CALIFORNIA: STEVE FRANK REPORTS ON LEFTIST DISCOMFORT WITH THE TRUTH
Steve has been debating again:
Then I had a 6:45pm debate on Prop. 85, sponsored by the National Council of Jewish Women. If you want to know their ideology, their speaker on October 18 is Senator Sheila Kuehl talking about her universal (socialist) health care bill. Then they will have Laurie David speak on the environment, on how to save it from corporations and bad governments. You get where they are headed.
I debated the Executive Vice President of Los Angeles Planned Parenthood, with Assemblywoman Jackie Goldberg as the listed moderator. I spoke about the need for parental notification, that government should not interfere with the relationship between parents and daughters. I told the group about the court waiver (Katie Short, in the audience gave a more precise exclamation of it, since she is the one who wrote it for the initiative--very nice person and dedicated to the cause of Life!). I felt support of 85 is in support of parents, opposition is in support of government and strangers--all the while, should an abortion occur, it is the parents that must take care of the emotional and medical needs of the daughter, not knowing what is really wrong.
Then I discussed the fact that rapists use abortion to hide their deeds--and that the abortion clinics don't turn in the rapists. I asked everyone in the room, "if you had evidence of a rape, would you turn it in?" Everyone raised their hands. Then I noted that the Attorney Generals of both Indiana and Kansas are suing Planned Parenthood for refusing to turn over evidence of rapes. Instances in several other states were being noted, when the "moderator", Jackie Goldberg, stopped me and said we are talking about California, I should only give examples of what happens in California, and that I had "finished" my answer. Would you turn in evidence of rape--why is it so hard for so many Planned Parenthood affiliates to do so?
Besides this, I noted that Planned Parenthood was being sued by one of its former finance staff, who was fired. Victor Gonzales claims he was fired because he turned LA Planned Parenthood into the State authorities. He claimed that PP was paying $1 for some contraceptives, then billing the state up to $48 for the products. This gave, according to Gonzales, in the public records, $4 million a year extra. This is now being adjudicated in the courts.
We all know that full disclosure in discussing public policy is important. If you are promoting a bill or a contract with government, you need to disclose you have an interest in it. Have you ever known Planned Parenthood mentioning that the largest, or one of the largest revenues sources for them, is their abortion clinics. I made note of that. Have you ever heard them mention that another major revenue source is government money for "programs" and "services". Since they never mention them, I did.
Well, you would have thought I had just told folks about the biggest State secret ever! The PP executive was "outraged" that I told these negative things about them. I was "slandering" them! If revenues from abortions are a slander, they shouldn't do it. If so many affiliates (an Arizona one was successful sued for withholding evidence) are withholding evidence, that is between them and the law--just because people now know about it, if that is the problem, they should do the right thing and turn in the evidence. If your daughter was raped, how would you feel if Planned Parenthood or some other private organization refused to give the evidence to the Police?
As the debate kept going, questions from the audience were coming. Periodically, Jackie Goldberg didn't like my answers, said so in the microphone and told me I was finished answering the question--even if I wasn't! She did this a few times. Guess she thinks she is still at Berkeley in the 60's shouting "free speech", then not allowing those that disagree with her to speak.
All in all, the day once again showed the shallowness of liberal thought and ideology--more taxes, more expenditures, shut up the opposition, then cry when the truth is told.
*************************
ELSEWHERE
Judicial Watch has filed a lawsuit against the city of Laguna Beach in California. The city is using tax dollars to help provide jobs for illegal aliens. Guess the city council doesn't understand the concept of illegal--you don't do it. I would prefer the Feds to arrest the City Council for violation of Federal law, and the Attorney General indict them for embezzlement of public funds for corrupt purposes. A copy of the lawsuit is available on Judicial Watch's Internet site, here. See also here
Far-Left teachers' union backs down: "After an outcry by Jewish organizations, the Los Angeles teachers union revoked plans Thursday by one of its committees to hold a pro-Palestinian rally at union headquarters. The Human Rights Committee of United Teachers Los Angeles had announced it would be a co-host of the rally at UTLA headquarters a week from Saturday, and support a boycott against Israel. After meeting with committee members, union President A.J. Duffy issued a statement saying the meeting could not take place at the union's building. "While as educators and union members we encourage a respectful debate on the important issues of the day, this event has provoked very sharp feelings among our members and concerns that this meeting is inappropriate," Duffy said".
California court upholds ban on gay marriage: "Concluding that "courts in this state simply do not have authority to redefine marriage," the California Court of Appeal on Thursday upheld state laws that ban same-sex marriages. The 2-1 decision added California to a growing list of states where appellate courts in the past few months -- in New York, Washington state and Nebraska -- have rejected constitutional challenges to the traditional definition of marriage as a union of man and woman. In 45 states, that tradition has been enshrined in statutes -- as in California -- or the state constitution. But it has come under heavy assault, particularly since the Massachusetts Supreme Court upheld the right of same-sex couples to marry in 2003".
California Homosexual Organization Admits HIV/AIDS is "Gay Disease": "The Los Angeles Gay and Lesbian Center has abandoned a long-held homosexual activist contention by declaring on billboards posted throughout Southern California that HIV/AIDS is a "gay disease." According to a report by the Los Angeles Times, the Center is trying to address rapidly increasing HIV infection rates among the homosexual population by rallying the gay community to increasing vigilance against exposure to the disease. Activists for the homosexual lifestyle have, until this current development, strongly, and sometimes vehemently refused to admit that the disease is predominantly generated among homosexual men. The ad campaign, which is also running in magazines, is in part a response to the findings of public health officials, who have noted that three out of four cases of HIV infections are found in men who engage in homosexual activity"
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
Saturday, October 07, 2006
LEFTIST HATRED OF THE ORDINARY MAN
An excerpt from George Will
Liberals think their campaign against Wal-Mart is a way of introducing the subject of class into America's political argument, and they are more correct than they understand. Their campaign is liberalism as condescension. It is a philosophic repugnance toward markets, because consumer sovereignty results in the masses making messes. Liberals, aghast, see the choices Americans make with their dollars and their ballots and announce - yes, announce - that Americans are sorely in need of more supervision by . . . liberals.
Before they went on their bender of indignation about Wal-Mart (customers per week: 127 million), liberals had drummed McDonald's (customers per week: 175 million) out of civilized society because it is making us fat, or something. So, what next? Which preferences of ordinary Americans will liberals, in their role as national scolds, next disapprove? Baseball, hot dogs, apple pie and Chevrolet?
No. The current issue of the American Prospect, an impeccably progressive magazine, carries a full-page advertisement denouncing something responsible for "lies, deception, immorality, corruption, and widespread labor, human rights and environmental abuses" and for having brought "great hardship and despair to people and communities throughout the world."
What is this focus of evil in the modern world? North Korea? The Bush administration? Fox News Channel? No, it is Coca-Cola (number of servings to Americans of the company's products each week: 2.5 billion).
********************
THE REALITY DEMOCRATS IGNORE
America's Democrats have failed to face up to the reality of the world that will come if the West's war with militant Islam is lost, if Europe surrenders, if America surrenders, if the Jihad emerges victorious. The world of social, intellectual, religious, and political liberty that America's Liberals and Democrats claim as their own would end with Sharia. America's Democrats, the champions of gay rights and sexual libertarianism, do not face up to the reality that the penalty for homosexuality and extra-marital sex under Sharia is death. They do not face up to the fact that in puritanical Islam, women are not equal. They do not face up to the fact that in puritanical Islam, religious intolerance, discrimination, and bigotry, are ideological imperatives.
America's Democrats, blind drunk on their lust for political power at any price, are blinded to the reality that the price of freedom from the totalitarian barbarians that come in a new guise in every generation, Hitlerian Nazism, Stalinist Communism, and now Islamo-Nazi Jihadism, is the constant willingness to do whatever is necessary to defend our freedoms, and sometimes that price is war. Not surrender, but victory. America's Democrats, chasing the chimerical dream of a world peace that has never been, and will never be, have made themselves the Neville Chamberlains of the 21st Century, who, seeking "peace in our time" at all costs, would rather surrender the Middle East, then Europe, then perhaps America, to the militant threats and demands of Jihadism, rather than fight for the freedom of others, to protect their own.
America will not win or lose the War on Terror, whether fought in Iraq, in Afghanistan, or anywhere else, because its armed forces cannot win. America will ultimately win the War on Terror, if it does, because Americans, Democrats and Republicans, muster up the will to do so. Or America will ultimately lose the War on Terror, if it does, because Americans, Democrats and Republicans, fail to sustain the will to win. America will either choose to win, or America will choose to surrender. By the end of this century, or perhaps by the end of this decade, either Western Civilization, with its freedoms and democracies, will remain, or puritanical Islam, Jihadism, will remain. But not both. One will win, the other will surrender. One will live, the other will die. The one with the greatest will to live, will live.
It may be a stereotype to describe Democrats as "Chardonnay Swilling Surrender Junkies" (which, quite coincidentally, rhymes perfectly with the tag some insensitive souls have pinned on the French as "Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys"), but I have a certain image of Liberals, based partly on personal experience, sipping Chardonnay with brie on baguettes, deploring the horror, stupidity, and depravity of George Bush.
But it seems that many, or most, of America's Democrats see the War in Iraq as "another Vietnam." If they regain control of Congress, or the White House, or both, they seem determined to turn that assessment into a self-fulfilling prophecy. They are addicted to the seductive euphoria of the ephemeral "peace" that surrender brings, for a time. They are surrender junkies.
They so covet power for themselves, and the illusion of a "peace" that cannot last, that, rather than join a Republican President, George W. Bush, in a determined war to defeat the anti-Liberal, anti-Democratic, Islamic Jihad, they would rather surrender their own future and freedom, surrender America's future and freedom, and ultimately surrender the entire edifice of Western Civilization, Judeo-Christian Civilization, to an aggressive, intolerant, imperialist, militant, fundamentalist, terrorist Islamic theocracy that will ultimately destroy every freedom Liberal Democrats claim to be for.
More here
*******************
ELSEWHERE
Today's Democrats bungle war: "We're in a war. Something always goes wrong in a war, and our military leaders have made mistakes in Iraq. But quitting and leaving would amount to defeat for the U.S. in the global war on terrorism and create chaos. Quitters never win. Here's the problem: America needs two strong, sound political parties. As far as domestic policy is concerned, it really doesn't make much difference if Democrats or Republicans are in power. Ours is a free, entrepreneurial society where anyone can do anything he or she wants if they have a positive attitude and the desire to work, learn and achieve. Ambitious people come from all over the world to take advantage of this tremendous opportunity. This is one reason our economy is so resilient, continually bouncing back from periodic setbacks, driven by new inventions and achievements. However, when it comes to which party has proved more capable in acting to defend and protect Americans from foreign enemies, there is only one choice. From Johnson to Carter to Clinton, virtually all the defense policies and decisions made by Democratic administrations have been unsuccessful. And in many cases, they have unintentionally but materially increased the danger to our national security and the safety of all Americans."
It's Christians that the Left fear: "Meanwhile, the ecstatically positive reviews that greeted the alarmist documentary film "Jesus Camp" (which explicitly compares an enthusiastic Christian summer program for kids to a terrorist training ground) show the genuine horror of religious revival that pervades much of the secular establishment. In reviewing the film for the New York Times, a horrified Stephen Holden unambiguously equated young Evangelical believers to Communist mass murderers. "It wasn't so long ago that another puritanical youth army, Mao Zedong's Red Guards, turned the world's most populous country inside out," he wrote. "Nowadays, the possibility of a right-wing Christian American version of what happened in China no longer seems entirely far-fetched...."
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
An excerpt from George Will
Liberals think their campaign against Wal-Mart is a way of introducing the subject of class into America's political argument, and they are more correct than they understand. Their campaign is liberalism as condescension. It is a philosophic repugnance toward markets, because consumer sovereignty results in the masses making messes. Liberals, aghast, see the choices Americans make with their dollars and their ballots and announce - yes, announce - that Americans are sorely in need of more supervision by . . . liberals.
Before they went on their bender of indignation about Wal-Mart (customers per week: 127 million), liberals had drummed McDonald's (customers per week: 175 million) out of civilized society because it is making us fat, or something. So, what next? Which preferences of ordinary Americans will liberals, in their role as national scolds, next disapprove? Baseball, hot dogs, apple pie and Chevrolet?
No. The current issue of the American Prospect, an impeccably progressive magazine, carries a full-page advertisement denouncing something responsible for "lies, deception, immorality, corruption, and widespread labor, human rights and environmental abuses" and for having brought "great hardship and despair to people and communities throughout the world."
What is this focus of evil in the modern world? North Korea? The Bush administration? Fox News Channel? No, it is Coca-Cola (number of servings to Americans of the company's products each week: 2.5 billion).
********************
THE REALITY DEMOCRATS IGNORE
America's Democrats have failed to face up to the reality of the world that will come if the West's war with militant Islam is lost, if Europe surrenders, if America surrenders, if the Jihad emerges victorious. The world of social, intellectual, religious, and political liberty that America's Liberals and Democrats claim as their own would end with Sharia. America's Democrats, the champions of gay rights and sexual libertarianism, do not face up to the reality that the penalty for homosexuality and extra-marital sex under Sharia is death. They do not face up to the fact that in puritanical Islam, women are not equal. They do not face up to the fact that in puritanical Islam, religious intolerance, discrimination, and bigotry, are ideological imperatives.
America's Democrats, blind drunk on their lust for political power at any price, are blinded to the reality that the price of freedom from the totalitarian barbarians that come in a new guise in every generation, Hitlerian Nazism, Stalinist Communism, and now Islamo-Nazi Jihadism, is the constant willingness to do whatever is necessary to defend our freedoms, and sometimes that price is war. Not surrender, but victory. America's Democrats, chasing the chimerical dream of a world peace that has never been, and will never be, have made themselves the Neville Chamberlains of the 21st Century, who, seeking "peace in our time" at all costs, would rather surrender the Middle East, then Europe, then perhaps America, to the militant threats and demands of Jihadism, rather than fight for the freedom of others, to protect their own.
America will not win or lose the War on Terror, whether fought in Iraq, in Afghanistan, or anywhere else, because its armed forces cannot win. America will ultimately win the War on Terror, if it does, because Americans, Democrats and Republicans, muster up the will to do so. Or America will ultimately lose the War on Terror, if it does, because Americans, Democrats and Republicans, fail to sustain the will to win. America will either choose to win, or America will choose to surrender. By the end of this century, or perhaps by the end of this decade, either Western Civilization, with its freedoms and democracies, will remain, or puritanical Islam, Jihadism, will remain. But not both. One will win, the other will surrender. One will live, the other will die. The one with the greatest will to live, will live.
It may be a stereotype to describe Democrats as "Chardonnay Swilling Surrender Junkies" (which, quite coincidentally, rhymes perfectly with the tag some insensitive souls have pinned on the French as "Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys"), but I have a certain image of Liberals, based partly on personal experience, sipping Chardonnay with brie on baguettes, deploring the horror, stupidity, and depravity of George Bush.
But it seems that many, or most, of America's Democrats see the War in Iraq as "another Vietnam." If they regain control of Congress, or the White House, or both, they seem determined to turn that assessment into a self-fulfilling prophecy. They are addicted to the seductive euphoria of the ephemeral "peace" that surrender brings, for a time. They are surrender junkies.
They so covet power for themselves, and the illusion of a "peace" that cannot last, that, rather than join a Republican President, George W. Bush, in a determined war to defeat the anti-Liberal, anti-Democratic, Islamic Jihad, they would rather surrender their own future and freedom, surrender America's future and freedom, and ultimately surrender the entire edifice of Western Civilization, Judeo-Christian Civilization, to an aggressive, intolerant, imperialist, militant, fundamentalist, terrorist Islamic theocracy that will ultimately destroy every freedom Liberal Democrats claim to be for.
More here
*******************
ELSEWHERE
Today's Democrats bungle war: "We're in a war. Something always goes wrong in a war, and our military leaders have made mistakes in Iraq. But quitting and leaving would amount to defeat for the U.S. in the global war on terrorism and create chaos. Quitters never win. Here's the problem: America needs two strong, sound political parties. As far as domestic policy is concerned, it really doesn't make much difference if Democrats or Republicans are in power. Ours is a free, entrepreneurial society where anyone can do anything he or she wants if they have a positive attitude and the desire to work, learn and achieve. Ambitious people come from all over the world to take advantage of this tremendous opportunity. This is one reason our economy is so resilient, continually bouncing back from periodic setbacks, driven by new inventions and achievements. However, when it comes to which party has proved more capable in acting to defend and protect Americans from foreign enemies, there is only one choice. From Johnson to Carter to Clinton, virtually all the defense policies and decisions made by Democratic administrations have been unsuccessful. And in many cases, they have unintentionally but materially increased the danger to our national security and the safety of all Americans."
It's Christians that the Left fear: "Meanwhile, the ecstatically positive reviews that greeted the alarmist documentary film "Jesus Camp" (which explicitly compares an enthusiastic Christian summer program for kids to a terrorist training ground) show the genuine horror of religious revival that pervades much of the secular establishment. In reviewing the film for the New York Times, a horrified Stephen Holden unambiguously equated young Evangelical believers to Communist mass murderers. "It wasn't so long ago that another puritanical youth army, Mao Zedong's Red Guards, turned the world's most populous country inside out," he wrote. "Nowadays, the possibility of a right-wing Christian American version of what happened in China no longer seems entirely far-fetched...."
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
Friday, October 06, 2006
THE BORING "RELIGIOUS" LEFT
Below is an amused comment on a recent Leftist attack on the "Religious Right" from Assistant Village Idiot. He scores himself on being able to predict what the Leftist will say. Excerpt only:
Randall Balmer has an essay in the most recent Chronicle of Higher Education entitled Jesus Is Not A Republican. Balmer is a professor of religious history at Barnard College. The Assistant Village Idiot puts his fingers to his temples and makes some guesses: (Full disclosure: I read the opening one-sentence blurb, so I did see the phrase "drunk on power." Therefore I made no predictions about what would be written about that, figuring I had an unfair hint.)
1. Balmer will use black-and-white rhetoric to decry the black-and-white thinking of the Religious Right. Their approaches will not be criticized for being unwise or inadequate, they will be condemned as completely without merit. Other sides to any religious argument will simply not exist, because he knows the Bible better than you.
Arggh! I missed one right at the beginning: raised as an evangelical. Minus 1 point Otherwise, perfect score (The Bible I read.) 9 out of 10
1A. Oh, and we're closed-minded, too. Perfect 3 bonus points
2. Ballmer will note that God loves the poor. Therefore, we know the Religious Right has perverted the gospel, because they are in favor of cutting the poor off without a farthing. There will be no mention in Ballmer of what conservative evangelicals want to do for the poor, because it is so obviously a sham that it doesn't bear mentioning. The RR doesn't want to do what the liberals want, therefore they don't care about the poor.
Too easy. 10 out of 10
2A. He will believe every liberal spin of economic statistics as if they are unassailable. Tax cuts for the rich and corporate greed will both be mentioned at least twice each. This will prove that the Religious Right hates the poor.
Perfect 3 bonus points
3. He will complain how today's public Christians are rotten, not like the Christians in the Good Old Days when he was a boy, and were involved with the Civil Rights movement and the anti-war protests.
I was pretty much wrong on this one. There are only hints with the McGovern reference. 1 out of 10 points. Ouch
3A. The 50-50 chance of mentioning the abolitionists will rise to 90-10 because he's a religious history professor. "City on a Hill" will be mentioned. perfect 3 bonus points
4. He will explain that the war in Iraq is unjust because it doesn't adhere to "just war" doctrine, by which he will mean "We didn't get final approval from the UN." The extended examinations of Just War doctrine by other Christians who reached different conclusions, such as over at First Things, will not be mentioned. Conveniently, they won't have to be refuted, either. ".would not meet even the barest of just war criteria."
Score! He doesn't mention the UN (I suspect it's in his head though), which keeps me off full credit. 8 out of 10 points
***************************
ELSEWHERE
Florida GOP names replacement candidate: "Disgraced former Rep. Mark Foley sought treatment for alcoholism and 'other behavioral problems' as Republicans on Monday picked a new candidate to salvage the seat Foley abandoned after disclosure of lurid online messages he exchanged with teenage boys. State party leaders chose state Rep. Joe Negron to replace Foley in next month's election. Negron will receive votes cast for Foley, although Foley's name will remain on the ballot in the West Palm Beach district, which is largely Republican."
Partners in plunder: "I keep reading that big business wants government off its back. But that's a myth. Here's the truth: [B]ig business and big government prosper from the perception that they are rivals instead of partners (in plunder). The history of big business is one of cooperation with big government. That's Timothy Carney writing in a recent Cato Policy Report. He's the author of a new book, The Big Ripoff: How Big Business and Big Government Steal Your Money. Carney's book shows that government and business are not antagonists but allies. They've always been allies. Politicians like it that way because they get power and prestige, and businessmen like it because they get protection from competition."
Growth is good: "David Cameron says, 'It's time we admitted that there's more to life than money, and it's time we focused not just on GDP, but on GWB -- General Wellbeing,' by which he means happiness. With Cameron's endorsement, the cockle-warming politics of happiness has officially become a multi-partisan affair, no longer the property of Labour peer Richard Layard and other social democrats. And why shouldn't it be? Certainly no one disputes that there is more to life than money, or more to politics than the size of the economy. However, Cameron's contrast implies that increased GWB might have to come at the expense of GDP growth and economic liberalisation."
A game plan on gas prices: "As we recover from the summer season gasoline price highs, its time for cooler heads to prevail on U.S. energy policy. Despite a lot of grandstanding from the political class about 'Big Oil' and 'price-gouging,' we have seen little effective action from Washington. The laws of supply and demand still govern our energy markets -- the problem is that our tax and regulatory framework for energy is outdated and even counterproductive. There is so little margin for error in the current system that news of unexpected corrosion in the Alaska pipeline instantly sent global oil prices up 2 percent." The most important thing to understand is that gasoline prices are a signal of market supply and demand; Congress should not attempt to control prices directly but should instead address the underlying tax and regulatory factors that affect prices.... The United States should at least allow motorists and refiners the right to source Brazilian ethanol, which is made from cane sugar, or to refine cane sugar into ethanol here in the America. (Refining ethanol from cane sugar is far more efficient than from corn.) But the federal government charges American consumers a 54 cent per gallon penalty on imported ethanol, largely pricing it out of the market. And entrepreneurs interested in refining cane-sugar into ethanol in the United States. are prevented from doing so by the federal sugar program’s import quotas. Corn and sugar corporate welfare programs should not be allowed to stand in the way of our energy security; these tariffs should be repealed to create a competitive market for ethanol."
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
Below is an amused comment on a recent Leftist attack on the "Religious Right" from Assistant Village Idiot. He scores himself on being able to predict what the Leftist will say. Excerpt only:
Randall Balmer has an essay in the most recent Chronicle of Higher Education entitled Jesus Is Not A Republican. Balmer is a professor of religious history at Barnard College. The Assistant Village Idiot puts his fingers to his temples and makes some guesses: (Full disclosure: I read the opening one-sentence blurb, so I did see the phrase "drunk on power." Therefore I made no predictions about what would be written about that, figuring I had an unfair hint.)
1. Balmer will use black-and-white rhetoric to decry the black-and-white thinking of the Religious Right. Their approaches will not be criticized for being unwise or inadequate, they will be condemned as completely without merit. Other sides to any religious argument will simply not exist, because he knows the Bible better than you.
Arggh! I missed one right at the beginning: raised as an evangelical. Minus 1 point Otherwise, perfect score (The Bible I read.) 9 out of 10
1A. Oh, and we're closed-minded, too. Perfect 3 bonus points
2. Ballmer will note that God loves the poor. Therefore, we know the Religious Right has perverted the gospel, because they are in favor of cutting the poor off without a farthing. There will be no mention in Ballmer of what conservative evangelicals want to do for the poor, because it is so obviously a sham that it doesn't bear mentioning. The RR doesn't want to do what the liberals want, therefore they don't care about the poor.
Too easy. 10 out of 10
2A. He will believe every liberal spin of economic statistics as if they are unassailable. Tax cuts for the rich and corporate greed will both be mentioned at least twice each. This will prove that the Religious Right hates the poor.
Perfect 3 bonus points
3. He will complain how today's public Christians are rotten, not like the Christians in the Good Old Days when he was a boy, and were involved with the Civil Rights movement and the anti-war protests.
I was pretty much wrong on this one. There are only hints with the McGovern reference. 1 out of 10 points. Ouch
3A. The 50-50 chance of mentioning the abolitionists will rise to 90-10 because he's a religious history professor. "City on a Hill" will be mentioned. perfect 3 bonus points
4. He will explain that the war in Iraq is unjust because it doesn't adhere to "just war" doctrine, by which he will mean "We didn't get final approval from the UN." The extended examinations of Just War doctrine by other Christians who reached different conclusions, such as over at First Things, will not be mentioned. Conveniently, they won't have to be refuted, either. ".would not meet even the barest of just war criteria."
Score! He doesn't mention the UN (I suspect it's in his head though), which keeps me off full credit. 8 out of 10 points
***************************
ELSEWHERE
Florida GOP names replacement candidate: "Disgraced former Rep. Mark Foley sought treatment for alcoholism and 'other behavioral problems' as Republicans on Monday picked a new candidate to salvage the seat Foley abandoned after disclosure of lurid online messages he exchanged with teenage boys. State party leaders chose state Rep. Joe Negron to replace Foley in next month's election. Negron will receive votes cast for Foley, although Foley's name will remain on the ballot in the West Palm Beach district, which is largely Republican."
Partners in plunder: "I keep reading that big business wants government off its back. But that's a myth. Here's the truth: [B]ig business and big government prosper from the perception that they are rivals instead of partners (in plunder). The history of big business is one of cooperation with big government. That's Timothy Carney writing in a recent Cato Policy Report. He's the author of a new book, The Big Ripoff: How Big Business and Big Government Steal Your Money. Carney's book shows that government and business are not antagonists but allies. They've always been allies. Politicians like it that way because they get power and prestige, and businessmen like it because they get protection from competition."
Growth is good: "David Cameron says, 'It's time we admitted that there's more to life than money, and it's time we focused not just on GDP, but on GWB -- General Wellbeing,' by which he means happiness. With Cameron's endorsement, the cockle-warming politics of happiness has officially become a multi-partisan affair, no longer the property of Labour peer Richard Layard and other social democrats. And why shouldn't it be? Certainly no one disputes that there is more to life than money, or more to politics than the size of the economy. However, Cameron's contrast implies that increased GWB might have to come at the expense of GDP growth and economic liberalisation."
A game plan on gas prices: "As we recover from the summer season gasoline price highs, its time for cooler heads to prevail on U.S. energy policy. Despite a lot of grandstanding from the political class about 'Big Oil' and 'price-gouging,' we have seen little effective action from Washington. The laws of supply and demand still govern our energy markets -- the problem is that our tax and regulatory framework for energy is outdated and even counterproductive. There is so little margin for error in the current system that news of unexpected corrosion in the Alaska pipeline instantly sent global oil prices up 2 percent." The most important thing to understand is that gasoline prices are a signal of market supply and demand; Congress should not attempt to control prices directly but should instead address the underlying tax and regulatory factors that affect prices.... The United States should at least allow motorists and refiners the right to source Brazilian ethanol, which is made from cane sugar, or to refine cane sugar into ethanol here in the America. (Refining ethanol from cane sugar is far more efficient than from corn.) But the federal government charges American consumers a 54 cent per gallon penalty on imported ethanol, largely pricing it out of the market. And entrepreneurs interested in refining cane-sugar into ethanol in the United States. are prevented from doing so by the federal sugar program’s import quotas. Corn and sugar corporate welfare programs should not be allowed to stand in the way of our energy security; these tariffs should be repealed to create a competitive market for ethanol."
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
Thursday, October 05, 2006
The Democrat fantasy-world has some popular appeal
Advertisers of consumer products often structure advertisements to associate their products with a mood or a sense of pleasure, often without providing specifics about the product. Advertisers appear to believe that image, at least in the Baby Boomer world, is everything.
Basing their campaign strategy on the sort of focus-group polling employed by consumer-goods advertisers, Democrats just want voters to associate their party with peace and opposition to anything that might require our military forces to enter dangerous combat. The declared intent of Islamic jihadists to subjugate or destroy all non- Muslim societies must be ignored, as it would conflict with the nebulous image that fighting back is the root cause of terrorism. Appeasement, aka "negotiating" via the UN, is the Democrat's Ned- Lamont socialist answer.
Such was the fantasy of British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in 1938 when he met with Adolph Hitler in Munich to sanction National Socialist Germany's seizure of Czechslovakia's Sudetenland. Mr. Chamberlain happily returned to England, on the eve of World War II, proclaiming, "Peace in our time."
Democrats have convinced themselves that dealing with terrorists is the same as stopping ordinary criminals, with arrests after the fact, public trials, and rehabilitation programs. This follows from another liberal-socialist doctrine: crime and war are the result of unequal distribution of income, which creates aggressive behavior among those deprived of their "constitutional rights" to the same level of income as everyone else.
The Democrats, the party of John Dewey's socialistic pragmatism, resolutely oppose the data of real-life experience and cling to the Darwinian doctrine that the world is a matter of chance, producing a process of social evolution. Yesterday's "truth" (of course, with the exception of socialism and pragmatism) will not be today's or tomorrow's "truth." With everything in a continuous state of flux, according to that theory, there is no truth, merely valid or invalid propositions. If an action works to your advantage, regardless of what happens to others, it is "valid." If their campaign to destroy President Bush succeeds, no matter what happens to our troops around the world or to our nation in the future, the necessary actions are, by Democrats' pragmatic lights, "valid."
Given liberal-socialist control of most of the opinion-forming media - newspapers, magazines, TV, movies - Democrats may win on image without substance. After three quarters of a century of educational indoctrination in the religion of socialism, too few Americans have been given the historical knowledge necessary to distinguish fact from fiction.
More here
*****************************
Where'd all the "It's Just Sex" Democrats Go?
The Seattle Times reports "House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi wants the House Ethics Committee to put Republican leadership under oath to find out what they knew about Congressman Mark Foley's inappropriate communications with Congressional pages.". In a statement, Minority Senate leader Harry Reid (D) described the allegations against Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) as 'repugnant.' "Equally as bad," the Nevada Democrat said, "is the possibility that Republican leaders in the House of Representatives knew there was a problem and ignored it to preserve a Congressional seat this election year."
Now wait a minute... Then-President Bill Clinton had not been sending inappropriate suggestive emails and instant messages to a young intern, an act certainly repugnant no matter the authors' politics. He had reduced the previously revered Oval Office, to just a personal sexually perverted play pen.
Democrats didn't sit silent as the news broke of Clinton's repeated and continuing sexual misconduct, they rushed to his defense with some dreamed up right-wing conspiracy theory intended to misdirect public attention away from Clinton's life-long sex addiction, throwing every person disgusted by his irresponsible conduct under the bus. They were not innocent bystanders, they were actively complicit, even enablers.
As Clinton wagged his finger in the nose of every American, assuring the world that he "did not have sex with that woman", he and his closest advisors knew better. As he sat under oath before a court committing outright perjury before a world-wide audience, Democrats stood firmly at his side, crying foul, insisting that any lie about sex isn't a lie at all really.
Even once Clinton was impeached and disbarred for perjury - Democrats insisted that none of this had anything to do with his ability to hold the highest office in the land. Many of those now seeking to make political hay out of Foley's disgracefully stupid indiscretions once blocked any effort to remove a convicted perjurer from the White House.
Foley certainly screwed up, BIG TIME! But he at least had the decency to resign, a decency neither Clinton himself nor his many Democrat supporters ever demonstrated. Now we are supposed to listen as Democrats try to cash-in on what can only be described as inappropriate sexual activities between consenting adults?
When former New Jersey Governor James McGreevey was busted cheating on his wife and family with a young male office assistant, Democrats again rushed to his side to defend his actions as that of a closet homosexual who did not deserve to be tossed from office on the basis of his sexual misconduct alone.
They kept him in office to avoid the mid-term appointment of a Republican Governor, buying time for the Party to come up with his Democrat replacement. That replacement was Senator John Corzine, who personally bought both his senate seat and the governorship with his own personal wealth.
Democrat Representative Barney Franks didn't get busted sending private messages to his boy friend - he was busted paying a male prostitute for services. He was busted while using his elected position of power to clear his boy friend from his felony past, with convictions for cocaine possession, oral sodomy and "production of obscene items involving a juvenile." Again, Democrats across the country ran to defend Franks and make excuses for his perverted and irresponsible if not bizarre behaviors.
Yet today, we are to believe that these same Democrats are so upset by private email exchanges, that they must have a full-scale FBI investigation into not just Foley's personal misconduct, but every Republican in congress too?
Give me a BREAK!!! We're talking about Democrats here... Democrats! - People who don't know the difference between innocent human life and a stomach tumor. People who declare that ALL sexual perversions be given equal status under the law and equal rights under the time-honored name of Marriage. People who have rushed to demand First Amendment protection of pornography, at the same time claiming that the bible has no such protections... Democrats...!
Any Republican who didn't call for Foley's resignation isn't a conservative. But for Democrats to try to capitalize on a republican SEX SCANDAL is hilarious! I mean we're talking about a Party that idolizes JFK and Clinton on the basis of their sexual prowess. A Party still led by gin-soaked Teddy Kennedy. Come on...
Today's Democrats aren't only shameless... They're STUPID! Believing that they can buy votes with promises from the treasury is one thing. But believing they can capitalize on someone else's sexual misconduct is just plain insane... Are you kidding me???
Foley should be finished... So should any politician looking to cash-in on Foley's follies, especially if they are a Democrat! Get out a here... I really have seen it all now! "I deeply regret and accept full responsibility for the harm I have caused," Foley said. Foley has already begun taking responsibility for his actions. Democrats never have and never will!
Source
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
Advertisers of consumer products often structure advertisements to associate their products with a mood or a sense of pleasure, often without providing specifics about the product. Advertisers appear to believe that image, at least in the Baby Boomer world, is everything.
Basing their campaign strategy on the sort of focus-group polling employed by consumer-goods advertisers, Democrats just want voters to associate their party with peace and opposition to anything that might require our military forces to enter dangerous combat. The declared intent of Islamic jihadists to subjugate or destroy all non- Muslim societies must be ignored, as it would conflict with the nebulous image that fighting back is the root cause of terrorism. Appeasement, aka "negotiating" via the UN, is the Democrat's Ned- Lamont socialist answer.
Such was the fantasy of British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in 1938 when he met with Adolph Hitler in Munich to sanction National Socialist Germany's seizure of Czechslovakia's Sudetenland. Mr. Chamberlain happily returned to England, on the eve of World War II, proclaiming, "Peace in our time."
Democrats have convinced themselves that dealing with terrorists is the same as stopping ordinary criminals, with arrests after the fact, public trials, and rehabilitation programs. This follows from another liberal-socialist doctrine: crime and war are the result of unequal distribution of income, which creates aggressive behavior among those deprived of their "constitutional rights" to the same level of income as everyone else.
The Democrats, the party of John Dewey's socialistic pragmatism, resolutely oppose the data of real-life experience and cling to the Darwinian doctrine that the world is a matter of chance, producing a process of social evolution. Yesterday's "truth" (of course, with the exception of socialism and pragmatism) will not be today's or tomorrow's "truth." With everything in a continuous state of flux, according to that theory, there is no truth, merely valid or invalid propositions. If an action works to your advantage, regardless of what happens to others, it is "valid." If their campaign to destroy President Bush succeeds, no matter what happens to our troops around the world or to our nation in the future, the necessary actions are, by Democrats' pragmatic lights, "valid."
Given liberal-socialist control of most of the opinion-forming media - newspapers, magazines, TV, movies - Democrats may win on image without substance. After three quarters of a century of educational indoctrination in the religion of socialism, too few Americans have been given the historical knowledge necessary to distinguish fact from fiction.
More here
*****************************
Where'd all the "It's Just Sex" Democrats Go?
The Seattle Times reports "House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi wants the House Ethics Committee to put Republican leadership under oath to find out what they knew about Congressman Mark Foley's inappropriate communications with Congressional pages.". In a statement, Minority Senate leader Harry Reid (D) described the allegations against Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) as 'repugnant.' "Equally as bad," the Nevada Democrat said, "is the possibility that Republican leaders in the House of Representatives knew there was a problem and ignored it to preserve a Congressional seat this election year."
Now wait a minute... Then-President Bill Clinton had not been sending inappropriate suggestive emails and instant messages to a young intern, an act certainly repugnant no matter the authors' politics. He had reduced the previously revered Oval Office, to just a personal sexually perverted play pen.
Democrats didn't sit silent as the news broke of Clinton's repeated and continuing sexual misconduct, they rushed to his defense with some dreamed up right-wing conspiracy theory intended to misdirect public attention away from Clinton's life-long sex addiction, throwing every person disgusted by his irresponsible conduct under the bus. They were not innocent bystanders, they were actively complicit, even enablers.
As Clinton wagged his finger in the nose of every American, assuring the world that he "did not have sex with that woman", he and his closest advisors knew better. As he sat under oath before a court committing outright perjury before a world-wide audience, Democrats stood firmly at his side, crying foul, insisting that any lie about sex isn't a lie at all really.
Even once Clinton was impeached and disbarred for perjury - Democrats insisted that none of this had anything to do with his ability to hold the highest office in the land. Many of those now seeking to make political hay out of Foley's disgracefully stupid indiscretions once blocked any effort to remove a convicted perjurer from the White House.
Foley certainly screwed up, BIG TIME! But he at least had the decency to resign, a decency neither Clinton himself nor his many Democrat supporters ever demonstrated. Now we are supposed to listen as Democrats try to cash-in on what can only be described as inappropriate sexual activities between consenting adults?
When former New Jersey Governor James McGreevey was busted cheating on his wife and family with a young male office assistant, Democrats again rushed to his side to defend his actions as that of a closet homosexual who did not deserve to be tossed from office on the basis of his sexual misconduct alone.
They kept him in office to avoid the mid-term appointment of a Republican Governor, buying time for the Party to come up with his Democrat replacement. That replacement was Senator John Corzine, who personally bought both his senate seat and the governorship with his own personal wealth.
Democrat Representative Barney Franks didn't get busted sending private messages to his boy friend - he was busted paying a male prostitute for services. He was busted while using his elected position of power to clear his boy friend from his felony past, with convictions for cocaine possession, oral sodomy and "production of obscene items involving a juvenile." Again, Democrats across the country ran to defend Franks and make excuses for his perverted and irresponsible if not bizarre behaviors.
Yet today, we are to believe that these same Democrats are so upset by private email exchanges, that they must have a full-scale FBI investigation into not just Foley's personal misconduct, but every Republican in congress too?
Give me a BREAK!!! We're talking about Democrats here... Democrats! - People who don't know the difference between innocent human life and a stomach tumor. People who declare that ALL sexual perversions be given equal status under the law and equal rights under the time-honored name of Marriage. People who have rushed to demand First Amendment protection of pornography, at the same time claiming that the bible has no such protections... Democrats...!
Any Republican who didn't call for Foley's resignation isn't a conservative. But for Democrats to try to capitalize on a republican SEX SCANDAL is hilarious! I mean we're talking about a Party that idolizes JFK and Clinton on the basis of their sexual prowess. A Party still led by gin-soaked Teddy Kennedy. Come on...
Today's Democrats aren't only shameless... They're STUPID! Believing that they can buy votes with promises from the treasury is one thing. But believing they can capitalize on someone else's sexual misconduct is just plain insane... Are you kidding me???
Foley should be finished... So should any politician looking to cash-in on Foley's follies, especially if they are a Democrat! Get out a here... I really have seen it all now! "I deeply regret and accept full responsibility for the harm I have caused," Foley said. Foley has already begun taking responsibility for his actions. Democrats never have and never will!
Source
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
THE LEFTIST AGENDA
Liberals hate an armed society. Liberals hate an educated society. Liberals hate a society that says "I can do this on my own." What is the easiest way to defeat a society that is armed, educated, and free? Take away the guarantees of all 3 and you have it. Disarm them and they are no longer citizens, they are subjects. Control the educations system and you no longer have free-thinkers you have state-educated subjects by indoctrination. Slowly erode their rights and you have a collective mass.
If this sounds eerily familiar it should. It was tried before in Communist Russia and Nazi Germany. This experiment has been tried and has failed miserably. The names of the parties from the past have faded away, only to be replaced in this country by a party whose sole purpose is to make these anti-freedom positions a fixture in a free society. Democrat liberals often champion their love for a free society, but by their actions they have defined themselves as enemies of true freedom. They want God to be replaced by the state. They want to experiment again with a test that will result in total failure. Our choice is clear of what must be done to preserve what is merely a shadow of true freedom granted to us by God. Our Founding Fathers did not sacrifice their lives for us to lay down now and not fight for a true government based on constitutional principles...
Liberals have successfully allowed some of these arguments to be discussed where they are allowed to choose the wording. You see, liberals understand they cannot win the arguments by their stance on issues. In order to win, they have to redefine words to make them look as non-threatening as possible. They aren't pro-murder, they are pro-choice of a woman. They aren't anti-American, they are pro-U.N. They are pro-family, meaning gay couples can adopt and get married. They are pro-religion as long as it isn't Christians. Muslims aren't the most dangerous followers of a religion in this country. It's those darn Christians. They must be stopped. We can't allow the 10 Commandments to be displayed!
We just don't understand a liberal's mind because we are one of the masses. We aren't elite enough to lead but rather follow. They know what is best for us. We just need to trust them on this one. Government can solve all of our problems. The Constitution is an outdated document that has no relevance in this 21st century of enlightenment. How can we not see that? Let us put our trust and faith in Hilary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and Howard Dean to make us the country that the Founding Fathers envisioned.
More here
**************************
ELSEWHERE
Prudent Bear has a thoughtful column about how the process of EU enlargement is going and what the prospects for future enlargement are.
Nutty Church of England blames Christians, not Muslims for abuse of women: "Misguided and distorted versions of Christian belief have contributed to domestic abuse in Britain, says the Church of England. And the Church itself has not done enough to protect victims. The report, which has been backed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, says that domestic abuse is as "prevalent among Christians" as among other groups and identifies problem areas in Christian tradition."
Old farts have learnt nothing: "Iraqi war demonstrators in their 60s don't see why today's young people seem so uninterested. The protesters were furious. Occupying the senator's office, they chanted antiwar slogans and demanded an immediate end to the war. The police moved in, warning protesters they would be arrested if they didn't disperse. Most left, but 11 activists were cuffed, charged with criminal trespass, and taken to jail. This model for antiwar activism was perfected in the Vietnam era. Today it is employed to protest the Iraq war. Yet, in accounts of this recent protest in the office of Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Me.), one telling statistic stood out: the youngest protester arrested was 52, and most were in their 60s. Where were the kids? The answer provides insight into a key dynamic happening in the American public sphere. A new generation gap exists. In a perfect inversion of the 1960s generation gap, today's is marked by angry, activist elders and a more quiescent youth."
More media deception: "Friday's Good Morning America featured a segment with Robin Roberts in Memphis with three Southern women, identified as Republicans, who are all supposedly "having second thoughts about their party" and now plan to vote for Democrats. But a quick Internet search found that two of the three have backgrounds which raise questions about their fidelity to the GOP.... while Herbison was Press Secretary to Republican Tennessee Governor Donald Sundquist, best known for a failed effort to enact a state income tax, she was also the Press Secretary for the Tennessee House Democratic Caucus. The other, Robin Rasmussen, who insisted that "I voted Republican in every election since I was 18," appears to be on the Board of Directors of Planned Parenthood, which doesn't make it impossible for her to be a Republican, but certainly suggests she's long been politically active for a liberal social cause."
Tom Friedman gets this right: "Thanks to pressure from Midwest farmers and agribusinesses, who want to protect the U.S. corn ethanol industry from competition from Brazilian sugar ethanol, we have imposed a stiff tariff to keep it out. We do this even though Brazilian sugar ethanol provides eight times the energy of the fossil fuel used to make it, while American corn ethanol provides only 1.3 times the energy of the fossil fuel used to make it. We do this even though sugar ethanol reduces greenhouses gases more than corn ethanol. And we do this even though sugar cane ethanol can easily be grown in poor tropical countries in Africa or the Caribbean, and could actually help alleviate their poverty."
Illegals hurt the young: "Over the 2000-2005 period, immigration levels remained very high and roughly half of new immigrant workers were illegal. This report finds that the arrival of new immigrants (legal and illegal) in a state results in a decline in employment among young native-born workers in that state. Our findings indicate that young native-born workers are being displaced in the labor market by the arrival of new immigrants."
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
Liberals hate an armed society. Liberals hate an educated society. Liberals hate a society that says "I can do this on my own." What is the easiest way to defeat a society that is armed, educated, and free? Take away the guarantees of all 3 and you have it. Disarm them and they are no longer citizens, they are subjects. Control the educations system and you no longer have free-thinkers you have state-educated subjects by indoctrination. Slowly erode their rights and you have a collective mass.
If this sounds eerily familiar it should. It was tried before in Communist Russia and Nazi Germany. This experiment has been tried and has failed miserably. The names of the parties from the past have faded away, only to be replaced in this country by a party whose sole purpose is to make these anti-freedom positions a fixture in a free society. Democrat liberals often champion their love for a free society, but by their actions they have defined themselves as enemies of true freedom. They want God to be replaced by the state. They want to experiment again with a test that will result in total failure. Our choice is clear of what must be done to preserve what is merely a shadow of true freedom granted to us by God. Our Founding Fathers did not sacrifice their lives for us to lay down now and not fight for a true government based on constitutional principles...
Liberals have successfully allowed some of these arguments to be discussed where they are allowed to choose the wording. You see, liberals understand they cannot win the arguments by their stance on issues. In order to win, they have to redefine words to make them look as non-threatening as possible. They aren't pro-murder, they are pro-choice of a woman. They aren't anti-American, they are pro-U.N. They are pro-family, meaning gay couples can adopt and get married. They are pro-religion as long as it isn't Christians. Muslims aren't the most dangerous followers of a religion in this country. It's those darn Christians. They must be stopped. We can't allow the 10 Commandments to be displayed!
We just don't understand a liberal's mind because we are one of the masses. We aren't elite enough to lead but rather follow. They know what is best for us. We just need to trust them on this one. Government can solve all of our problems. The Constitution is an outdated document that has no relevance in this 21st century of enlightenment. How can we not see that? Let us put our trust and faith in Hilary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, John Kerry, and Howard Dean to make us the country that the Founding Fathers envisioned.
More here
**************************
ELSEWHERE
Prudent Bear has a thoughtful column about how the process of EU enlargement is going and what the prospects for future enlargement are.
Nutty Church of England blames Christians, not Muslims for abuse of women: "Misguided and distorted versions of Christian belief have contributed to domestic abuse in Britain, says the Church of England. And the Church itself has not done enough to protect victims. The report, which has been backed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, says that domestic abuse is as "prevalent among Christians" as among other groups and identifies problem areas in Christian tradition."
Old farts have learnt nothing: "Iraqi war demonstrators in their 60s don't see why today's young people seem so uninterested. The protesters were furious. Occupying the senator's office, they chanted antiwar slogans and demanded an immediate end to the war. The police moved in, warning protesters they would be arrested if they didn't disperse. Most left, but 11 activists were cuffed, charged with criminal trespass, and taken to jail. This model for antiwar activism was perfected in the Vietnam era. Today it is employed to protest the Iraq war. Yet, in accounts of this recent protest in the office of Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Me.), one telling statistic stood out: the youngest protester arrested was 52, and most were in their 60s. Where were the kids? The answer provides insight into a key dynamic happening in the American public sphere. A new generation gap exists. In a perfect inversion of the 1960s generation gap, today's is marked by angry, activist elders and a more quiescent youth."
More media deception: "Friday's Good Morning America featured a segment with Robin Roberts in Memphis with three Southern women, identified as Republicans, who are all supposedly "having second thoughts about their party" and now plan to vote for Democrats. But a quick Internet search found that two of the three have backgrounds which raise questions about their fidelity to the GOP.... while Herbison was Press Secretary to Republican Tennessee Governor Donald Sundquist, best known for a failed effort to enact a state income tax, she was also the Press Secretary for the Tennessee House Democratic Caucus. The other, Robin Rasmussen, who insisted that "I voted Republican in every election since I was 18," appears to be on the Board of Directors of Planned Parenthood, which doesn't make it impossible for her to be a Republican, but certainly suggests she's long been politically active for a liberal social cause."
Tom Friedman gets this right: "Thanks to pressure from Midwest farmers and agribusinesses, who want to protect the U.S. corn ethanol industry from competition from Brazilian sugar ethanol, we have imposed a stiff tariff to keep it out. We do this even though Brazilian sugar ethanol provides eight times the energy of the fossil fuel used to make it, while American corn ethanol provides only 1.3 times the energy of the fossil fuel used to make it. We do this even though sugar ethanol reduces greenhouses gases more than corn ethanol. And we do this even though sugar cane ethanol can easily be grown in poor tropical countries in Africa or the Caribbean, and could actually help alleviate their poverty."
Illegals hurt the young: "Over the 2000-2005 period, immigration levels remained very high and roughly half of new immigrant workers were illegal. This report finds that the arrival of new immigrants (legal and illegal) in a state results in a decline in employment among young native-born workers in that state. Our findings indicate that young native-born workers are being displaced in the labor market by the arrival of new immigrants."
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Unclear and present danger
The public is still not fully aware of the gravity of the threat posed by Islamist extremists, Britain's anti-terror supremo says:
Britain's top counter-terrorist cop has no doubt the nature of the threat has changed dramatically. Peter Clarke, Scotland Yard's 51-year-old head of counter-terrorism, talks with quiet resolution about the challenge of Islamist terrorism and how it has turned British policing upside down. People often say to Clarke how well placed the British authorities must be to deal with Islamist terror given their long experience of Irish Republican Army killers. No, he responds emphatically. It's a whole new ball game with no defined rules of engagement or carefully delineated boundaries. "The current terrorist threat is almost the reverse of all those parameters," Clarke said in Canberra this week. "What we see is global in origin, global in ambition, global in reach. The networks are loose, they are fluid and they are incredibly resilient," Clarke told a security conference.
Defeating the threat demands a level of resources, including sustained surveillance, unprecedented in modern law enforcement. "Unless you have pace and scale on your side, you will fail to deal with these terrorist conspiracies that we are currently seeing," he stressed. Clarke tells Inquirer the threat posed by radical Islamists in Britain is growing in scale and complexity. "I think the only sensible conclusion is that it is ... because if you look at the pace of terrorist activity since 9/11, it's clearly unabated and there appears to be a consistency, almost a regularity, in the attack patterns. "I don't want to sound unnecessarily gloomy, but I don't see many positive signs in terms of it being diminished." He points out that British authorities have managed to foil four or five attacks in the past 12 months. But the "sad probability" is that another attack will get through at some time....
Clarke says Britain's experience of Islamist terror, including last year's London bombings and the recently thwarted plot to blow up airliners flying to the US, is driving far-reaching changes in the way police now operate. It used to be that police would only intervene in the final stages of a terrorist plot, making arrests at or near the point of attack, with the strongest possible weight of evidence to put before a court. However, Clarke says the scale of the threat means "we can no longer afford to wait until that moment". "It's a complete shift in scale. Mentally we have had to completely change our response in terms of interdiction and intervention to prevent an increased risk to the public."
Clarke says earlier action to pre-empt a mass casualty attack also dictates the need to engage closely with local communities as a key element of counter-terrorism strategy. He believes the British public is still not fully aware of the gravity of the threat posed by Islamist terror groups. This is despite the fact there are now 90 people awaiting trial on terrorism charges. "We have a whole series of trials which over the coming months and years will unfold in the UK. When that hard evidence is produced the public are able to see what has been planned over the last months and years, that will contribute to their understanding of the threat."
Clarke warns it is vital that the aviation industry examines the implications of the foiled plot for air travel. The plotters had been planning to smuggle liquid explosives on board several planes. "I can't go into details about the methodology except to say its very innovative. That will give a clue to the fact that now in response ... new protective measures are required. The methodology is such that there must be an enduring threat to air transport." So a serious threat to aviation safety remains which has to be addressed? "Absolutely," comes the reply.
More here
********************
ELSEWHERE
Some blotted-out history: "It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's: Slavery, Secession, Segregation and now Socialism. During the civil rights era of the 1960's, Dr. King was fighting the Democrats who stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs. It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools."
Alabama blacks unhappy with Donks: "Black Democrats will meet today to discuss their future with the state party and if they should support candidates with an "unacceptable agenda," a move one political analyst said could hurt the party in the Nov. 7 general election. The meeting is detailed in a letter by Alabama Democratic Conference Chairman Joe Reed to the leadership of the Alabama Democratic Conference and other party officials. A copy of the Sept. 12 letter obtained by the Montgomery Advertiser states the meeting in Prattville is dedicated to determining the "quality and status" of the group's relationship to the party and "whether it is in our best interest to continue to maintain our present relationship.... Although the letter questions whether the conference should endorse certain Democratic candidates, the meeting has "nothing to do" with the state party granting its nomination to state legislative candidate Patricia Todd, said Jerome Gray, the conference's field director. Todd is white and openly gay. She was chosen over Gaynell Hendricks, a black candidate".
Homosexuals Prey on Young Boys (Comment by Dick McDonald): "Don't give me any crap about the political correctness of my headline. I was reared in West Hollywood, CA and can tell you as a young blonde athlete of the many encounters I had with homosexuals trying to blow me. Luckily my girlfriend's father was the Chief Commander of the Hollywood Police Station and gave me simple hints how to handle their approaches. One of the simplest was to reply to their standard line "I hear there are a lot of fags in Hollywood" to a hitch hiker like me was by emphatically stating "Yeah I turned one in last night" whereupon the car would screech to a halt and the "fellow" would tell me he wasn't going "my way" anymore. He had to turn. So what do we have now? Representative Tom Foley (R), the Co-Chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus, resigned today with the disclosure of sexually explicit e-mails he sent to a 16 year-old page and the hint that he has a history with other pages as well. Tom wrote the young page to inquire "Do I make you a little horny?" How sick is that? Apparently it was well known in Washington that Foley was light in the shoes. How he got to manage "exploited" children is a mystery; a serious management error by the Republican leadership. If you think about it, it is stranger than fiction. Democrat supporters of gay rights are going to forget their support temporarily, the political advantage is just too delicious."
Chris Brand has just done a new lot of posts on his usual themes of race, IQ and political correctness -- with particular emphasis on the British scene.
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
The public is still not fully aware of the gravity of the threat posed by Islamist extremists, Britain's anti-terror supremo says:
Britain's top counter-terrorist cop has no doubt the nature of the threat has changed dramatically. Peter Clarke, Scotland Yard's 51-year-old head of counter-terrorism, talks with quiet resolution about the challenge of Islamist terrorism and how it has turned British policing upside down. People often say to Clarke how well placed the British authorities must be to deal with Islamist terror given their long experience of Irish Republican Army killers. No, he responds emphatically. It's a whole new ball game with no defined rules of engagement or carefully delineated boundaries. "The current terrorist threat is almost the reverse of all those parameters," Clarke said in Canberra this week. "What we see is global in origin, global in ambition, global in reach. The networks are loose, they are fluid and they are incredibly resilient," Clarke told a security conference.
Defeating the threat demands a level of resources, including sustained surveillance, unprecedented in modern law enforcement. "Unless you have pace and scale on your side, you will fail to deal with these terrorist conspiracies that we are currently seeing," he stressed. Clarke tells Inquirer the threat posed by radical Islamists in Britain is growing in scale and complexity. "I think the only sensible conclusion is that it is ... because if you look at the pace of terrorist activity since 9/11, it's clearly unabated and there appears to be a consistency, almost a regularity, in the attack patterns. "I don't want to sound unnecessarily gloomy, but I don't see many positive signs in terms of it being diminished." He points out that British authorities have managed to foil four or five attacks in the past 12 months. But the "sad probability" is that another attack will get through at some time....
Clarke says Britain's experience of Islamist terror, including last year's London bombings and the recently thwarted plot to blow up airliners flying to the US, is driving far-reaching changes in the way police now operate. It used to be that police would only intervene in the final stages of a terrorist plot, making arrests at or near the point of attack, with the strongest possible weight of evidence to put before a court. However, Clarke says the scale of the threat means "we can no longer afford to wait until that moment". "It's a complete shift in scale. Mentally we have had to completely change our response in terms of interdiction and intervention to prevent an increased risk to the public."
Clarke says earlier action to pre-empt a mass casualty attack also dictates the need to engage closely with local communities as a key element of counter-terrorism strategy. He believes the British public is still not fully aware of the gravity of the threat posed by Islamist terror groups. This is despite the fact there are now 90 people awaiting trial on terrorism charges. "We have a whole series of trials which over the coming months and years will unfold in the UK. When that hard evidence is produced the public are able to see what has been planned over the last months and years, that will contribute to their understanding of the threat."
Clarke warns it is vital that the aviation industry examines the implications of the foiled plot for air travel. The plotters had been planning to smuggle liquid explosives on board several planes. "I can't go into details about the methodology except to say its very innovative. That will give a clue to the fact that now in response ... new protective measures are required. The methodology is such that there must be an enduring threat to air transport." So a serious threat to aviation safety remains which has to be addressed? "Absolutely," comes the reply.
More here
********************
ELSEWHERE
Some blotted-out history: "It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's: Slavery, Secession, Segregation and now Socialism. During the civil rights era of the 1960's, Dr. King was fighting the Democrats who stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs. It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools."
Alabama blacks unhappy with Donks: "Black Democrats will meet today to discuss their future with the state party and if they should support candidates with an "unacceptable agenda," a move one political analyst said could hurt the party in the Nov. 7 general election. The meeting is detailed in a letter by Alabama Democratic Conference Chairman Joe Reed to the leadership of the Alabama Democratic Conference and other party officials. A copy of the Sept. 12 letter obtained by the Montgomery Advertiser states the meeting in Prattville is dedicated to determining the "quality and status" of the group's relationship to the party and "whether it is in our best interest to continue to maintain our present relationship.... Although the letter questions whether the conference should endorse certain Democratic candidates, the meeting has "nothing to do" with the state party granting its nomination to state legislative candidate Patricia Todd, said Jerome Gray, the conference's field director. Todd is white and openly gay. She was chosen over Gaynell Hendricks, a black candidate".
Homosexuals Prey on Young Boys (Comment by Dick McDonald): "Don't give me any crap about the political correctness of my headline. I was reared in West Hollywood, CA and can tell you as a young blonde athlete of the many encounters I had with homosexuals trying to blow me. Luckily my girlfriend's father was the Chief Commander of the Hollywood Police Station and gave me simple hints how to handle their approaches. One of the simplest was to reply to their standard line "I hear there are a lot of fags in Hollywood" to a hitch hiker like me was by emphatically stating "Yeah I turned one in last night" whereupon the car would screech to a halt and the "fellow" would tell me he wasn't going "my way" anymore. He had to turn. So what do we have now? Representative Tom Foley (R), the Co-Chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus, resigned today with the disclosure of sexually explicit e-mails he sent to a 16 year-old page and the hint that he has a history with other pages as well. Tom wrote the young page to inquire "Do I make you a little horny?" How sick is that? Apparently it was well known in Washington that Foley was light in the shoes. How he got to manage "exploited" children is a mystery; a serious management error by the Republican leadership. If you think about it, it is stranger than fiction. Democrat supporters of gay rights are going to forget their support temporarily, the political advantage is just too delicious."
Chris Brand has just done a new lot of posts on his usual themes of race, IQ and political correctness -- with particular emphasis on the British scene.
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
Monday, October 02, 2006
HATE IS BASIC TO LEFTISM
Let's face it, when you get right down to it, all of liberalism is fueled by a singular strategy-a strategy which has been continually perfected and relentlessly executed over the past forty years. That strategy is to promote and exploit divisiveness. Everything liberal politicians do is based on this simple principle. Tell the people that are given to hating the most, that they are the ones who are hated. Tell the people who expect the most, that they deserve more. Tell blacks to hate whites. Tell women to hate men. Tell the lazy to hate the motivated. Tell the poor that only conservatives are rich, and then be sure to tell them to hate them for it.
Class warfare, race baiting, name calling and man-hating-all with a singular goal: to get themselves in power by promoting and exploiting divisiveness. Of course, once this divisiveness turns into frenzy, these same people suddenly act as if they actually want to solve a problem that didn't even exist before they did everything they possibly could to create it. To liberals, every issue, every situation is an opportunity to divide. History, religion, the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the death of a soldier, a political debate, the hurricane which devastated New Orleans. Every tragedy exploited to divide. Every victory belittled to divide. Every incident, every word, every distorted statistic, every holiday-you name it, they will find some way to divide it.
Unfortunately, it's not just the politicians who promote and exploit divisiveness; it is the people as well. Malcontents, jealous of anyone with any sort of success, come up with any way they can to attack those who are more successful then they are. Someone is rich only because they stole something from them. Certain groups are more successful only because they took advantage of them. Work has nothing to do with it. Intelligence has nothing to do with it. Planning ahead has nothing to do with it. Even luck has nothing to do with it.
And what do these kinds of people view as the solution to this imaginary injustice? Why special rights, privileges and opportunities for themselves, of course. Level the playing field. Get something for nothing. Take from the rich, the white, the male dominated, homophobic society that has already given them everything. Take what they have, what they built, what they earned-whether it be money, property, liberty or opportunity-and find some way, some justification, some cause or some guise to redistribute it to the people who have done nothing to earn it. To people who refuse to compete on merit. To people who insist on taking more out of society than what they put in to it. To people who don't give a damn that their inclusion comes only at the expense of someone else's exclusion. The strategy is simple, really-promote divisiveness and then exploit it for your own benefit.
But differences have given liberals the perfect opportunity to stop any rational discussion dead in its tracks. Differences have led to polarization. Differences have led to countries within a country. Differences have led to the dreaded xist-ism-monger-phobia. Differences have allowed liberals to add any of these four sounds to the end of any word they choose, virtually guaranteeing that they can get away with anything they want.
Worse yet, liberals actually have the nerve to turn around and endlessly accuse conservatives of divisiveness. To them, conservatives- who believe everyone should be held to the same standards-are somehow divisive. To them, conservatives-who believe everyone should have the same rights regardless of the guises used to justify different ones for different people-are somehow divisive. To them, conservatives-who sacrifice their time, money, careers and often their lives to defend the true meaning of freedom and liberty-are somehow divisive.
But the reality is that divisiveness does not come from those who are trying to make some contribution to our society. The reality is that divisiveness does not come from those who expect others to at least try to do the same. The reality is that divisiveness comes from those who are always trying to get something out of a society far beyond what they are willing to put back in. The reality is that divisiveness comes from those who are always trying to get something for nothing.
More here. See also here
*********************
ELSEWHERE
Korea: Test tube on socialism vs capitalism: "Permit me to add something to Secretary Rumsfeld’s observations on the different results in North and South Korea. (Living in South Korea for a year was one of the things that cured me of my youthful leftism.) The Korean people may be the most ethnically homogeneous people on earth. About 60 percent have one of only three surnames: Lee, Kim, and Park. North and South Korea had the same history from the dawn of history until 1945. The Korean peninsula is small, and about 45 percent constitutes the South. At the time of partition through about 1960, I’d say, the economy of the North was more developed than that of the South. The North had a smaller population, but one that was arguably better educated than the South’s. The North had more industry, too. During the 1950s, the South was absolutely destitute, and survived on food donations from the United States. Thus, in 1945, an “experiment of nature” was carried out. Take a small, homogeneous country and divide it arbitrarily more or less in half. Then install one kind of government in the north and another kind in the south. Close the curtain. See what happens. The results speak for themselves, don’t they? Fifty years of Communism produced famine, or near famine. Fifty years of an increasingly free-market system produced prosperity and wider political freedom. What more does anyone need to know about socialism?
New disclosure rules reveal where union bosses spend: "For the first time, federal disclosure rules are shining sunlight upon union spending priorities, and many rank-and-file members won't like what they reveal. Fortunately, they can do something about it. Among other pursuits, unions such as the AFL-CIO and National Education Association (NEA) spent 60% or more of their discretionary dollars on partisan political activities in 2004-2005, compared to 40% or less on actual work-related representation activities."
Increasing freedom increases growth: "States that have lower taxes, smaller government and flexible labor markets tend to have comparatively more economic growth. An annual report from the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) and Canada's Fraser Institute attempts to quantify each state's economic freedom, and then examine what this means for economic growth. This year's report points to good news for all but a few states, most notably New Mexico."
The Antifederalists were right : "September 27 marks the anniversary of the publication of the first of the Antifederalist Papers in 1789. The Antifederalists were opponents of ratifying the US Constitution. They feared that it would create an overbearing central government, while the Constitution's proponents promised that this would not happen. As the losers in that debate, they are largely overlooked today. But that does not mean they were wrong or that we are not indebted to them."
From Far Left to libertarian : "The question of how I became a libertarian ultimately is a question about how I changed my mental model of the political system from one of 'good guys vs. villains' to one of the importance of limited government, individual liberty, and personal responsibility. I travelled the route from Far Left to libertarian. I think that quite a few libertarians have travelled that route, and yet I cannot think of anyone who has gone the other direction. This leads me to suspect that: 1. Far Leftists and libertarianism have much in common. 2. Libertarians know something that Far Leftists do not."
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
Let's face it, when you get right down to it, all of liberalism is fueled by a singular strategy-a strategy which has been continually perfected and relentlessly executed over the past forty years. That strategy is to promote and exploit divisiveness. Everything liberal politicians do is based on this simple principle. Tell the people that are given to hating the most, that they are the ones who are hated. Tell the people who expect the most, that they deserve more. Tell blacks to hate whites. Tell women to hate men. Tell the lazy to hate the motivated. Tell the poor that only conservatives are rich, and then be sure to tell them to hate them for it.
Class warfare, race baiting, name calling and man-hating-all with a singular goal: to get themselves in power by promoting and exploiting divisiveness. Of course, once this divisiveness turns into frenzy, these same people suddenly act as if they actually want to solve a problem that didn't even exist before they did everything they possibly could to create it. To liberals, every issue, every situation is an opportunity to divide. History, religion, the First Amendment, the Second Amendment, the death of a soldier, a political debate, the hurricane which devastated New Orleans. Every tragedy exploited to divide. Every victory belittled to divide. Every incident, every word, every distorted statistic, every holiday-you name it, they will find some way to divide it.
Unfortunately, it's not just the politicians who promote and exploit divisiveness; it is the people as well. Malcontents, jealous of anyone with any sort of success, come up with any way they can to attack those who are more successful then they are. Someone is rich only because they stole something from them. Certain groups are more successful only because they took advantage of them. Work has nothing to do with it. Intelligence has nothing to do with it. Planning ahead has nothing to do with it. Even luck has nothing to do with it.
And what do these kinds of people view as the solution to this imaginary injustice? Why special rights, privileges and opportunities for themselves, of course. Level the playing field. Get something for nothing. Take from the rich, the white, the male dominated, homophobic society that has already given them everything. Take what they have, what they built, what they earned-whether it be money, property, liberty or opportunity-and find some way, some justification, some cause or some guise to redistribute it to the people who have done nothing to earn it. To people who refuse to compete on merit. To people who insist on taking more out of society than what they put in to it. To people who don't give a damn that their inclusion comes only at the expense of someone else's exclusion. The strategy is simple, really-promote divisiveness and then exploit it for your own benefit.
But differences have given liberals the perfect opportunity to stop any rational discussion dead in its tracks. Differences have led to polarization. Differences have led to countries within a country. Differences have led to the dreaded xist-ism-monger-phobia. Differences have allowed liberals to add any of these four sounds to the end of any word they choose, virtually guaranteeing that they can get away with anything they want.
Worse yet, liberals actually have the nerve to turn around and endlessly accuse conservatives of divisiveness. To them, conservatives- who believe everyone should be held to the same standards-are somehow divisive. To them, conservatives-who believe everyone should have the same rights regardless of the guises used to justify different ones for different people-are somehow divisive. To them, conservatives-who sacrifice their time, money, careers and often their lives to defend the true meaning of freedom and liberty-are somehow divisive.
But the reality is that divisiveness does not come from those who are trying to make some contribution to our society. The reality is that divisiveness does not come from those who expect others to at least try to do the same. The reality is that divisiveness comes from those who are always trying to get something out of a society far beyond what they are willing to put back in. The reality is that divisiveness comes from those who are always trying to get something for nothing.
More here. See also here
*********************
ELSEWHERE
Korea: Test tube on socialism vs capitalism: "Permit me to add something to Secretary Rumsfeld’s observations on the different results in North and South Korea. (Living in South Korea for a year was one of the things that cured me of my youthful leftism.) The Korean people may be the most ethnically homogeneous people on earth. About 60 percent have one of only three surnames: Lee, Kim, and Park. North and South Korea had the same history from the dawn of history until 1945. The Korean peninsula is small, and about 45 percent constitutes the South. At the time of partition through about 1960, I’d say, the economy of the North was more developed than that of the South. The North had a smaller population, but one that was arguably better educated than the South’s. The North had more industry, too. During the 1950s, the South was absolutely destitute, and survived on food donations from the United States. Thus, in 1945, an “experiment of nature” was carried out. Take a small, homogeneous country and divide it arbitrarily more or less in half. Then install one kind of government in the north and another kind in the south. Close the curtain. See what happens. The results speak for themselves, don’t they? Fifty years of Communism produced famine, or near famine. Fifty years of an increasingly free-market system produced prosperity and wider political freedom. What more does anyone need to know about socialism?
New disclosure rules reveal where union bosses spend: "For the first time, federal disclosure rules are shining sunlight upon union spending priorities, and many rank-and-file members won't like what they reveal. Fortunately, they can do something about it. Among other pursuits, unions such as the AFL-CIO and National Education Association (NEA) spent 60% or more of their discretionary dollars on partisan political activities in 2004-2005, compared to 40% or less on actual work-related representation activities."
Increasing freedom increases growth: "States that have lower taxes, smaller government and flexible labor markets tend to have comparatively more economic growth. An annual report from the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) and Canada's Fraser Institute attempts to quantify each state's economic freedom, and then examine what this means for economic growth. This year's report points to good news for all but a few states, most notably New Mexico."
The Antifederalists were right : "September 27 marks the anniversary of the publication of the first of the Antifederalist Papers in 1789. The Antifederalists were opponents of ratifying the US Constitution. They feared that it would create an overbearing central government, while the Constitution's proponents promised that this would not happen. As the losers in that debate, they are largely overlooked today. But that does not mean they were wrong or that we are not indebted to them."
From Far Left to libertarian : "The question of how I became a libertarian ultimately is a question about how I changed my mental model of the political system from one of 'good guys vs. villains' to one of the importance of limited government, individual liberty, and personal responsibility. I travelled the route from Far Left to libertarian. I think that quite a few libertarians have travelled that route, and yet I cannot think of anyone who has gone the other direction. This leads me to suspect that: 1. Far Leftists and libertarianism have much in common. 2. Libertarians know something that Far Leftists do not."
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
Sunday, October 01, 2006
LEFTISTS NEED CONTROL
One can't exaggerate how large Fox looms in the liberal imagination. They see it as huge and mighty and credit it with almost mythical powers. It is a propaganda channel whose mission it is to destroy the Democratic Party. That's part of why Clintons' performance had such salience. Finally he was standing up to an evil empire. It is odd that they are so spooked. In October America is set to become a nation of 300 million. What a big country. Fox News's average evening prime-time viewership is less than two million. Its average daytime is less than a million. And if my mail is an indication, they're already Republicans. Fox's power is that it is an alternative to the mainstream media. It did not take its shape by deeply inhaling liberalism and slowly breathing it out.
The left sees Fox as a symptom and promoter of anarchy. The old unity, the old essential unity one used to experience when one turned on the TV in 1950 or 1980, has been fractured, broken up. We are becoming balkanized. Fox, blogs, talk radio, the Internet, citizen reporters--it's all producing cacophony, and heralds a future of No Compromise. No one trusts the information they're given anymore, as they trusted Uncle Walter. This is bad for the country.
It is an odd thing about modern liberals that they're made anxious by the unsanctioned. A conservative is more likely to see what's happening as freedom. It isn't that honest and impartial news lost its place of respect, it's that establishment liberalism lost its journalistic monopoly. And it was a monopoly. Not everyone believed Uncle Walter. Uncle Walter, and Chet and David, were all there was. But while they reigned, Americans were buying "Conscience of a Conservative" by Barry Goldwater, and Reagan was quietly rising way out in California, and Spiro Agnew and Bill Safire were issuing mainstream hits like "effete snobs" and "nattering nabobs." In the time liberals think of as the last great unified era, Americans were rising up.
The new media did not divide us. The new media gave voice to our divisions. The result: more points of view, more subjects discussed, more data presented. This, in a great republic, a great democracy, a leader of the world in a dangerous time, is not bad but good.
More here
********************
ELSEWHERE
UT: Trio asks court to overturn polygamy ban: "A Utah couple and a woman who wants to become the second wife in their family are asking a Denver-based federal appeals court to overturn Utah's ban on polygamy, saying it violates their rights to religion, association and privacy. A Salt Lake County clerk refused to issue a marriage license in December 2003 when G. Lee Cook and the second woman -- accompanied by Cook's wife -- applied. About a year later, a federal judge dismissed their lawsuit, saying the clerk properly followed state laws and rejecting arguments that those laws violate the rights of people who believe in plural marriage. On Monday, a three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals formally accepted written arguments submitted earlier this year. There was no indication when they might rule."
Argentina: Pupils to learn Britain "colonised" Falklands: "A new history book describing how Britain illegally 'colonised' the Falkland Islands is to be distributed to every secondary school pupil in Argentina. The book accuses British forces of arriving secretly on the islands in the 18th century and taking it by force from the Spanish. Since then the British have refused offers to discuss the islands' sovereignty with Argentina, the book claims. ... According to the Argentinian version of events, the Falklands became part of Argentina after it declared independence from Spain in 1810. The new Argentinian government 'considered [the Falklands] an integral part of its territory, inherited from Spain by succession,' the book says. The British version of events reads differently. It maintains that an expeditionary force led by the Royal Navy reached West Falkland in 1765 and, on finding it unoccupied, took formal possession of the Falklands."
UK: "Anti-junk mail" postman keeps job: "The rebel postman who became a populist hero when he championed the case against junk mail is to keep his job, it was announced yesterday. Roger Annies, 45, won praise from customers and environmental campaigners when he told householders on his route how to avoid some of the 21 billion pieces of junk mail which are put through Britain's letterboxes each year. Taking matters into his own hands the father-of-one, from Barry, south Wales, designed and circulated a leaflet highlighting Royal Mail's opt-out clause for unsolicited mail. ... Mr Annies was suspended and faced a disciplinary hearing for his intervention. Yesterday, however, a company spokesman said he had been reinstated."
Taxachusetts still very taxing: "Fees and taxes have increased more than $700 million a year under Governor Mitt Romney and Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey, a leading budget specialist said yesterday. Michael J. Widmer -- president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, which closely tracks state finances -- said the state has raised roughly $740 million to $750 million per year by increasing fees and corporate taxes gained from what the Romney administration describes as 'closing loopholes.' Widmer's figure is about $500 million more than what Romney asserted yesterday when he sharply disputed charges by Democratic gubernatorial nominee Deval L . Patrick that the GOP administration had raised millions in taxes. But it is also tens of millions less than the $985 million that Patrick cited."
Arnie vetoes drivers' licence bill: "Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed legislation Thursday to allow illegal immigrants to obtain California driver's licenses, marking the eighth consecutive year such proposals have died. Senate Bill 1162 was a far weaker proposal than had been pushed in years past, recognizing the string of defeats and bitter political friction over the issue in an election year. The veto marked one of dozens of actions taken Thursday by Schwarzenegger, who is racing to meet a deadline of midnight Saturday to sign or veto about 500 bills remaining on his desk".
Neuro wine in old bottles : "In the September 18 edition of The New Yorker magazine, writer John Cassidy leads a fascinatin-g tour through parts of the new field of neuroeconomics, the study of the neurological underpinnings of economic decision-making. Sadly, a number of the economists Cassidy interviews are stuck in a conceptual quagmire about the relationship between reason, emotion, and paternalistic public policy. Cassidy, a good journalist, inherits their confusion. There is, in fact, nothing in the research Cassidy reviews that helps to justify, in his words, 'a new political philosophy based on the idea of saving people from the vagaries of their limbic regions.'"
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
One can't exaggerate how large Fox looms in the liberal imagination. They see it as huge and mighty and credit it with almost mythical powers. It is a propaganda channel whose mission it is to destroy the Democratic Party. That's part of why Clintons' performance had such salience. Finally he was standing up to an evil empire. It is odd that they are so spooked. In October America is set to become a nation of 300 million. What a big country. Fox News's average evening prime-time viewership is less than two million. Its average daytime is less than a million. And if my mail is an indication, they're already Republicans. Fox's power is that it is an alternative to the mainstream media. It did not take its shape by deeply inhaling liberalism and slowly breathing it out.
The left sees Fox as a symptom and promoter of anarchy. The old unity, the old essential unity one used to experience when one turned on the TV in 1950 or 1980, has been fractured, broken up. We are becoming balkanized. Fox, blogs, talk radio, the Internet, citizen reporters--it's all producing cacophony, and heralds a future of No Compromise. No one trusts the information they're given anymore, as they trusted Uncle Walter. This is bad for the country.
It is an odd thing about modern liberals that they're made anxious by the unsanctioned. A conservative is more likely to see what's happening as freedom. It isn't that honest and impartial news lost its place of respect, it's that establishment liberalism lost its journalistic monopoly. And it was a monopoly. Not everyone believed Uncle Walter. Uncle Walter, and Chet and David, were all there was. But while they reigned, Americans were buying "Conscience of a Conservative" by Barry Goldwater, and Reagan was quietly rising way out in California, and Spiro Agnew and Bill Safire were issuing mainstream hits like "effete snobs" and "nattering nabobs." In the time liberals think of as the last great unified era, Americans were rising up.
The new media did not divide us. The new media gave voice to our divisions. The result: more points of view, more subjects discussed, more data presented. This, in a great republic, a great democracy, a leader of the world in a dangerous time, is not bad but good.
More here
********************
ELSEWHERE
UT: Trio asks court to overturn polygamy ban: "A Utah couple and a woman who wants to become the second wife in their family are asking a Denver-based federal appeals court to overturn Utah's ban on polygamy, saying it violates their rights to religion, association and privacy. A Salt Lake County clerk refused to issue a marriage license in December 2003 when G. Lee Cook and the second woman -- accompanied by Cook's wife -- applied. About a year later, a federal judge dismissed their lawsuit, saying the clerk properly followed state laws and rejecting arguments that those laws violate the rights of people who believe in plural marriage. On Monday, a three-judge panel of the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals formally accepted written arguments submitted earlier this year. There was no indication when they might rule."
Argentina: Pupils to learn Britain "colonised" Falklands: "A new history book describing how Britain illegally 'colonised' the Falkland Islands is to be distributed to every secondary school pupil in Argentina. The book accuses British forces of arriving secretly on the islands in the 18th century and taking it by force from the Spanish. Since then the British have refused offers to discuss the islands' sovereignty with Argentina, the book claims. ... According to the Argentinian version of events, the Falklands became part of Argentina after it declared independence from Spain in 1810. The new Argentinian government 'considered [the Falklands] an integral part of its territory, inherited from Spain by succession,' the book says. The British version of events reads differently. It maintains that an expeditionary force led by the Royal Navy reached West Falkland in 1765 and, on finding it unoccupied, took formal possession of the Falklands."
UK: "Anti-junk mail" postman keeps job: "The rebel postman who became a populist hero when he championed the case against junk mail is to keep his job, it was announced yesterday. Roger Annies, 45, won praise from customers and environmental campaigners when he told householders on his route how to avoid some of the 21 billion pieces of junk mail which are put through Britain's letterboxes each year. Taking matters into his own hands the father-of-one, from Barry, south Wales, designed and circulated a leaflet highlighting Royal Mail's opt-out clause for unsolicited mail. ... Mr Annies was suspended and faced a disciplinary hearing for his intervention. Yesterday, however, a company spokesman said he had been reinstated."
Taxachusetts still very taxing: "Fees and taxes have increased more than $700 million a year under Governor Mitt Romney and Lieutenant Governor Kerry Healey, a leading budget specialist said yesterday. Michael J. Widmer -- president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, which closely tracks state finances -- said the state has raised roughly $740 million to $750 million per year by increasing fees and corporate taxes gained from what the Romney administration describes as 'closing loopholes.' Widmer's figure is about $500 million more than what Romney asserted yesterday when he sharply disputed charges by Democratic gubernatorial nominee Deval L . Patrick that the GOP administration had raised millions in taxes. But it is also tens of millions less than the $985 million that Patrick cited."
Arnie vetoes drivers' licence bill: "Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed legislation Thursday to allow illegal immigrants to obtain California driver's licenses, marking the eighth consecutive year such proposals have died. Senate Bill 1162 was a far weaker proposal than had been pushed in years past, recognizing the string of defeats and bitter political friction over the issue in an election year. The veto marked one of dozens of actions taken Thursday by Schwarzenegger, who is racing to meet a deadline of midnight Saturday to sign or veto about 500 bills remaining on his desk".
Neuro wine in old bottles : "In the September 18 edition of The New Yorker magazine, writer John Cassidy leads a fascinatin-g tour through parts of the new field of neuroeconomics, the study of the neurological underpinnings of economic decision-making. Sadly, a number of the economists Cassidy interviews are stuck in a conceptual quagmire about the relationship between reason, emotion, and paternalistic public policy. Cassidy, a good journalist, inherits their confusion. There is, in fact, nothing in the research Cassidy reviews that helps to justify, in his words, 'a new political philosophy based on the idea of saving people from the vagaries of their limbic regions.'"
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
Saturday, September 30, 2006
Brookes News Update
Why tax cuts and not consumer spending rescued the US economy: By cutting capital gains President Bush lifted a huge burden off production by generating additional savings. It is these tax cuts that spurred the economy. Therefore they gave the US economy something it sorely needed - more investment
Inflation and the price of oil: The yearly rate of growth of the CPI less food and energy edged up to 2.8 per cent in August from 2.7 per cent in July - the biggest 12-month gain in nearly five years. So did the Fed cause the rise or was it the price of oil?
Is monetary policy killing Australian manufacturing?: Australia's ratio of manufacturing to GDP is one of the lowest in the developed world. Our economists tell us not to worry because this is a natural process. But what if it isn't? What are the consequences for living standards if this shift in manufacturing has been caused by the Reserve Bank's loose monetary policy?
Liberal Party sabotaging its own labour market deregulation policy: By imposing more regulations on firms the Government is admitting that it has no genuine understanding of how labour markets work. Is that why it no longer claims that deregulated labour markets generate increased productivity?
Day of Muslim rage: What else is new?: Nothing Muslim - be it law, music, written words, or cultural practices - can be criticized. When anyone has the audacity to complain about something Islamic, the fanatics automatically take to the streets in numerous places around the world and in engage in orgies of barbaric behaviour
Terrorism and the West's path to self-destruction: In recent years there have been many Islamic acts of terror committed against Western countries. All of them were openly or covertly supported by most Muslim rulers and are silently condoned by most of the Islamic communities around the world
Inflation fallacies, prices and houses: Much economic commentary, particularly in our newspapers, makes for truly depressing reading so poor is much of the analysis - particularly with respect to inflation
**************************
ELSEWHERE
I have just put up here a press release about the enormously biased media hounding of Senator George Allen. I rarely comment on individual Congressional races but this is a case of outright media persecution on essentially baseless grounds. Previous posts from me about what the Senator was originally accused of are here and here
Sowers of sexual confusion: ""Transgender activists are aggressively targeting our public school children this fall," said TVC Executive Director Andrea Lafferty. "These sexually confused individuals have made it their goal to deceive our kids into thinking they're the opposite sex. This insanity must stop. Our new report, "Will Cross-Dressing Activists Come To Your School?" exposes this dangerous effort to confuse our children." TVC's Back to School Report details the growing movement of transgender activists, including teachers, counselors and pediatricians who are teaching children that being male or female is "fluid" and changeable. "This is absolutely crazy, but pediatricians from some of the nation's most prestigious children's hospitals are involved in this gender confusion movement," said Lafferty. "Children who suffer from a Gender Identity Disorder are being redefined by these radical pediatricians as `gender variant' children who should be affirmed in their sexual confusions. These children need serious therapy, not affirmation for their gender confusion"
Is your IP address harboring pedophiles?: "Contrary to conventional wisdom, the most outlandish and delusional thing uttered last week by a small, powerful Hispanic man was not Hugo Chavez ranting at the United Nations about El Diablo. It was U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales telling a Senate panel that the Justice Department must have two years worth of history on every American's Web site usage. Gonzales claimed the info hoarding is needed to stop child pornography. Assuming the Bush administration really believes that -- and we'll get to that -- collecting giant stacks of cyber-hay in order to find pedophiles is madness."
Why Bush will nuke Iran: "The U.S. has battled in Iraq longer than it fought against Nazi Germany, and the situation in Iraq is out of control. The Taliban have regained half of Afghanistan. The king of Saudi Arabia has told Bush that the ground is shaking under his feet as unrest over the American/Israeli violence against Muslims builds to dangerous levels. Our Egyptian puppet sits atop 100 million Muslims who do not think that Egypt should be a lackey of U.S. hegemony. The king of Jordan understands that Israeli policy is to drive every Palestinian into Jordan. Bush is incapable of recognizing his mistake. He can only escalate. Plans have long been made to attack Iran. The problem is that Iran can respond in effective ways to a conventional attack. Moreover, an American attack on another Muslim country could result in turmoil and rebellion throughout the Middle East. This is why the neocons have changed U.S. war doctrine to permit a nuclear strike on Iran."
Where's the integrity?: "The Senate is poised to take up, as soon as this week, the Federal Election Integrity Act of 2006. Some say the act is an overdue, common-sense measure to prevent voter fraud; others protest that it's a clever attempt at voter suppression, if not outright disenfranchisement. Regardless of who's right one thing is certain: If passed, the act will spawn considerable litigation. In fact, the day before the House passed the bill last week a Fulton County, Georgia superior-court judge struck down a nearly identical Georgia statute."
Socialist man in the Big Easy: "Marxists long theorized that communism would bring about the new socialist man. Through communist programs, man would turn his sole purpose to laboring and struggling for the greater good of the collective. Through socialist policies and redistribution, New Orleans has raised from its ruin a new socialist man. However, instead of working for the collective, this risen New Orleans man does not work at all."
Chicago Gets Its First Wal-Mart: "Wal-Mart opened its first store in Chicago, a little more than two weeks after Mayor Richard M. Daley vetoed an ordinance requiring all 'big-box' stores to pay their employees $10 an hour by 2010. More than 15,000 people applied to work at the 142,000-square-foot store, which is in the economically depressed Austin section on the West Side. Wal-Mart officials estimated that the store would produce 490 jobs. Critics of the chain's urban expansion, including some aldermen who were unable to override Mr. Daley's veto, said they would continue to push for higher wages for employees of the city's big-box stores." [If workers have too few employers bidding for their services, it hardly makes sense to crack down on those that are!]
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
Why tax cuts and not consumer spending rescued the US economy: By cutting capital gains President Bush lifted a huge burden off production by generating additional savings. It is these tax cuts that spurred the economy. Therefore they gave the US economy something it sorely needed - more investment
Inflation and the price of oil: The yearly rate of growth of the CPI less food and energy edged up to 2.8 per cent in August from 2.7 per cent in July - the biggest 12-month gain in nearly five years. So did the Fed cause the rise or was it the price of oil?
Is monetary policy killing Australian manufacturing?: Australia's ratio of manufacturing to GDP is one of the lowest in the developed world. Our economists tell us not to worry because this is a natural process. But what if it isn't? What are the consequences for living standards if this shift in manufacturing has been caused by the Reserve Bank's loose monetary policy?
Liberal Party sabotaging its own labour market deregulation policy: By imposing more regulations on firms the Government is admitting that it has no genuine understanding of how labour markets work. Is that why it no longer claims that deregulated labour markets generate increased productivity?
Day of Muslim rage: What else is new?: Nothing Muslim - be it law, music, written words, or cultural practices - can be criticized. When anyone has the audacity to complain about something Islamic, the fanatics automatically take to the streets in numerous places around the world and in engage in orgies of barbaric behaviour
Terrorism and the West's path to self-destruction: In recent years there have been many Islamic acts of terror committed against Western countries. All of them were openly or covertly supported by most Muslim rulers and are silently condoned by most of the Islamic communities around the world
Inflation fallacies, prices and houses: Much economic commentary, particularly in our newspapers, makes for truly depressing reading so poor is much of the analysis - particularly with respect to inflation
**************************
ELSEWHERE
I have just put up here a press release about the enormously biased media hounding of Senator George Allen. I rarely comment on individual Congressional races but this is a case of outright media persecution on essentially baseless grounds. Previous posts from me about what the Senator was originally accused of are here and here
Sowers of sexual confusion: ""Transgender activists are aggressively targeting our public school children this fall," said TVC Executive Director Andrea Lafferty. "These sexually confused individuals have made it their goal to deceive our kids into thinking they're the opposite sex. This insanity must stop. Our new report, "Will Cross-Dressing Activists Come To Your School?" exposes this dangerous effort to confuse our children." TVC's Back to School Report details the growing movement of transgender activists, including teachers, counselors and pediatricians who are teaching children that being male or female is "fluid" and changeable. "This is absolutely crazy, but pediatricians from some of the nation's most prestigious children's hospitals are involved in this gender confusion movement," said Lafferty. "Children who suffer from a Gender Identity Disorder are being redefined by these radical pediatricians as `gender variant' children who should be affirmed in their sexual confusions. These children need serious therapy, not affirmation for their gender confusion"
Is your IP address harboring pedophiles?: "Contrary to conventional wisdom, the most outlandish and delusional thing uttered last week by a small, powerful Hispanic man was not Hugo Chavez ranting at the United Nations about El Diablo. It was U.S. Attorney General Alberto Gonzales telling a Senate panel that the Justice Department must have two years worth of history on every American's Web site usage. Gonzales claimed the info hoarding is needed to stop child pornography. Assuming the Bush administration really believes that -- and we'll get to that -- collecting giant stacks of cyber-hay in order to find pedophiles is madness."
Why Bush will nuke Iran: "The U.S. has battled in Iraq longer than it fought against Nazi Germany, and the situation in Iraq is out of control. The Taliban have regained half of Afghanistan. The king of Saudi Arabia has told Bush that the ground is shaking under his feet as unrest over the American/Israeli violence against Muslims builds to dangerous levels. Our Egyptian puppet sits atop 100 million Muslims who do not think that Egypt should be a lackey of U.S. hegemony. The king of Jordan understands that Israeli policy is to drive every Palestinian into Jordan. Bush is incapable of recognizing his mistake. He can only escalate. Plans have long been made to attack Iran. The problem is that Iran can respond in effective ways to a conventional attack. Moreover, an American attack on another Muslim country could result in turmoil and rebellion throughout the Middle East. This is why the neocons have changed U.S. war doctrine to permit a nuclear strike on Iran."
Where's the integrity?: "The Senate is poised to take up, as soon as this week, the Federal Election Integrity Act of 2006. Some say the act is an overdue, common-sense measure to prevent voter fraud; others protest that it's a clever attempt at voter suppression, if not outright disenfranchisement. Regardless of who's right one thing is certain: If passed, the act will spawn considerable litigation. In fact, the day before the House passed the bill last week a Fulton County, Georgia superior-court judge struck down a nearly identical Georgia statute."
Socialist man in the Big Easy: "Marxists long theorized that communism would bring about the new socialist man. Through communist programs, man would turn his sole purpose to laboring and struggling for the greater good of the collective. Through socialist policies and redistribution, New Orleans has raised from its ruin a new socialist man. However, instead of working for the collective, this risen New Orleans man does not work at all."
Chicago Gets Its First Wal-Mart: "Wal-Mart opened its first store in Chicago, a little more than two weeks after Mayor Richard M. Daley vetoed an ordinance requiring all 'big-box' stores to pay their employees $10 an hour by 2010. More than 15,000 people applied to work at the 142,000-square-foot store, which is in the economically depressed Austin section on the West Side. Wal-Mart officials estimated that the store would produce 490 jobs. Critics of the chain's urban expansion, including some aldermen who were unable to override Mr. Daley's veto, said they would continue to push for higher wages for employees of the city's big-box stores." [If workers have too few employers bidding for their services, it hardly makes sense to crack down on those that are!]
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
Friday, September 29, 2006
A defence of Muslims by a Leftist elitist
I very rarely bother to fisk Leftist articles. It is much more interesting to spend my time looking at articles that endeavour to consider all the facts of a matter rather than looking at the very selective attention to the facts that characterizes Leftist writing. A reader has however drawn my attention to a typical bit of Leftist hate by Australian columnist Amanda Blair and offered some comments on it. I reproduce both the column and the comments on it elsewhere. I thought however that I might make a few comments in passing on the column myself:
Our wonderfully caring Amanda is unhappy with the way senior members of the Australian government have repeately told Australia's Muslims that they should shape up or ship out (See e.g. here). In response to that, dearest Amanda puts forward the hoary argument that since not all Muslims are the same we should consider them only as individuals and not as a group. That most Leftist discourse consists of NOTHING BUT talk about groups ("The poor", "Minorities", "Women", "Zionists" etc.) does not of course embarrass Amanda one bit. And according to Amanda's logic we should all in fact be struck dumb -- since all words in our language are words for categories. There are for instance large dogs, small dogs, black dogs and white dogs, tame dogs and fierce dogs so obviously we should not talk of dogs -- right?
Allowance should of course always be made in official policy for the characteristics of individuals (something that Leftists seem to find extraordinarily hard to do) but Prime Minister Howard has repeatedly done just that -- stressing that the problem lies with a minority of Muslims only, not with all Muslims. And yet it is of Mr Howard that sad Amanda is most critical.
What would you say about someone who was careful to speak slowly and clearly to someone who appeared to be of immigrant origin? Would you describe them as polite, considerate etc.? Amanda does not. When Mr Howard did that she made the very large leap of saying that it showed him to be a "little Englander". Since he is Australian, not English, that would appear to be a snide accusation of racism. The irony of the fact that the original little Englanders of the 19th century were radical opponents of imperialism is of course quite lost on our Amanda. She appears to be one of that fortunately rare but very amusing ilk who like to use big words and expressions without really knowing what they mean. She is, most probably, the product of a modern journalism education.
She also seems to be claiming that Australians are much less happy with their immigrants than are Americans. Since Australia has had for around 60 years now a policy of deliberately encouraging immigration -- something that only Israel could rival -- that is as fact-free as the rest of her diatribe.
To say any more about her pathetic outburst would, I think, be to take it far more seriously than it deserves. I have however interpolated into her text a few more comments in italics here. Note that the "caring" Amanda turns into the arrogant Amanda when she starts to talk about working-class Australians.
*************************
NO PLEASING THE LEFT
Among the most heated debates of the last 40 years has been the debate over Pope Pius XII and the Holocaust. What did he do when the greatest evil of his day engulfed Christian Europe? Was he "Hitler's Pope," as the name of a widely read book about him charged? Was he too reticent in speaking out against Nazism and the Nazi extermination of Europe's Jews? Was he perhaps even a Nazi sympathizer? Or was he in fact a great friend of Europe's Jews who did whatever he could to save tens of thousands of Jews, especially in Italy, opening up the doors of Church institutions to hide Jews?
It is not my aim here to offer an answer to that debate. But the attacks on Pope Benedict XVI may help shed new light on some of the motives for the attacks on Pius XII. It is true that we have always known that most, if not all, of Pius's critics were/are on the political/religious Left. But this no more discredited their critiques of Pius than the fact that the vast majority of Pius's defenders were on the political/religious Right discredited their defense.
But recently the critics have lost credibility. If the same people who attack Pope Pius XII for his silence regarding the greatest evil of his time are largely the same people who attack Pope Benedict XVI for confronting the greatest evil of his time, maybe it isn't a pope's confronting evil that concerns Pius's critics, but simply defaming the Church.
After all, has not Benedict done precisely what Pius's critics argue that Pius, and presumably any pope, should have done -- be a courageous moral voice and condemn the greatest evil and greatest manifestation of anti-Semitism of his time? Take The New York Times editorial page, for example. It is written by people who condemn Pius for his alleged silence and now condemn Benedict for not being quiet. According to the Times, Benedict will only create more anti-Western Muslim violence. But that was exactly the excuse defenders of Pius XII so often offered for why Pius XII did not speak out more forcefully -- that he was afraid it would only engender more Nazi violence. Yet Pius's critics have (correctly) dismissed that excuse out of hand.
Source.
(For a scholarly demolition of the scurrilous accusations against Pius XII, see here. Pacelli (Pius XII) was an Italian and there has long been very little antisemitism in Italy. In the early days, Jews were even prominent in Mussolini's Fascist party).
**************************
ELSEWHERE
A new lot of Reds: "Democrats have an anti-religion problem. In fact, they have such a serious anti-religion problem that in 2004 they had to bring a leftist pastor named Jim Wallis to try to teach Democrat congressmen how to use "God talk" in their campaign speeches. This pathetic effort failed as will a new disinformation campaign called "Red Letter Christians." Wallis, founder of the left-wing Sojourners group, and self-described "progressive evangelical" Tony Campolo, have just founded a liberal front organization called the "Red Letter Christians." Wallis, Campolo, Father Richard Rohr, "Emergent Church" pioneer Brian McLaren, Dr. Cheryl J. Sanders, Rev. Noel Castellanos, and others met recently to form this new pseudo-evangelical group. These "Red Letter Christians" are supposedly trying to alert American Evangelicals to the importance of living the words of Jesus as highlighted in red in many Bibles. Their idea of living the words of Jesus, however, is somehow reinterpreted to mean support for every liberal political agenda on the horizon."
Cartoons of Pope OK: "A few months back, American liberal newspapers (which is to say, most of them) refused to publish cartoons previously published in a Danish newspaper, depicting Muhammad as the terrorist that he was... The liberal fourth estate in the US wants us to believe that it is "sensitive," a frequently bastardized word, now code, and akin to the newly equally manipulated word, "tolerant." [but] Neither the Associated Press, nor The New Haven Register, on Saturday, September 23rd, exhibited any compunction in showing an altered and vitriolic photo of a hideously defiled Pope Benedict XVI, sporting facial sutures, bruises, and an eye patch, with of course, Arabic writing above and below."
A former Prime Minister of Spain comments: ""It is interesting to note that while a lot of people in the world are asking the pope to apologise for his speech, I have never heard a Muslim say sorry for having conquered Spain and occupying it for eight centuries."
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
I very rarely bother to fisk Leftist articles. It is much more interesting to spend my time looking at articles that endeavour to consider all the facts of a matter rather than looking at the very selective attention to the facts that characterizes Leftist writing. A reader has however drawn my attention to a typical bit of Leftist hate by Australian columnist Amanda Blair and offered some comments on it. I reproduce both the column and the comments on it elsewhere. I thought however that I might make a few comments in passing on the column myself:
Our wonderfully caring Amanda is unhappy with the way senior members of the Australian government have repeately told Australia's Muslims that they should shape up or ship out (See e.g. here). In response to that, dearest Amanda puts forward the hoary argument that since not all Muslims are the same we should consider them only as individuals and not as a group. That most Leftist discourse consists of NOTHING BUT talk about groups ("The poor", "Minorities", "Women", "Zionists" etc.) does not of course embarrass Amanda one bit. And according to Amanda's logic we should all in fact be struck dumb -- since all words in our language are words for categories. There are for instance large dogs, small dogs, black dogs and white dogs, tame dogs and fierce dogs so obviously we should not talk of dogs -- right?
Allowance should of course always be made in official policy for the characteristics of individuals (something that Leftists seem to find extraordinarily hard to do) but Prime Minister Howard has repeatedly done just that -- stressing that the problem lies with a minority of Muslims only, not with all Muslims. And yet it is of Mr Howard that sad Amanda is most critical.
What would you say about someone who was careful to speak slowly and clearly to someone who appeared to be of immigrant origin? Would you describe them as polite, considerate etc.? Amanda does not. When Mr Howard did that she made the very large leap of saying that it showed him to be a "little Englander". Since he is Australian, not English, that would appear to be a snide accusation of racism. The irony of the fact that the original little Englanders of the 19th century were radical opponents of imperialism is of course quite lost on our Amanda. She appears to be one of that fortunately rare but very amusing ilk who like to use big words and expressions without really knowing what they mean. She is, most probably, the product of a modern journalism education.
She also seems to be claiming that Australians are much less happy with their immigrants than are Americans. Since Australia has had for around 60 years now a policy of deliberately encouraging immigration -- something that only Israel could rival -- that is as fact-free as the rest of her diatribe.
To say any more about her pathetic outburst would, I think, be to take it far more seriously than it deserves. I have however interpolated into her text a few more comments in italics here. Note that the "caring" Amanda turns into the arrogant Amanda when she starts to talk about working-class Australians.
*************************
NO PLEASING THE LEFT
Among the most heated debates of the last 40 years has been the debate over Pope Pius XII and the Holocaust. What did he do when the greatest evil of his day engulfed Christian Europe? Was he "Hitler's Pope," as the name of a widely read book about him charged? Was he too reticent in speaking out against Nazism and the Nazi extermination of Europe's Jews? Was he perhaps even a Nazi sympathizer? Or was he in fact a great friend of Europe's Jews who did whatever he could to save tens of thousands of Jews, especially in Italy, opening up the doors of Church institutions to hide Jews?
It is not my aim here to offer an answer to that debate. But the attacks on Pope Benedict XVI may help shed new light on some of the motives for the attacks on Pius XII. It is true that we have always known that most, if not all, of Pius's critics were/are on the political/religious Left. But this no more discredited their critiques of Pius than the fact that the vast majority of Pius's defenders were on the political/religious Right discredited their defense.
But recently the critics have lost credibility. If the same people who attack Pope Pius XII for his silence regarding the greatest evil of his time are largely the same people who attack Pope Benedict XVI for confronting the greatest evil of his time, maybe it isn't a pope's confronting evil that concerns Pius's critics, but simply defaming the Church.
After all, has not Benedict done precisely what Pius's critics argue that Pius, and presumably any pope, should have done -- be a courageous moral voice and condemn the greatest evil and greatest manifestation of anti-Semitism of his time? Take The New York Times editorial page, for example. It is written by people who condemn Pius for his alleged silence and now condemn Benedict for not being quiet. According to the Times, Benedict will only create more anti-Western Muslim violence. But that was exactly the excuse defenders of Pius XII so often offered for why Pius XII did not speak out more forcefully -- that he was afraid it would only engender more Nazi violence. Yet Pius's critics have (correctly) dismissed that excuse out of hand.
Source.
(For a scholarly demolition of the scurrilous accusations against Pius XII, see here. Pacelli (Pius XII) was an Italian and there has long been very little antisemitism in Italy. In the early days, Jews were even prominent in Mussolini's Fascist party).
**************************
ELSEWHERE
A new lot of Reds: "Democrats have an anti-religion problem. In fact, they have such a serious anti-religion problem that in 2004 they had to bring a leftist pastor named Jim Wallis to try to teach Democrat congressmen how to use "God talk" in their campaign speeches. This pathetic effort failed as will a new disinformation campaign called "Red Letter Christians." Wallis, founder of the left-wing Sojourners group, and self-described "progressive evangelical" Tony Campolo, have just founded a liberal front organization called the "Red Letter Christians." Wallis, Campolo, Father Richard Rohr, "Emergent Church" pioneer Brian McLaren, Dr. Cheryl J. Sanders, Rev. Noel Castellanos, and others met recently to form this new pseudo-evangelical group. These "Red Letter Christians" are supposedly trying to alert American Evangelicals to the importance of living the words of Jesus as highlighted in red in many Bibles. Their idea of living the words of Jesus, however, is somehow reinterpreted to mean support for every liberal political agenda on the horizon."
Cartoons of Pope OK: "A few months back, American liberal newspapers (which is to say, most of them) refused to publish cartoons previously published in a Danish newspaper, depicting Muhammad as the terrorist that he was... The liberal fourth estate in the US wants us to believe that it is "sensitive," a frequently bastardized word, now code, and akin to the newly equally manipulated word, "tolerant." [but] Neither the Associated Press, nor The New Haven Register, on Saturday, September 23rd, exhibited any compunction in showing an altered and vitriolic photo of a hideously defiled Pope Benedict XVI, sporting facial sutures, bruises, and an eye patch, with of course, Arabic writing above and below."
A former Prime Minister of Spain comments: ""It is interesting to note that while a lot of people in the world are asking the pope to apologise for his speech, I have never heard a Muslim say sorry for having conquered Spain and occupying it for eight centuries."
For more postings, see TONGUE-TIED, EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE, FOOD & HEALTH SKEPTIC, AUSTRALIAN POLITICS and EYE ON BRITAIN. (Mirror sites here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here).
**************************
"All the worth which the human being possesses, all spiritual reality, he possesses only through the State." -- 19th century German philosopher Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel. Hegel is the most influential philosopher of the Left -- inspiring Karl Marx, the American "Progressives" of the early 20th century and university socialists to this day.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Pages are here or here or here.
****************************
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
