Wednesday, February 28, 2007
Ben Shapiro has a great article today about the relationship between sports and politics.
Glorification of sports above all else -- sports as unifying factor, bringing men together to celebrate our common humanity -- is an egregious misreading of the value of sports. Sports, at the end of the day, are entertainment. Sports may display our common DNA structure, but they surely fail to demonstrate our common humanity -- some humans are inhuman. Sports solve no great moral dilemmas. Sports are not politics.Read the entire Townhall article here.
Tuesday, February 27, 2007
Maggie's Farm has a great piece about AlGore.
-Day by dayIt just gets better from here.
-Day by day
-Oh Dear Al
-Three things I pray
-To see thee more clearly (You’re getting global looking yourself)
-Love thee more dearly (Dear Leader of our cult)
-Follow thee more nearly (In a private jet all the way, baby)
When life hands you lemons, look for the tequila and salt.
Monday, February 26, 2007
Can you spell H-y-p-o-c-r-i-t-e? The Tennessee Center for Policy Research decided to research former Vice President Al Gore's energy consumption over the past year and look at what they've found:
Al Gore’s Personal Energy Use Is His Own “Inconvenient Truth”I'd say mr. "internet inventor" himself has a lot of explaining to do.
Gore’s home uses more than 20 times the national average
Last night, Al Gore’s global-warming documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, collected an Oscar for best documentary feature, but the Tennessee Center for Policy Research has found that Gore deserves a gold statue for hypocrisy.
Gore’s mansion, located in the posh Belle Meade area of Nashville, consumes more electricity every month than the average American household uses in an entire year, according to the Nashville Electric Service (NES).
In his documentary, the former Vice President calls on Americans to conserve energy by reducing electricity consumption at home.
The average household in America consumes 10,656 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per year, according to the Department of Energy. In 2006, Gore devoured nearly 221,000 kWh—more than 20 times the national average.
Last August alone, Gore burned through 22,619 kWh—guzzling more than twice the electricity in one month than an average American family uses in an entire year. As a result of his energy consumption, Gore’s average monthly electric bill topped $1,359.
Since the release of An Inconvenient Truth, Gore’s energy consumption has increased from an average of 16,200 kWh per month in 2005, to 18,400 kWh per month in 2006.
Gore’s extravagant energy use does not stop at his electric bill. Natural gas bills for Gore’s mansion and guest house averaged $1,080 per month last year.
“As the spokesman of choice for the global warming movement, Al Gore has to be willing to walk the walk, not just talk the talk, when it comes to home energy use,” said Tennessee Center for Policy Research President Drew Johnson.
In total, Gore paid nearly $30,000 in combined electricity and natural gas bills for his Nashville estate in 2006.
Hat Tip: Stacey Campfield
Bob Krumm has more here.
They say politics is a game, and as with any game there are certain rules that must be followed. What are these rules? Well, in America it's called The Constitution of the United States of America. The number of politicians who still play by these rules is minuscule, even though, as with most games, those who don't play by the rules are supposed it be disqualified. Marnie Pehrson has a great piece about this topic on her blog.
How about this one for a big time confidence booster!
Sunday, February 25, 2007
According to a recent news report, the Rev. Al Sharpton's great-grandfather was once a slave owned by relatives of the late Senator Strom Thurmond. I'm finding this story quite humorous for some reason, although it's pretty ironic considering both politicos past histories.
Hat Tip: A Blog For All
Saturday, February 24, 2007
There's a new website for those who don't believe all the global warming hype. Joseph Conklin has recently started climatepolice.com. The stated mission from their site is:
Climatepolice.com is dedicated to promoting an open exchange and dialog on climate change. To achieve that goal, research and articles with alternate views on climate change will be the primary sources of news and information on this site. We will not include any news or information with sensationalist claims; only sources with sound scientific evidence or research will be used.Sounds like a great way to get some real objectivity in this very controversial topic.
Thursday, February 22, 2007
The Wild and Free Pigs of the Okefenokee Swamp
Some years ago, about 1900, an old trapper from North Dakota hitched up some horses to his Studebaker wagon, packed a few possessions--especially his traps--and drove south. Several weeks later he stopped in a small town just north of the Okefenokee Swamp in Georgia. It was a Saturday morning--a lazy day--when he walked into the general store. Sitting around the pot-bellied stove were seven or eight of the town's local citizens.
The traveler spoke. "Gentlemen, could you direct me to the Okefenokee Swamp?"
Some of the old-timers looked at him like he was crazy. "You must be a stranger in these parts," they said.
"I am. I'm from North Dakota," said the stranger.
"In the Okefenokee Swamp are thousands of wild hogs," one old man explained. "A man who goes into the swamp by himself asks to die!" He lifted up his leg. "I lost half my leg here, to the pigs of the swamp."
Another old fellow said, "Look at the cuts on me; look at my arm bit off! Those pigs have been free since the Revolution, eating snakes and rooting out roots and fending for themselves for over a hundred years. They're wild and they're dangerous. You can't trap them. No man dare go into the swamp by himself."
Every man nodded his head in agreement.
The old trapper said, "Thank you so much for the warning. Now could you direct me to the swamp?"
They said, "Well, yeah, it's due south--straight down the road." But they begged the stranger not to go, because they knew he'd meet a terrible fate.
He said, "Sell me ten sacks of corn, and help me load it in the wagon." And they did. Then the old trapper bid them farewell and drove on down the road. The townsfolk thought they'd never see him again.
Two weeks later the man came back. He pulled up to the general store, got down off the wagon, walked in, and bought ten more sacks of corn. After loading it up he went back down the road toward the swamp.
Two weeks later he returned and again bought ten sacks of corn. This went on for a month. And then two months, and three. Every week or two the old trapper would come into town on a Saturday morning, load up ten sacks of corn, and drive off south into the swamp. The stranger soon became a legend in the little village and the subject of much speculation. People wondered what kind of devil had possessed this man, that he could go into the Okefenokee by himself and not be consumed by the wild and free hogs.
One morning the man came into town as usual. Everyone thought he wanted more corn. He got off the wagon and went into the store where the usual group of men was gathered around the stove. He took off his gloves.
"Gentlemen," he said, "I need to hire about ten or fifteen wagons. I need twenty or thirty men. I have six thousand hogs out in the swamp, penned up, and they're all hungry. I've got to get them to market right away."
"You've WHAT in the swamp?" asked the storekeeper, incredulously.
"I have six thousand hogs penned up. They haven't eaten for two or three days, and they'll starve if I don't get back there to feed and take care of them."
One of the old-timers said, "You mean you've captured the wild hogs of the Okefenokee?"
"How did you do that? What did you do?" the men urged, breathlessly.
One of them exclaimed, "But I lost my arm!"
"I lost my brother!" cried another.
"I lost my leg to those wild boars!" chimed a third.
The trapper said, "Well, the first week I went in there they were wild all right. They hid in the undergrowth and wouldn't come out. I dared not get off the wagon. So I spread corn along behind the wagon. Every day I'd spread a sack of corn. The old pigs would have nothing to do with it."
"But the younger pigs decided that it was easier to eat free corn than it was to root out roots and catch snakes. So the very young began to eat the corn first. I did this every day. Pretty soon, even the old pigs decided that it was easier to eat free corn. After all, they were all free; they were not penned up. They could run off in any direction they wanted at any time."
"The next thing was to get them used to eating in the same place all the time. So I selected a clearing, and I started putting the corn in the clearing. At first they wouldn't come to the clearing. It was too far. It was too open. It was a nuisance to them."
"But the very young decided that it was easier to take the corn in the clearing than it was to root out roots and catch their own snakes. And not long thereafter, the older pigs also decided that it was easier to come to the clearing every day."
"And so the pigs learned to come to the clearing every day to get their free corn. They could still subsidize their diet with roots and snakes and whatever else they wanted. After all, they were all free. They could run in any direction at any time. There were no bounds upon them."
"The next step was to get them used to fence posts. So I put fence posts all the way around the clearing. I put them in the underbrush so that they wouldn't get suspicious or upset. After all, they were just sticks sticking up out of the ground, like the trees and the brush. The corn was there every day. It was easy to walk in between the posts, get the corn, and walk back out."
"This went on for a week or two. Shortly they became very used to walking into the clearing, getting the free corn, and walking back out through the fence posts."
"The next step was to put one rail down at the bottom. I also left a few openings, so that the older, fatter pigs could walk through the openings and the younger pigs could easily jump over just one rail. After all, it was no real threat to their freedom or independence. They could always jump over the rail and flee in any direction at any time."
"Now I decided that I wouldn't feed them every day. I began to feed them every other day. On the days I didn't feed them the pigs still gathered in the clearing. They squealed, and they grunted, and they begged and pleaded with me to feed them. But I only fed them every other day. And I put a second rail around the posts."
"Now the pigs became more and more desperate for food. Because now they were no longer used to going out and digging their own roots and finding their own food. They now needed me. They needed my corn every other day. So I trained them that I would feed them every day if they came in through a gate. And I put up a third rail around the fence. But it was still no great threat to their freedom, because there were several gates and they could run in and out at will."
"Finally I put up the fourth rail. Then I closed all the gates but one, and I fed them very, very well. Yesterday I closed the last gate. And today I need you to help me take these pigs to market."
The allegory of the pigs has a serious moral lesson. This story is about federal funds being used to bait, trap, and enslave a once free and independent people. Federal welfare, in its myriad forms, has reduced not only individuals to a state of dependency, but state and local governments are also on the fast track to elimination due to their functions being subverted by the command and control structures of federal revenue sharing programs.
Wednesday, February 21, 2007
In a previous post I spoke about Tim Hardaway's homosexual views and the NBA's reaction to them. Michael Medved at Townhall goes into detail about the psychology of his comments and how he is right in his opinion, just as the military is correct in their "don't ask, don't tell" policy.
Making gay males unwelcome in the intimate circumstances of an NBA team makes just as much sense as making straight males unwelcome in the showers for a women’s team at the WNBA. Most female athletes would prefer not to shower together with men not because they hate males (though some of them no doubt do), but because they hope to avoid the tension, distraction and complication that prove inevitable when issues of sexual attraction (and even arousal) intrude into the arena of competitive sports.Check out the entire article here.
Dinesh D'Souza has all the latest here.
1. "TEMPERANCE. Eat not to dullness; drink not to elevation."
2. "SILENCE. Speak not but what may benefit others or yourself; avoid trifling conversation."
3. "ORDER. Let all your things have their places; let each part of your business have its time."
4. "RESOLUTION. Resolve to perform what you ought; perform without fail what you resolve."
5. "FRUGALITY. Make no expense but to do good to others or yourself; i.e., waste nothing."
6. "INDUSTRY. Lose no time; be always employ'd in something useful; cut off all unnecessary actions."
7. "SINCERITY. Use no hurtful deceit; think innocently and justly, and, if you speak, speak accordingly."
8. "JUSTICE. Wrong none by doing injuries, or omitting the benefits that are your duty."
9. "MODERATION. Avoid extremes; forbear resenting injuries so much as you think they deserve."
10. "CLEANLINESS. Tolerate no uncleanliness in body, cloaths, or habitation."
11. "TRANQUILLITY. Be not disturbed at trifles, or at accidents common or unavoidable."
12. "CHASTITY. Rarely use venery but for health or offspring, never to dullness, weakness, or the injury of your own or another's peace or reputation."
13. "HUMILITY. Imitate Jesus and Socrates."
Tuesday, February 20, 2007
A 13 year old Italian girl has been forced to have an abortion.
TURIN, Italy, February 19, 2007 (LifeSiteNews.com) - An Italian judge ordered a 13 year-old girl to undergo an abortion, despite the girl's pleas to let her keep her child reports the Italian news agency, La Stampa.Read the rest of this heartbreaking story here.
The girl, Valentina, had become pregnant by her 15 year-old boyfriend, however rather than let her choose to keep her child, her parents demanded she have an abortion on the grounds that she was ruining her life by becoming a mother.
Under Italian law, a minor may not decide whether to keep or abort her child, and may be forced by her guardians or parents to undergo an abortion.
This video has got to be the most shocking thing I haver ever watched. I feel as though I've been betrayed by everything I've ever believed in. Maybe I'm over reacting, I certainly hope so. But this sure makes a lot of sense considering the state of world affairs right now.
Monday, February 19, 2007
Some use airplanes, some use guns, and some use taxi cabs!
WSMV is reporting:
NASHVILLE, Tenn. -- A local cab driver allegedly tried to run over two customers after a fight over religion became heated.What this article fails to mention however is that the cabbie is a Sunni Muslim from Somalia. Think there's a reason the drive-by media isn't mentioning this? Jihad Watch has more.
The incident happened early Sunday morning on the Vanderbilt campus and left one man hospitalized and a cab driver arrested, said police
Two students visiting from Ohio were coming from a bar downtown when they got into an argument with their driver over religion, said police. After they paid the driver he allegedly ran them down in a parking lot.
Ibrihim Ahmned, of United Cab, was arrested and charged with assault, attempted homicide and theft. One of the passengers, Andrew Nelson, managed to outrun the cab but Jeremy Invus was taken to the Vanderbilt University Medical Center with serious injuries, said police.
Ahmed has been convicted of misdemeanors including evading arrest in a motor vehicle and driving on a suspended license, said police.
Ahmed was charged with theft because police said the license plate on his cab was listed as stolen. His bond is set at $300,000.
"One of the sad signs of our times is that we have demonized those who produce, subsidized those who refuse to produce, and canonized those who complain."
"If you have always believed that everyone should play by the same rules and be judged by the same standards, that would have gotten you labeled a radical 60 years ago, a liberal 30 years ago and a racist today."
"One of the most fashionable notions of our times is that social problems like poverty and oppression breed wars. Most wars, however, are started by well-fed people with time on their hands to dream up half-baked ideologies or grandiose ambitions, and to nurse real or imagined grievances."
Saturday, February 17, 2007
How about this one for a conspiracy theory. The video appears to be historically accurate to the best of my knowledge. Thats the scary part. And people wonder why I'm such a cynic.
Friday, February 16, 2007
Townhall has some great comics up, here are two of my current favorites.
Former NBA star Tim Hardaway announced during a radio show Wednesday that he doesn't like homosexuals when asked how he would respond to a teammate coming out of the closet. As can be expected the backlash to his comment has been incredible. The NBA has banned Hardaway from participating in this weekend's All-Star game festivities do to his so-called 'intolerance'. Hardaway has a First Amendment right just like the rest of us, so why is the NBA being so intolerant of him for voicing his personal opinion when asked it? What should he do, lie? Pretend that the practice of sodomizing another man is morally decent? Whenever a homosexual activist such as Rosie O'Donnell expresses her personal belief by bashing Christianity no one is saying that she is intolerant or bigoted. So why is there such a double standard for those who actually have a moral belief system and buck the politically correct crowd? The PC left is completely hypocritical in that by denouncing anyone who is considered "intolerant" they are being intolerant of intolerance!
To those who think the Roman Catholic Church is against the death penalty in the same way as abortion and euthanasia, think again. Tradition, Family and Property has a great article about the REAL teaching of the Church, complete with the history and references to back it up.
Thursday, February 15, 2007
The debate about illegal immigration is never ending. The majority consensus is that we have to lock down the border in order to curb the massive influx from Mexico. That's all good and well, but what do we do with the 18 million illegals that are already here?
Those on the left seem to be in favor of complete amnesty, allowing those already here to become citizens, or to at least accelerate the process. President Bush seems to think that a guest worker program is the solution, allowing those already here to perform jobs that (supposedly) most American's won't do and to have a quicker path to citizenship. Those on the far right think that every last person who is here illegally should be charged with a felony and then deported. The reality is that there is no easy answer to this dilemma.
Amnesty is not an option. We can't reward those who have broken the law with automatic citizenship. What does this say to all those who are trying to come in to our country legally? A guest worker program might help curb the flow of illegals, but those jobs Americans supposedly don't want are actually being filled by Americans after the illegals are busted in the workplace. Automatic felony convictions and deportation is completely unrealistic. The cost to the American tax payer would be astronomical, and trying to round up and deport 18 million people, many of whom have been here for years would be a practical impossibility.
So what is the solution? There is no perfect answer to this question. One of the major complaints about the hispanic influx is that they are not acclimating to American culture and society, they are trying to maintain their own cultural identity and bypassing the melting pot.
Here's my idea for the problem. Allow those illegals to gain citizenship automatically if they will volunteer for military duty for a period of two years or more. This would serve a three fold purpose.
A. They would have to learn English and become acclimatized to American culture, proving that they do want to become citizens and not just migrant workers.
B. It would teach disciple and responsibility.
C. It would help to build up our armed forces and increase the security of our country.
With this plan the immediate dependents of the newly enlisted already in America would gain some type of visitor or worker card, and an accelerated path to citizenship. All those found who refuse to participate would be deported.
I know it's not a perfect plan, there's probably numerous holes in it that I have not thought of yet. However, at least it's a plan that would not grant undeserved amnesty, it's not automatic deportation to everyone here illegally, and it takes into account the many families who are here and have nothing to go back home to.
I'd love to hear some feedback on this, pros, cons, alternative ideas, etc.
Can't figure out what the brother next door is talking about with all of his street slang? Well then have I got a website for you! The Urban Dictionary will walk you out of the darkness of suburbia and straight into the light of modern day urban vocab.
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
How about this for bizarre, Muslim congressman Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) called the police on presidential candidate and Colorado congressman Tom Tancredo last week because he was smoking a cigar in his office. Certainly not a good way to make friends with your new colleagues, eh? Read the whole story here. Hat tip: LGF.
The understanding of the term fundamentalist/fundamentalism has undergone a dramatic shift over the past several years. When the term "fundamentalist" is used in conjunction with religion, politics, etc., the person or group whom the term is applied to is considered to be on the fringe or extreme side of the group's beliefs. Why is this, why are we led to believe that to have a fundamental belief is to be an "extremest"? Webster's Dictionary defines the term fundamental as:
1. serving as an original or generating source; serving as a basis supporting existence or determining essential structure or function.
2. of or relating to essential structure, function, or facts; of or dealing with general principles rather than practical application; adhering to fundamentalism
3. of, relating to, or produced by the lowest component of a complex vibration
4. of central importance
5. belonging to one's innate or ingrained characteristics
Wikipedia states that fundamentalism is:
a movement or attitude stressing strict and literal adherence to a set of basic principlesSo in a nut shell, to be a fundamentalist is to have a core set of beliefs that one adheres to.
In sports when a coach says that it's time to 'get back to the fundamentals of the game' it means they're going back to basics, back to the fundamental skills that allow them to perform at the highest caliber.
So I ask, why has the term fundamentalist been hijacked? In my opinion it's because those who use it in a derogatory sense have no core beliefs, no fundamentals upon which to fall back on. Therefore they must label all those who do as being on the fringe, as radical extremists trying to force their beliefs upon those who have none. They are scared because they have no answers, no moral code, no fundamental belief system to guide them, other than the belief that those who have basic principles are wackos.
I think it's time to get back to the fundamentals and adhere to our core values, to use the word as it was intended, not as the radical no-belief crowd would have us perceive it.
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Drudge reports that the House's "global warming" hearing has been canceled due to snow. The irony of this is beyond humorous!
Gun-control laws do not control crime because crimes are not committed by guns; they are committed by criminals. Criminals will always have guns because they do not obey laws, including anti-gun laws. Those without guns are easy prey for criminals with guns. Gun control encourages crime. The right to bear arms was included in the Bill of Rights, not to deter crime, but to deter oppressive government. Just governments honor and protect the right to bear arms. Oppressive governments fear and prohibit the right to bear arms. Guns are dangerous. The only thing more dangerous is not having them.
The Truth about Tolerance
How Our Therapeutic Thinkers Threaten Western Values.
by Bruce Thornton
Acceptance of a double standard has always been a sign of inferiority. To let someone behave according to one set of principles or values while demanding that you be subjected to others is to validate a claim of superiority that justifies the inconsistent and unfair behavior. A double standard can also reflect incoherent thinking, a failure to apply consistently a principle that presumably has universal validity. In the West’s struggle with Islamic jihad, doubts about the superiority of Western values have coupled with a breakdown in ethical reasoning. The result is the appeasement of jihadist aggression and the confirmation of the jihadist estimation of the West’s corruption.
That’s why many Muslims demand from Westerners a hypersensitivity to Islam, all the while that Christians and Jews in Muslim countries are subjected to harassment, assault, and the looniest kinds of slander and insult. In the West, respect for Muslim ways such as the veil for women is supposed to be granted as a self-evident right beyond argument or debate. Yet Western ideals and values, such as the equality of the sexes, are derided, disrespected, and rejected as self-evident evils. The worst inconsistencies, however, involve the violation of core Western ideals, most importantly free speech. Many Muslims demand the right to deny the Holocaust, recycle Nazi-era anti-Semitic drivel, characterize Christianity as polytheistic idolatry, and excoriate a decadent, corrupt Western civilization. But no such criticism of Mohammed or Islam is tolerated, but it is, in fact, met with violence and threats.
The past few years have seen numerous examples, from the riots over the extremely mild political cartoons featuring Mohammed, to the uproar over the Pope’s quotation of a Byzantine emperor. The exercise of free speech in all these cases is met with rage, violence, and hysterical demands of “respect” for Islam, but there is no reciprocal respect for Western values. And for the most part, we in the West go along with this double standard, and thus accept the logic of the jihadist position: we are weak and unsure of our beliefs. Our craven behavior is a sign of our inferior status and our justified subjection to those who passionately believe in the rightness of their faith.
Let’s be clear on the roots of this cowardly response — the West has lost its faith. We have created John Lennon’s juvenile utopia in which there is “nothing to kill or die for, and no religion too.” Shorn of transcendent validation, now all our beliefs are contingent and negotiable, easily traded away for security or comfort. At the same time, the therapeutic mentality bestows on the non-Western “other” a finely calibrated sensitivity to his culture, no matter how dysfunctional, all the while the West refuses to extend such consideration to its own. Why would it? Haven’t generations of Western intellectuals and artists told the world how corrupt and evil the West is? Having culturally internalized this self-loathing, we are vulnerable to those who are filled with passionate intensity about the rightness of their beliefs and the payback due to us for our various historical sins such as colonialism or imperialism or globalization. And then we wonder why the jihadist considers us ripe for conquest, and destined to be subjected to the superior values of Islam.
Consider the following cautionary tale, from San Francisco State. Last October the College Republicans held an anti-terrorism rally during which posters painted to look like the flags of the terrorist gangs Hamas and Hezbollah were walked on. Since those flags have the name of Allah in Arabic, a complaint was filed in which the College Republicans were accused of “incitement,” “creation of a hostile environment,” and “incivility.” The complaint is now headed for trial before one of those campus star chambers created to monitor and police student behavior.
You don’t have to be a Constitutional scholar to see that this investigation is a gross violation of the students’ First Amendment right to free speech. This sort of institutional intervention creates what the ACLU — which never seems to make a peep about this sort of “progressive” censorship — likes to call a “chilling effect.” The Vice President of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, Robert Shilbey, has pointed out the obvious: “At a public university, stepping on a flag — even burning an American flag — is without question a constitutionally protected act of political protest. The right to protest is at the very heart of the First Amendment, and means nothing if only inoffensive expression is permitted.”
Here’s where the double standards and incoherence of much politically correct behavior comes in. On any college campus in this country, every day, inside of class and out, you can encounter speech that is “insensitive,” “uncivil,” or “hostile.” But of course, this speech is directed towards Christians, or “conservatives,” or Israel, or Republicans, or “straight white males.” Nobody attempts to censor this speech or haul people before tribunals to answer vague charges such as “incivility,” which will be defined according to the subjective standards of the complainants. And if someone does complain, the faculty and administration will immediately go into high dudgeon mode and start preaching the glories of unfettered free speech no matter how offensive. In other words, free speech for me but not for thee.
But the ill effects of this hypocrisy are nothing compared to the damage done when the institution caters to the unreasonable demands of those Muslims who, convinced of their spiritual superiority and righteousness, are active enemies of the West and think they are justified in imposing their standards on everybody else, even if those standards violate a core political value such as free speech. And when the appeasement comes from the university, which supposedly exists in order to foster what Matthew Arnold called “the free play of the mind on all subjects,” the message is quite clear: we don’t really believe in all these goods we profess and benefit from, but we will abandon them a
Monday, February 12, 2007
Get all your Jack Bauer gear here.
I Have A Plan To Destroy America
by: Richard D. Lamm
I have a secret plan to destroy America. If you believe, as many do, that America is too smug, too white bread, too self-satisfied, too rich, lets destroy America. It is not that hard to do. History shows that nations are more fragile than their citizen’s think. No nation in history has survived the ravages of time. Arnold Toynbee observed that all great civilizations rise and they all fall, and that "an autopsy of history would show that all great nations commit suicide." Here is my plan:
I. We must first make America a bilingual-bicultural country. History shows, in my opinion, that no nation can survive the tension, conflict, and antagonism of two competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. One scholar, Seymour Martin Lipset, put it this way:
"The histories of bilingual and bicultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension, and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon-all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with its Basques, Bretons, and Corsicans."II. I would then invent "multiculturalism" and encourage immigrants to maintain their own culture. I would make it an article of belief that all cultures are equal: that there are no cultural differences that are important. I would declare it an article of faith that the black and hispanic dropout rate is only due to prejudice and discrimination by the majority. Every other explanation is out-of-bounds.
III. We can make the United States a "Hispanic Quebec" without much effort. The key is to celebrate diversity rather than unity. As Benjamin Schwarz said in the Atlantic Monthly recently:
"...The apparent success of our own multiethnic and multicultural experiment might have been achieved not by tolerance but by hegemony. Without the dominance that once dictated ethnocentrically, and what it meant to be an American, we are left with only tolerance and pluralism to hold us together."I would encourage all immigrants to keep their own language and culture. I would replace the melting pot metaphor with a salad bowl metaphor. It is important to insure that we have various cultural sub-groups living in America reinforcing their differences rather than Americans, emphasizing their similarities.
IV. Having done all this, I would make our fastest growing demographic group the least educated - I would add a second underclass, unassimilated, undereducated, and antagonistic to our population. I would have this second underclass have a 50% drop out rate from school.
V. I would then get the big foundations and big business to give these efforts lots of money. I would invest in ethnic identity, and I would establish the cult of victimology. I would get all minorities to think their lack of success was all the fault of the majority - I would start a grievance industry blaming all minority failure on the majority population.
VI. I would establish dual citizenship and promote divided loyalties. I would "celebrate diversity." "Diversity" is a wonderfully seductive word. It stresses differences rather than commonalities. Diverse people worldwide are mostly engaged in hating each other, that is, when they are not killing each other. a diverse," peaceful, or stable society is against most historical precedent. People undervalue the unity it takes to keep a nation together, and we can take advantage of this myopia. Look at the ancient Greeks. Dorf's world history tells us:
"The Greeks believed that they belonged to the same race; they possessed a common language and literature; and they worshiped the same gods. All Greece took part in the Olympic games in honor of Zeus and all Greeks venerated the shrine of Apollo at Delphi. A common enemy Persia threatened their liberty. Yet, all of these bonds together were not strong enough to overcome two factors...(local patriotism and geographical conditions that nurtured political divisions...)"E. Pluribus Unum" - From many, one. If we can put the emphasis on the "Pluribus," instead of the "Unum," we can Balkanize America as surely as Kosovo.
VII. Then I would place all these subjects off limits - make it taboo to talk about. I would find a word similar to "heretic" in the 16th century - that stopped discussion and paralyzed thinking. Words like "racist", "xenophobe" that halts argument and conversation.
Having made America a bilingual-bicultural country, having established multiculturalism, having the large foundations fund the doctrine of "victimology", I would next make it impossible to enforce our immigration laws. I would develop a mantra - "that because immigration has been good for America, it must always be good." I would make very individual immigrant symmetric and ignore the cumulative impact.
VIII. Lastly, I would censor Victor Hanson Davis’s book Mexifornia - this book is dangerous - it exposes my plan to destroy America. So please, please - if you feel that America deserves to be destroyed - please, please - don't buy this book! This guy is on to my plan.
"the smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum." -Noam Chomsky, American linguist and us media and foreign policy critic.
Sunday, February 11, 2007
"Worry is interest paid on debts not yet due."
Thursday, February 8, 2007
Chicago Bears fan Scott Wiese made a bet he's now regretting. The 26 year old die-hard Bears fan signed a pledge in front of a crowd at a local bar last Friday night to legally change his name to "Peyton Manning" if Chicago lost to the Indianapolis Colts in last Sunday's Super Bowl. When asked about the decision Wiese responded, "I made the bet, and now I've got to keep it." Sounds like a stand up guy who's true to his word. Too bad he's got no common sense when it comes to the Bears and alcohol!
Wednesday, February 7, 2007
Net neutrality sounds nice. After all, who doesn’t like non-confrontational neutrality? Can’t we all just get along? Let’s all hold hands, form a circle and sing after me: “Net neutrality, my Lord, net neutrality…”More governmental intervention, when will it end?
But the reality of net neutrality is this simple: New government regulation of the Internet. Net neutrality, in essence, says that someone who uses a lot more of a service only has to pay the same amount as someone who uses a minimal amount. Think of an all-you-can-eat buffet where “Large Marge” loads up her plate three stories high and pays the same amount as the person who just grabs a small salad.
Tuesday, February 6, 2007
More news on the controversial Texas HPV vaccine mandate. GOPUSA reports that the American College of Pediatricians is strongly opposing that students be required to have the vaccination due to the false sense of security and health risks.
It's Time for the Flat Tax
By Greg Reeson
February 5, 2007
Well, it's tax time again. As I try to make some sense of the seemingly bottomless pile of papers required to balance my account with the federal government, it strikes me that now, more than ever, is the perfect time to implement a flat tax.
Let's face it. Our current tax system is broken. It is extremely complicated, with nearly 900 different tax forms in all. It is easily manipulated by those who know how to do so in order to take advantage of the bureaucratic mess and inefficiency that is the tax code. And it stifles growth by penalizing productive behavior, savings and investment. Everyone hates it, and everyone complains about it. It is a system in desperate need of reform, or better yet replacement.
A flat tax is the perfect alternative to what we have today. Implementing a flat tax system would be simple and, more importantly, fair to American taxpayers. Establishing a single, low rate, regardless of income, would treat all taxpayers fairly and equally. If the rate were, for example, 20 percent, then all income would be taxed at 20 cents on the dollar one time and one time only: when it was earned. I don't know what the actual rate should be, but many of the former Soviet republics have adopted flat taxes that range anywhere from just over 10 percent to over 30 percent. Right now, though, it is not the number, but the principle, that is important.
If taxpayer A has 50 times more taxable income than taxpayer B, then taxpayer A pays 50 times more in taxes. What could be fairer than that? Those who argue that the rich should be required to pay a greater percentage in taxes ignore the economic realities of penalizing some of the most productive contributors to the nation's wealth.
Now, I know that some will argue that those at the bottom of the income range suffer more by paying x-percent than those at the top of the income range. This may be true, but it is fundamentally fair. Taxes are the cost of citizenship in a country where people demand services like police and fire protection, roads to drive on, and schools for their children. The costs associated with these citizen demands should be borne equally, with each taxpayer remitting the same percentage of their pay to the government.
A flat tax would also eliminate deductions, credits, exemptions, and all the other items that make the current code so difficult to understand. By simply taxing citizens a single rate on what they earn, there is no need for tax provisions that attempt to dictate behavior. Many flat tax advocates include a set deduction based on family size. Low-income families that have taxable incomes less than the deduction would pay no taxes. I disagree with this approach, as stated before, because I believe that anyone who takes advantage of government services should contribute to the costs associated with those services.
A flat tax would also put an end to the practice of double taxation. By taxing income only once, at the time it is earned, there is no need for the imposition of taxes like the estate tax (or death tax, if you prefer). If the money earned has already been taxed once, why should it be taxed again? Doing so penalizes those who engage in wealth accumulation by saving and investing.
Finally, a flat tax would treat all businesses equally. Corporations or companies would pay taxes to the U.S. government on all income earned within the United States, minus necessary expenses such as labor and investment. Simplifying the tax system for businesses would make the United States more attractive to corporations from around the world.
There is no disputing that our current tax system is in desperate need of help. Implementing a flat tax would simplify the process of collecting revenues for the federal government, eliminate unfair tax practices, and encourage business operations within the United States. But perhaps most importantly, it would level the playing field for all Americans by treating all taxpayers equally and encouraging savings and investment without fear of penalty. The time for a flat tax has come, before our current system drags us deeper into the abyss of government inefficiency and waste.
Monday, February 5, 2007
Dr. Tim Ball, a climatology professor at the University of Winnipeg and chairman of the Natural Resources Stewardship Project is convinced global warming is nothing more than a bill of goods being sold to us for political gain.
What would happen if tomorrow we were told that, after all, the Earth is flat? It would probably be the most important piece of news in the media and would generate a lot of debate. So why is it that when scientists who have studied the Global Warming phenomenon for years say that humans are not the cause nobody listens? Why does no one acknowledge that the Emperor has no clothes on?He lays out the rest in this article. The desmog blog has more.
Believe it or not, Global Warming is not due to human contribution of Carbon Dioxide (CO2). This in fact is the greatest deception in the history of science. We are wasting time, energy and trillions of dollars while creating unnecessary fear and consternation over an issue with no scientific justification. For example, Environment Canada brags about spending $3.7 billion in the last five years dealing with climate change almost all on propaganda trying to defend an indefensible scientific position while at the same time closing weather stations and failing to meet legislated pollution targets.
With all the media hype that leads up to the Super Bowl every year, you know there is going to be some type of politicization surrounding the big game, and of course, this year was no exception. Michelle Malkin has the goods on the Prudential Ad that the NY Times claims is directly linked to the war in Iraq. Of course it's just a ridiculous accusation to push their ongoing political agenda.
What I find to be the most polarizing and politically repugnant use of the game is the race card. Yes the race card. Of all the media hubbub surrounding the Super Bowl, the one aspect that gained more attention than any other was the fact that it was the first time in history that both teams are led by black head coaches. Is this a great accomplishment? Of course, it's always a tremendous accomplishment for anyone to make it to the Super Bowl. However, when we as a society say that it is of greater significance and importance for one race to accomplish something than it is for another, this does nothing but breed racial disparity and inequality. In this day and age there are not very many people who actually believe there is a fundamental difference between a human being based solely on his color. When the media constantly brings up differences between us and what we've accomplished it creates a resentment that makes us focus on what we don't have, instead of what we have been blessed with.
I read an article online last week where a 'racial studies professor' at a state university in New York commented about the Super Bowl coaches, "this is a great day for the 'black community'". What the hell is the black community? What if I made the comment that this is a great day for the 'white community' because both quarterbacks in the Super Bowl are white? Well, I would be called a bigot, a racist, every name in the book. Why? because I'm not a 'minority.' Double standards. That's what it comes down to.
So back to the commercials. A plethora of 'black history month' commercials abounded during the Super Bowl. What is 'black history', or for that matter, what is 'white history'? History is not separated based upon race, color, or creed, only upon the actual events that happened at a certain time, in a certain place, to a certain amount of people. To place all those with dark skin under one heading does a huge disservice to them, just as it would to place all those with light skin under a separate heading.
We've got to stop beating the dead horse of affirming those based upon their race, and not upon their accomplishments. If we want justice and equality for all then we must end the racism of giving favor to those people who were disparaged against generations ago and reward them only for their successes today. Only then will there be true freedom and justice for all.
Mary Katharine Ham has a great piece today about all this.
"Minorities are getting lower grades than other students. Lower the standards! Minorities aren't getting into colleges at the same rates as other students. Give them special race-based admissions programs! Minorities need help. Give them expensive social programs of questionable efficacy!And there you have it. Exactly what I've been trying to say!
The liberal solution to these problems has never been one that grants minorities the dignity of achieving success. In fact, it assumes they are incapable of achieving it without extensive help from liberal government programs."
Sunday, February 4, 2007
Sleeper Cells in the United States and Canada
By Dave Gaubatz
February 02, 2007
There is every reason to suspect that we will endure suicide missions by Islamist sleeper cells. They are already in place. They are waiting for the right time. I know this from experience.
I have worked over 15 years as a U.S. Federal Agent, a U.S. State Department Arabic linguist, and the first civilian Federal Agent deployed into Iraq at the start of Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. Since returning from Iraq I have been involved in terrorism analysis, specifically the mindset of terrorists. During my extensive research on sleeper cells I have talked with hundreds of people from the Middle East from all walks of life, and have talked with Iraqi Government officials, Iraqi military, and Iraqi police officers. In addition I have interviewed numerous counter-terrorism specialists in the U.S. and abroad. In the last year alone I have trained over 4000 U.S. Law Enforcement officers in Basic Investigative Arabic and counter-terrorism. The conclusion of my research is the title of this article.
Before I departed for the Middle East in 2003 I had been assigned to Kirtland AFB, NM. Kirtland has some of the best scientists in the world working on U.S. Government projects. I had been working closely with these scientists who specialized in nuclear energy, directed energy, laser technology, bio-weapons and more. I fully understand the impact if suicide bombers begin progressing from conventional explosives to unconventional methods.
The Middle East
In Jan 2003, I was assigned to Arar Air Base Saudi Arabia. Arar is located near the border of Iraq. My mission was to interact with Saudi military officials in order to determine the support we could expect from the Saudi government, to determine if Iraqis were monitoring the activities of the U.S. forces at Arar, and to infiltrate the encampments of the Bedouin community (Saudis and Iraqis living in the desert of Arar). This involved leaving the relatively safe confines of Arar Air Base and driving to the Bedouin camps.
It was most important the Saudis did not know we were leaving the compound because they had forbidden us to do so. Four U.S. special Agents would use our ATV's and/or four wheel drive vehicles to conduct these missions. The Saudi Government had active spies collecting information pertaining to our troop strength, our weapons, and any other intelligence they could obtain. The Saudis were providing the intelligence to the Saudi Government, and we were very confident it was also being passed to Iraqi intelligence.
During January 2003 and Feb 2003, Saudi Intelligence officers would boast that the American military was overreacting about Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. Their bravery changed as we approached the invasion of Iraq in Mar 2003. The high-ranking Saudi officers were scrambling to obtain gas masks and other protective equipment. They knew their equipment was substandard and they wanted U.S.-made protective equipment. We gave them some of ours. The Saudi Intelligence officers were visibly frightened about a potential chemical, biological, or nuclear attack and expressed their fears. This was my first confirmation Saddam Hussein still had WMD material and the capability to use them.
The Saudis knew Saddam had WMD and would use them if he had the opportunity.
When I arrived in Nasiriyah, Iraq (after the start of war) my team and I immediately began interviewing (in the field) Iraqis from all walks of life to determine where the WMD sites were located. At the beginning of the war Iraqis were very helpful and provided us exact locations and proof WMD was at certain locations (primarily southern Iraq because Saddam knew the UN Weapons Inspectors had seldom inspected any locations in this area). They had always focused in northern Iraq.
Four primary suspected WMD sites were located. We tried from April until July 2003 to have the Iraq Survey Group come and excavate these sites. They advised us they did not have the manpower nor the heavy equipment needed to excavate the sites, which were underground bunkers (beneath waterways). We were frustrated. I have received information from various sources that the WMD I had attempted to have excavated was subsequently looted (after the war) and transferred to Syria.
While in Iraq we determined the following:
- Russian activity in Iraq had been rampant several months prior to the war and up until the day before the invasion.
- Iranians were infiltrating southern Iraq by the thousands and were preparing to assistinsurgents in removing U.S. forces from Iraq.
- We found numerous pieces of evidence indicating WMD were in Iraq before the war began and some were still in Iraq.
- I and other agents were informed by Iraqis that a civil war would erupt and violence against U.S. forces would increase due to the Iranian and Russian influence.
Vulnerability at home
Upon returning from Iraq I left Federal Service to pursue a career educating U.S. law enforcement in the U.S. I wrote a book titled "Arabic for law enforcement and military". During my lectures to local, county, and state law enforcement officers it was revealed the true first line defenders in the U.S. are not trained nor prepared to combat terrorism in the U.S. (through no fault of their own). The local law enforcement agencies were not receiving adequate funds or assistance from the Federal Government to fight terrorism. The majority advised they were supposed to be the first line defenders, but in actuality they did not even know what Al-Qaeda meant, and/or could not point out Iraq or Iran on a map. They had no Arabic language training.
I began conducting research and talking with experts from various fields and determined three significant facts that I corroborated by further research:
- The terrorists groups such as Hezbollah, Hamas, and Al-Qaeda each had different leaders and to some degree operated in different ways, but they each had the same two goals (destroy Israel and destroy America and any country that supported either)
- Our nuclear research centers were very vulnerable to an attack and the potential for a suicide bomber using a dirty radiological bomb from these facilities was and is a high probability. Note: Vic Walter and Brian Ross of ABC News did an excellent report on the lack of security at these facilities. I received an enormous amount of information from individuals associated with Russian nuclear programs that there is nuclear material being sold on the black market and nuclear material is in the hands of Islamic Extremists.
- Terrorist sleeper cells are located primarily in North Carolina, Michigan, and Canada. The "sleepers" are prepared to conduct terrorist attacks within the U.S., and nuclear material is available to them. "Prepared" in this instance indicates they have the necessary tools to carry our their attacks and are prepared to die.
Less than a week ago I met several citizens from the Middle East who are familiar with terrorist groups, their methodology, and more importantly the mindset of terrorists (specifically Al-Qaeda). They believe violence in Iraq will increase and the number of U.S. troops in Iraq is not a factor. The largest percentage of U.S. troops in Iraq are support troops and not combat troops. From the beginning of 2003 until now the number of troops who actually engage insurgents is actually less than 5% of all assigned troops in the region. Al-Qaeda now has a strong hold in Iraq and they will not let go. Terrorist operations are active in the U.S. and are being operated/financed in Michigan. U.S. citizens need to understand there are people trained and prepared to carry our suicide missions in the U.S. and nothing is off limits. Churches, malls, and even the schools our children attend are not off limits to suicide bombers. It is only a relatively short time before the U.S. will begin seeing suicide terrorist missions.
I will continue to research terrorism related issues in the U.S. and Canada and will bring forward the results. My next project is to follow Dr. Paul William's investigation into McMaster University located in Canada. My initial research indicates terrorists are being educated here with the approval of some university administrators. I have contacted the university and informed them of this project and will give them an opportunity to respond to each piece developed during my research on terrorism at McMaster. McMaster is not alone when it comes to nuclear reactors located on major university sites. Nuclear reactors are located on a large number of major university campuses in the U.S. There locations are not classified and are described on the internet.
Children are the ones who suffer in wartime and I want to prevent any child from ever having to experience a terrorist attack.
Friday, February 2, 2007
Texas is trying to become the first state to mandate that all schoolgirls be immunized with the Human Papilloma Virus vaccine, starting with girls as young as 11. Now on the surface this sounds like a good idea, right? HPV is an STD that causes certain types of cervical cancer in women. Who wouldn't want to reduce their chances of contracting it?
Well, since this vaccination is so new we don't know what type of side effects it may cause later in life, and it doesn't stop all types of HPV, only some of the most common. Of course, when you give a kid a vaccine that is supposed to keep her from contracting an STD this young, doesn't it make sense that she's more likely to engage in sexual activity at a younger age? Just like handing boys condoms or putting girls on the pill, it's empowering them to go at because now it's "safe."
Texas Gov. Rick Perry is pushing for the legislature to pass the requirement right away. Why is he so concerned about it you ask? Well, upon closer scrutiny of this fiasco, the main lobbyist group for the vaccine is of course Merck, the same company who is producing the vaccine. The Governor's former chief of staff, Mike Toomey, is one of Merck's main Texas lobbyists, and Perry himself has received $6000 from the big Pharm giant during his reelection campaign.
Sounds like a very big conflict of interest if you ask me. Read more here.
Fresh Meat has some great political cartoons from a conservative bent. Lots of great stuff!
This is a great philosophy for life and politics in America, I came across it on radio talk-show host Phil Valentine's website.
The ABC's of Reality in America
AIDS has a cure. It's called abstinence.
Belief in God is a cornerstone of our republic.
Character is the single most important attribute in a leader.
Drug legalization will cripple America.
Entrepreneurs are our economic lifeblood and deserve every penny they make.
Families are the basic building blocks of society.
Guns are good.
Hyphenated labels are divisive and destructive.
Illegal immigration is dangerous to this country.
Junk science is behind the global warming scare.
Killing through abortion is murder.
Liberalism is an ideology doomed to failure.
Military strength deters aggression.
National Security is the first responsibility of the federal government.
Oppression should not be fueled by American capitalism.
Political Correctness is the liberal version of fascism.
Quotas are wrong.
Reagan was right.
Schools are best run by local people on the local level.
Tax rates should be flat and fair.
Unions have outlived their usefulness.
Vigilance is the price of freedom.
Welfare robs people of their dignity and is the poison of capitalism.
Xenophobia is at the root of protectionism.
You and you alone are ultimately responsible for your own destiny.
Zero Tolerance is the only way to effectively deal with crime.