Freedom Line Blog

In the days since a Florida jury acquitted George Zimmerman of the shooting death of Trayvon Martin, liberal politicians and pundits have tried to argue that without the state’s ‘Stand Your Ground’ law providing a defense, Zimmerman would be guilty.

The problem with this argument is that Zimmerman’s lawyers never invoked ‘Stand Your Ground’ as a defense in the trial. ‘Stand Your Ground’ was irrelevant to the verdict.

But that hasn’t stopped liberals like Attorney General Eric Holder from using the mere existence of ‘Stand Your Ground’ laws as a pretext for unmerited lawsuits. In a speech to the NAACP this week, Holder encouraged members of the NAACP to agitate for the repeal of such laws in the 30+ states where they exist.

Now, Congress is upping the ante.

Senate Majority Whip Dick Durbin (D-IL) is promising to hold congressional hearings about the effects of ‘Stand Your Ground’ laws, including such topics as “when racial profiling and ‘stand your ground’ laws mix,” according to a press release.

Amid all the racially charged theater, Durbin also announced what has to be his real motive behind the hearings – scrutinizing the roles that the NRA and ALEC played in promoting ‘Stand Your Ground’ legislation.

Durbin has no right to subject either organization to an investigative fishing expedition designed to criticize private groups for exercising their First Amendment rights. If Durbin follows through with his threat, someone in the Senate GOP needs to throw some brush-back pitches in Dick’s direction. After the politician-inspired IRS scandal, it’s time for liberals to be held accountable for their wild-eyed accusations.

In a wide-ranging piece, The Daily Caller explains the continuing mainstream media bias against Andrew Breitbart and anyone else who dares to shine a light on government corruption.  Breitbart’s castigation during the Shirley Sherrod episode spurred him to research liberal claims he only spotlighted Sherrod’s discriminatory comments to an NAACP crowd as a quick gimmick.  After four and a half months of interviews, Breitbart is in the early days of a multi-stage release on the depth and breadth of the Pigford settlement scandal that so far has cost taxpayers over $2 billion.

Since President Barack Obama has a direct link to the newest $1.15 billion funding the Pigford II settlement round, don’t be surprised if the White House comes under continuing pressure to defend itself for its legislation-for-votes deal-making.

The political left, as illustrated by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), continues its Captain Ahab-like obsession to portray Tea Partiers as irredeemably and inherently “racist.”

So here’s a puzzle for them as they, in the words of The Wall Street Journal’s Jason Riley, “monitor Sarah Palin rallies for Confederate flags”:  If Tea Partiers are so innately racist, why have they so swiftly come to the defense of Juan Williams, who is both African-American and politically liberal to boot?  Such leading Tea Party figures as Senator Jim DeMint (R – SC), Sarah Palin and Congressman Eric Cantor (R – VA) immediately voiced support for Williams, and attacked National Public Radio (NPR) for summarily terminating him.   How to explain this inconvenient turn of events?

Perhaps the NAACP or the hysterical anchors over at MSNBC will reply that the Tea Party’s defense of Williams is all part of its sinister scheme to deceive the American electorate just one week before the November 2 elections.  Of course, that would undermine their other meme that Tea Partiers are simply a horde of ignorant yahoos.  Decisions, decisions…