent tax increases. Mr. Obama is using primitive class-warfare rhetoric, insisting on soaking "the rich." He is not serious about confronting our debt bomb; rather, he seeks to consolidate his socialist revolution, paying for the expansion of the entitlement society.
Mr. Boehner should insist on a small deal -- lifting the debt ceiling along with corresponding spending reductions. Every debt dollar raised should be coupled with a spending dollar cut. That way, the package pays for itself. More important, it places Mr. Obama in a no-win situation. House Republicans will pass legislation that raises the debt limit. Therefore, they cannot be blamed for any economic fallout should America default. Mr. Obama can veto it, which means he will be solely responsible for the fiscal calamity. Or he can sign it -- publicly standing down from his earlier threats. Thus, he will be denuded among his liberal supporters and the larger electorate, and shown to be a weak leader whose words mean nothing.
Either way, it will be his Waterloo -- the effective end of his presidency. Ambition cost Napoleon his empire. For Mr. Obama, the "big package" strategy is the moment of colossal overreach. He wanted too much, too soon. Now comes the long, humiliating and fatal retreat.
In a May 26 Washington Times column, Jeffrey Kuhner attacked President Obama over Britain's reaffirming of its ban on Michael Savage, baselessly claiming that it is part of an Obama "assault on conservative speech." Kuhner also attacked Media Matters and George Soros, claiming that Soros "shares with Islamists one overriding impulse: the hatred of America." Kuhner has occasionally guest-hosted Savage's radio show.
From Kuhner's column:
The ban is more than simply the persecution of an innocent man. It signifies the triumph of a creeping soft totalitarianism. There is an unholy alliance between the hard left and Islamic fascism. Media Matters, a group funded by socialist billionaire George Soros, spearheaded the drive to get Mr. Savage on the blacklist. Mr. Soros is using his millions to stifle conservative voices. Like all Leninists, he believes in using state power to eradicate opposing points of view. Mr. Soros is a transnational progressive. He believes in one-world government marked by high taxes, lavish social programs, abortion on demand, euthanasia, the legalization of drugs and the appeasement of Islamic terrorism. He shares with Islamists one overriding impulse: the hatred of America. The political gods demand that Mr. Savage be sacrificed on the altar of multiculturalism.
Instead of demanding that Britain rescind its ban, Mr. Obama stood silent. He is only too happy to support this assault on free speech. It is part of a larger pattern against his critics. The president has demonized Fox News as illegitimate, urged his minority supporters to "punish" their Republican "enemies," excluded skeptical journalists from press gaggles and demanded the passage of the Fairness Doctrine - which would muzzle much of conservative talk radio. He also wants the government to monitor and have emergency powers over the Internet.
Bill O'Reilly attacked Rev. Wallace Charles Smith, whose church President Obama attended on Easter Sunday, as a "race activist" for claiming that Fox News provides a forum for racially charged statements. In fact, Fox News has a history of hosts and guests who make race-baiting statements, in addition to its relentless promotion of the phony New Black Panthers controversy.
Following Obama's official announcement that he is running for reelection, the right-wing media has resorted to a series of racially charged attacks against the president. These attacks have ranged from false claims about the president's place of birth and religion to claiming Obama has "black nationalist sympathies."
In an April 26 Washington Times column headlined, "Obama's black nationalism," Jeffrey Kuhner wrote that "[i]t is clear by his actions and affiliations that [President] Obama has black nationalist sympathies." He further claimed that Obama's "racial socialist politics are alien to the American tradition. They belong more to the Third World."
From Kuhner's column:
A disturbing pattern is emerging. For 20 years, Mr. Obama sat in the church of an anti-American pastor who constantly railed against "white greed" and "white oppression." The president's hand-picked attorney general, Eric H. Holder Jr., has called America "a nation of cowards" when it comes to race. His Justice Department has refused to prosecute members of the New Black Panthers for blatant voter intimidation. Mr. Obama has openly embraced Mr. Sharpton, an odious race-baiter. It is clear by his actions and affiliations that Mr. Obama has black nationalist sympathies.
The result is that he appears increasingly strange to many voters; his racial socialist politics are alien to the American tradition. They belong more to the Third World. This explains why Middle America is turning its back on Mr. Obama. When Americans voted for him in 2008, they thought they were getting a liberal pragmatist, a modern-day Franklin D. Roosevelt or John F. Kennedy. Instead, they got a Rev. Jeremiah Wright in blue pinstripes who attended law school.
Conservative media responded to President Obama's budget speech by attacking it as a "class warfare debacle." Conservatives have repeatedly dredged up the same tired "class warfare" talking point to attack progressives on tax policy or other matters.
In an April 12 Washington Times column, Jeffrey Kuhner demanded that President Obama "[s]how us the birth certificate," adding that "[i]t is time Mr. Obama came clean. At a minimum, if he does not reveal his birth certificate, he cannot -- and should not -- be allowed to run for a second term." Further, Kuhner claimed that Obama "is hiding something. It may be the stated religious affiliation, the possible identity of his true father, the location of his birth -- no one will know until the records are revealed."
From Kuhner's column:
The reality is that until Mr. Obama shows his proper, documented long-form birth certificate, the issue will not go away - nor should it. Many in Kenya's political and media class say he was born there before being brought to the United States. His Kenyan family members make the same claim, while others in Hawaii insist he was born in Honolulu. There is only one way to end the controversy: Show us the birth certificate.
Instead, what Mr. Obama has revealed is a certificate of live birth, which is not the same thing. It simply states that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii; it does not prove it. Documents can be fraudulently manufactured after the fact.
The president's supporters, however, cannot answer one simple question. If the controversy is so preposterous, then why has Mr. Obama's legal team spent campaign money to prevent the birth certificate from being unsealed?
The answer: He is hiding something. It may be the stated religious affiliation, the possible identity of his true father, the location of his birth - no one will know until the records are revealed. But protecting Mr. Obama's privacy is not a plausible reason and certainly not a justification for spending millions.
The birth issue is slowly casting a shadow over Mr. Obama's presidency; it threatens to undermine public confidence in his legal and moral authority to govern. Several states are pushing to pass laws compelling future presidential candidates - including Mr. Obama - to fully disclose all documents proving their natural born citizenship status. This desire for greater political transparency and accountability is healthy.
It is time Mr. Obama came clean. At a minimum, if he does not reveal his birth certificate, he cannot - and should not - be allowed to run for a second term.
This month, right-wing media figures are arguing that President Obama should be impeached for actions he has taken with respect to Libya. Undermining the possibility that they really care about the constitutional issues involved, this argument is just the latest in the right-wing media's neverending quest to see Obama impeached.
In a March 29 Washington Times column headlined, "Shut the government down," Jeffrey Kuhner advocated for a government shutdown, writing: "[I]f the budget crisis leads to a government shutdown, so be it. It will be Mr. Obama's fault. He is the one who is bleeding the country white. A shutdown will unmask the destruction he is wreaking upon America."
From Kuhner's column:
It's time Republicans play political hardball. If they do not, they will soon dangerously alienate large chunks of their conservative base. Negotiations have stalled. A fiscal showdown is looming. Congressional Republicans and Democrats are trying to pass a budget to fund the government for the current fiscal year. Two short-term appropriation extensions have been enacted. The latest one is set to expire April 8. Both sides are beginning to dig in their heels. If a budgetary agreement is not reached, the government will shut down.
America is at a watershed. It desperately needs bold, principled leadership - a fiscal Winston Churchill, someone who is willing to tell the country that real sacrifices must be made if the American experiment in self-government and liberty is to survive.
The difference between now and 1995 is simple and stark. We live in a different age. Amid a decade of peace and prosperity, a government shutdown struck voters as juvenile and senseless.
Today, however, it will serve to highlight the dire predicament the country faces. Shaving a billion here and a billion there is simply a drop in the proverbial bucket. It only makes Republicans complicit in America's fiscal collapse. Tea Party activists, rank-and-file conservatives and independents will rightly conclude the GOP is not serious about rolling back the federal leviathan and runaway spending. They may bolt and form a third party in 2012, fatally wounding the Republicans.
Hence, if the budget crisis leads to a government shutdown, so be it. It will be Mr. Obama's fault. He is the one who is bleeding the country white. A shutdown will unmask the destruction he is wreaking upon America.
In a March 24 Washington Times column, Jeffrey Kuhner called for President Obama's impeachment over his handling of Libya, writing that "[t]he Libyan war is part of a pattern of Mr. Obama's unethical and criminal behavior" and that "[i]f Republicans and conservatives are serious about restoring constitutional government, they will demand that Mr. Obama be impeached." Kuhner further wrote that Obama is a "socialist thug" who "has betrayed his country, his constitutional oath of office and his duty as commander in chief."
From Kuhner's column:
President Obama has lost his legitimacy to remain in office. The Libyan war has exposed the administration's lawlessness and rampant criminality. If Republicans and conservatives are serious about restoring constitutional government, they will demand that Mr. Obama be impeached.
Also, Mr. Obama further insults the nation by asking for a resolution from the United Nations Security Council instead of seeking the approval of the American people. His actions demonstrate that he thinks a supranational institution, such as the United Nations, supersedes Congress. He also is tacitly relegating the Constitution to second-class status, especially compared to the U.N. charter. His actions undermine America's national sovereignty and make our foreign policy hostage to a virulently anti-American international body. Mr. Obama has betrayed his country, his constitutional oath of office and his duty as commander in chief.
The Libyan war is part of a pattern of Mr. Obama's unethical and criminal behavior. He passed Obamacare against the express will of the American people, systematically abusing the political process even though the federal government has no constitutional authority to take over health care. He has appointed countless policy "czars" possessing sweeping Cabinet-level powers without Senate consent or oversight. His cronies have directly sought to manipulate or interfere in Democratic primary campaigns on behalf of pro-Obama candidates - a flagrant violation of the law.
Mr. Obama is a socialist thug. Since entering office, he has engaged in a massive, almost unprecedented power grab. He thinks he is above the law, that he can cavalierly circumvent the limits imposed by the Constitution. Only one remedy will teach him that he cannot do so: impeachment.