Happy New Year

This may be my last post for 2011.  I will be out of town until Tuesday and may not have internet access.

I am looking forward to 2012.  With any luck, that will be the last year of the Obama presidency.  Let's all work hard to support the Republican candidate, whoever he or she turns out to be.  None of them are perfect, but as of this moment, I prefer Newt to Mitt.

So...have a safe and Happy New Year, and may 2012 bring us all greater opportunities and happiness.

The Obamagasm Award

The Obamessiah

Media Research Center has announced the Obamagasm Award for 2011 goes to Stephen Marche of Esquire Magazine.  Marche's paean to Barack Obama includes this:

...can we just take a month or two to contemplate him the way we might contemplate a painting by Vermeer or a guitar lick by the early-seventies Rolling Stones or a Peyton Manning pass or any other astounding, ecstatic human achievement? Because twenty years from now, we’re going to look back on this time as a glorious idyll in American politics, with a confident, intelligent, fascinating president riding the surge of his prodigious talents from triumph to triumph....

I would rewrite this essay a bit:

...can we just take a month or two to contemplate him the way we might contemplate a Flea Market painting of Elvis on black velvet, the early singing skills of Milli Vanilli,  a Jamarcus Russell [intercepted] pass, or any other mundane, over-hyped, pie-in-the-sky mediocrity?  Because twenty years from now, we're going to look back on this time as a raging insanity in American politics, with a conceited, naive and arrogant punk of a president, riding the surge of his own ignorance from one political disaster to the next...

Read the whole thing here, and then throw up.  Hat tip:  No Pasaran.

Why Islamophobia? Robert Spencer Answers Muslim Filmmaker

Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch was asked by a Muslim filmmaker for an interview.  It seems one Dean Obeidallah is making a film about "Islamophobia," no doubt along the lines that fear of Islam is unfair, irrational and bigoted.  "Islamophobia," of course, is an invented term used to shame critics into silence about the murderous, violent and intolerant nature of Islam.

Spencer asked Obeidallah to answer several questions as a prelude to an interview.  Obeidallah did not answer them.  The best of these is item number 1, in which Spencer asks:

True or false: No comedy show, no matter how clever or winning, is going to eradicate the suspicion that many Americans have of Muslims. This is because Americans are concerned about Islam not because of the work of greasy Islamophobes, but because of Naser Abdo, the would-be second Fort Hood jihad mass murderer; and Khalid Aldawsari, the would-be jihad mass murderer in Lubbock, Texas; and Muhammad Hussain, the would-be jihad bomber in Baltimore; and Mohamed Mohamud, the would-be jihad bomber in Portland; and Faisal Shahzad, the would-be Times Square jihad mass-murderer; and Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, the Arkansas military recruiting station jihad murderer; and Naveed Haq, the jihad mass murderer at the Jewish Community Center in Seattle; and Mohammed Reza Taheri-Azar, the would-be jihad mass murderer in Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Ahmed Ferhani and Mohamed Mamdouh, who hatched a jihad plot to blow up a Manhattan synagogue; and Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the would-be Christmas airplane jihad bomber; and many others like them who have plotted and/or committed mass murder in the name of Islam and motivated by its texts and teachings -- all in the U.S. in the last couple of years.

And this doesn't even mention Major Nidal Hassan, who killed 13 people at Fort Hood in Texas a couple of years ago, acting on behalf of his religion -- Islam.

Read the whole thing here.   By the way, I am currently reading Spencer's book "The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran."  It is an informative book on how the Koran was created and what it contains.  You can read the Koran itself, but this is a difficult task, since the Koran is arranged in a chaotic, non-sequential manner, repeats itself many times, and often provides little or no context for its subject matter.  (You must refer to the Hadith to obtain the context and supporting facts, and Spencer quotes from the Hadith when necessary to remove ambiguity.)

Special Academy Award Issued to North Korean Mourners for Great Acting

"Oh Boo Hoo Hoo Hoo!"  How was that?

Maggie over at Maggie's Notebook noticed something that I also noticed:  the wailing, gesticulating mourners at Kim Jong Il's funeral were decidedly dry-eyed.  With all that moaning, bawling and crying, there were no tears. The mourners, knowing what was good for them, put on quite an act for Dear Leader's funeral.

Just Out of Camera Range

We suspect that Hollywood will issue a special Oscar for these amazing put-ons.  Acting!

Meanwhile, singing was heard throughout the land:  "The Witch is dead, the Witch is dead, the wicked Witch is dead!"  The Lollipop Guild is expected to make a public announcement shortly.

I Want to Make a YouTube Video

Curmudgeon over at Political Clown Parade has made a video reflecting on the events of 2011.  It's the first video she's made in quite some time, posted to her YouTube account "Definite Opinion."  It's pretty good, view it here.

I like viewing her Photoshops and she's actually a pretty good writer when she has a mind to be -- and lately, she has a mind to be.  She has sometimes made YouTube videos that are worthwhile to watch, and I am  inspired to make some videos too.  I know how to do it, that's not the hard part.  The hard part is figuring out what I want to present, what images or video clips to include, what background music to use.  I'll give it some thought.  Suggestions are welcome.

As Kim Jung Mentally Il Is Laid To Rest...the Haunting Sound of "Taps," Played on a Kazoo

Kim Jung Mentally Il has been laid to rest.  The North Koreans are so poor that Il's casket was wheeled to the cemetery on a used skateboard...propelled along by the deft footwork of the New Dear Leader, Kim Jung Ungh!.

People were pointing out that the hearst was a 1976 Lincoln Continental, but that's not true.  It was a blown up picture of a 1976 Lincoln Continental, taped on to the camera-view side of the skateboard.  The photo was ordered from Office Max and flown in by carrier pigeon, which was promptly shot down by anti-aircraft fire and eaten.

However, it's true that North Korea has achieved much.  They have arrived at that position in the world so fervently hoped for by our own Dear Leader, Kim Jung Barack Obama.  No other country in the world feels inferior to North Korea, nor do they envy it's super-power status; and no one can claim that Evil Capitalists are exploiting the other 99% with products, services, technology, jobs or any kind of standard-of-living.  As for #OccupyNorthKorea, the people there who are living in tents, squalor, filth and poverty are called "the upper class."

Kim Jung Mentally Il's funeral was ended with the plaintive sound of taps.  Since the North Koreans can't afford a bugle, a lady with a kazoo was used instead.

Kim Jung Mentally Il's corpse was then taken to the processing plant where it was turned into Soylent Green.

Meanwhile, the North Korean military (which is everyone in the country, apparently) turned out to fake great expressions of grief, with loud wailing and bawling, but...no tears.  I wonder how many were secretly thinking:  Thank God the bastard's dead.

See for yourself:

Blog Whoring and Me-Too Blogging

Dan Riehl has a worthwhile post this morning on "Iconoclastic Bloggers."  He defines an iconoclast as a person who attacks settled beliefs or institutions.  I like that.

I like even more what he said about blogger cliques and groups:

"Still, cliques and groups around certain larger blogs have grown up, along with the professional sites and aspects of it."

A light went on in my head.  Dan had described a phenomenon that annoys the hell out of me, though I hadn't fully verbalized or defined it.  Cliques!  I have simply referred to the phenomenon as "Me-Too Blogging."

"Me-too" blogging is where one assumes a role in the king blogger's court and begs for links and attention and indulges in throw-me-a-bone bootlicking. "Me-too" bloggers are beholden to bigger bloggers for traffic they haven't actually earned, and so compromise their principles and honesty in order to retain their benefactor's good graces. Some people have called this "blog-whoring," and the description is apt.  It means you must defend your benefactor, even when he or she is wrong or has done something unethical.

Also, Clique-Blogging is a form of group-think.  Riehl also pointed out:

Group-think is the enemy of freedom and I detest it, in its various forms.

Me-Too Blogging is compromised blogging.  Don't do it.

The Shallowness of Atheism

I really don't care what anyone believes about God, as long as they believe it peacefully and do not attempt to impose their beliefs on me through coercive means.  "Coercive means," for purposes of this discussion, include using Congress and the courts to subvert the First Amendment.

Atheists, however, are particularly annoying in their religious beliefs.  Yes, atheism is a form of religion, as it is believed on faith -- a negative kind of faith, but faith nonetheless.  To know whether God exists, one would have to be God himself.  Man's comparatively minuscule intellect is insufficient to answer the question.    Therefore, many of us believe, on faith, that there is a higher power and a higher purpose to our existence.

Atheists, on the other hand, insist that God does not exist, that God is a myth and religion a delusion.  They are actually rather impatient, even intolerant with those who disagree.  After all, the question is entirely clear to them, and they assume that their personal clarity on the issue should be shared by all.  In this regard, they are no different from any fanatical sect who insists that theirs represents THE ONE TRUE RELIGION, that all other religions are doomed to fail and only they are possessed of God's grace, acceptance and enlightenment.

I recently saw a video by the atheist Pat Condell, whose anti-Islam rants I love, haughtily insist that "there is no God."  He knows.  His is "the one true religion."

Atheism is similar to color blindness, and atheists are like color-blind fanatics insisting that green, red, blue and yellow do not exist, and that those who see them are delusional.  Atheists are entitled to their beliefs, but I wish they would stop wearing their religion on their sleeve and trying to push it off on everyone else.

Tim Tebow Terrorizes Secularists and Atheists

As Timothy Gordon points out in American Thinker today, the left is becoming increasingly intolerant towards any public religious expression.  For that reason, Tim Tebow, quarterback for the Denver Broncos, is becoming a hated figure.  Tebow likes to silently pray in the end zone after touchdowns, by dropping to one knee and giving thanks.  Gordon writes:

Tebow's straightforward and unapologetic Christianity has been received by NFL mensae magnae (contradiction in terms?) as a type of threat.

And what is the liberal/secularist plan?  To eventually make religion disappear:

That is, when sec-progs start out declaring that they aim merely to set a plain whereupon all religions can fairly "coexist," they really contemplate an end-game where religions fade permanently out of view. Have a look at the emergent history of the jurisprudence: "No federal religion" became "no state religions"; this became "no government entanglement with religion"; this became "no governmental support for religion"; this became "no governmental mention of religion"; this led to the phase that the Tebow debacle currently evinces: "no popular mention of religion in any public sphere, including private affairs which get viewed on TV." One can easily imagine the last few steps in this phenomenology of disappearance.

I noticed this on Jay Leno last week, when Denver finally lost their second game of the season.  When Leno announced the loss, his liberal Los Angeles audience broke into applause...not because they dislike the Broncos, but because they dislike practicing Christians.

Ron Paul's Extreme Isolationism Disqualifies Him To Be President

Eric Dondero, a former Ron Paul staffer, has set the record straight on many facts about his former boss.  Dondero, writing at Right Wing News, states the following are true:
1.  Ron Paul is neither racist nor anti-Semitic.  Further, he is not homophobic.
2.  Ron Paul is a strong isolationist.  He was vehemently opposed to any US military response to the 9/11 attack.  He believes the United States should not have fought the Nazis in World War II.
3.  Ron Paul dislikes Israel because of Paul's extreme isolationism, and our alliance with Israel prevents us from being more isolationist.  (I am paraphrasing here.)
4.  Ron Paul supports the so-called Palestinians and wants the entire state of Israel given over to them.

Dondero sums it up:

On one other matter, I’d like to express in the strongest terms possible, that the liberal media are focusing in on entirely the wrong aspects regarding controversies on Ron Paul.

It’s his foreign policy that’s the problem; not so much some stupid and whacky things on race and gays he may have said or written in the past.

Ron Paul is most assuredly an isolationist. He denies this charge vociferously. But I can tell you straight out, I had countless arguments/discussions with him over his personal views. For example, he strenuously does not believe the United States had any business getting involved in fighting Hitler in WWII. He expressed to me countless times, that “saving the Jews,” was absolutely none of our business. When pressed, he often times brings up conspiracy theories like FDR knew about the attacks of Pearl Harbor weeks before hand, or that WWII was just “blowback,” for Woodrow Wilson’s foreign policy errors, and such.

Dondero confirms what I have written in previous posts:  Ron Paul is not a racist and the charges of "racism" are just unethical propaganda by some on the right.  Ron Paul is, however, an enemy of Israel and an extreme isolationist.  I fear that his isolationism would provide no deterrence whatsoever to the radical Muslims who would attack us.  If Ron Paul were president, Iran would feel quite safe in launching a nuclear attack on Israel.  For these reasons, I could never vote for Ron Paul, nor would I recommend him to anyone.

Hat tip:  Pirate's Cove

There is Absolutely Nothing Good About Islam. Nothing.

Bare Naked Islam reports that the new radicals governing Egypt want to destroy the pyramids.  That's because the pyramids represent an ancient religion and is not Islamic.

The New York Daily News reports that Muslim terrorists in Nigeria bombed a number of Christian churches on Christmas day, killing several dozen Christians:

For the second Christmas in a row, Islamic group Boko Haram, which aims to install Sharia law in Africa’s most populous nation, orchestrated fatal attacks.

Bare Naked Islam has more on the story here.

Meanwhile, a hateful and crazy female Muslim was shot dead by police in Marietta, Georgia.  Jihad Watch has the story of Jameela Barnette, who regularly sent hate mail to various bloggers, like this (from Jihad Watch):

ALLAH is the greatest, ALLAH is ALIVE, but the christian's god is only a partially eaten, jew corpse. ALLAHU AKBAR you rabid, jew-eating, racist, christian MOTHA F U C K A S of extremely low intelligence. I will be sure to tell your hostile jinn aka jew masters what loyal and obedient slaves you christians are. Enjoy your brief and evil life of fairy tales and hokum your evil jew masters have created for you, because the Hell-fire is your final destination. Muslims should kill you corpse-eating, blood-drinking, christian savages and send you to your partially-eaten, jew corpse you call god.

Apparently, Jameela summoned the police herself by activating a "panic alarm" in her apartment complex.  When the police arrived, however, she answered the door with a knife in one hand and a pistol in the other, and began slashing one of the officers with the knife.  He promptly shot her dead.  I volunteered over at Blazing Cat Fur to play taps for Jameela...on a kazoo.

I hate Islam.  It is completely evil, anti-human, savage and insane.  Just like the bearded faker who invented the "religion."

I ordered Robert Spencer's book "The Complete Infidel's Guide to the Koran."  I know what's in the Koran, but it will be interesting and entertaining to see what Spencer has to say about it.  The Koran itself is rather mundane and boring.

The Morning After the Night Before: the Dull Day After Christmas

Last night we were eating, drinking and making merry.  The morning after is so much less fun.  December 26 is the day you begin to realize that the Grinch had a point.

There's that sink piled high with dirty dishes.  Then there's all those torn Christmas wrappings and boxes scattered around the living room.  My head doesn't feel quite right.  Will you turn off that Christmas tree?  The garishly bright lights are giving me a headache.  Where in hell is the aspirin?

I have lots of chores that I could do, but I don't want to do any.  Lots of resolutions to make for New Year's, but they can wait.

The good news is that they aren't showing continual reruns of "A Christmas Story" any more.

Yep, it's true:  December 26 is not my most favorite day of the year.

Burp.  Oh God, I think I have acid indigestion.

Merry Christmas to All!

It's Christmas Eve, so no more serious blogging until Monday.

I had a nasty cold all week, and finally it is has subsided enough to call myself "well."  So now I can go Christmas shopping!

I guess I shouldn't complain -- there have been many Christmases where I didn't start shopping until Christmas Eve.  I'm a man -- I hate shopping!!

So time to hit the shower, then the stores.

Merry Christmas to all!

Lez Be In Love: Social Progress in the Navy

There was a news story out this week about the wonderful results of allowing openly gay people into the military.  The AP had a nice photo shoot of a female sailor returning to base in Virginia, being greeted by her lover and passionately kissed on the dock.  This is a picture seen through the decades as our fighting sailors return home from the sea.  Except this time both the sailor and the spouse are women.

What wonderful social progress!  Now what was formerly considered unnatural and unfruitful can be displayed in the news, celebrated as enlightenment, featured and feted!  Two beautiful women will not add their DNA to the gene pool, or enjoy old-fashioned marriages to men, or become mothers.  Yes indeed, this is something to celebrate!  No need to bake cookies for the kiddies or drive the kids to soccer practice...because there are none!

One can only wonder how much more social progress we can stand will see in the next twenty years...perhaps the sailor returning from the sea will share a passionate kiss with her spouse...a cow!!  Twenty years after that, who knows?  Perhaps the spouse will be a carrot....or even a banana.

You got a problem with that?   BIGOT!

Jazz For Cows (Video)

These Dixieland Jazz musicians show up in a cow pasture and serenade a herd of cows. The cows' ears go up and they all turn towards the band and slowly advance forward in a line. The cows are curious and even seem to like it. Now if cows can learn to love jazz, can progressives learn common sense? Nah, I'm afraid that's stretching credulity to the breaking point.

 

A Democrat Poem From 1949, Still So Relevant For Today

A couple of weeks ago, Always on Watch posted the scan from a newspaper in 1949. The paper carried a poem, "Ode to the Welfare State." I loved the poem, and transcribed into a Word document; but I didn't want to steal AOW's thunder so I didn't run it right away. The graphic of the newspaper is below, followed by my transcription, to enable other bloggers easier ways to run it, copy it or email it.

ODE TO THE WELFARE STATE
Rep Clarence J. Brown, R-Ohio, 1949
A poem put into the Congressional Record

Democratic Dialogue

Father must I go to work?
No my lucky son,
We’re living now on Easy Street
On dough from Washington.

We’ve left it up to Uncle Sam
So don’t get exercised.
Nobody has to give a damn –
We’ve all been subsidized.

But if Sam treats us all so well
And feeds us milk and honey,
Please daddy, tell me what the hell
He’s going to use for money.

Don’t worry Bub, there’s not a hitch
In this here noble plan –
 He simply soaks the filthy rich
And helps the common man.

But father, won’t there come a time
When they run out of cash
And we have left them not a dime
When things will go to smash?

My faith in you is shrinking, son,
You nosy little brat;
You do too much thinking, son,
To be a Democrat.

GQ's Comic Strip Lamentation for Osama Bin Laden

Kindly Grandpa Figure Offed by
Fanatical Christian Right Wingers

The online version of Gentleman's Quarterly has published a "web comic" about the termination of Osama Bin Laden by Navy Seals in May of this year.  They asked some well-known comic book artists to illustrate the mission that killed Bin Laden.

The artwork is well done, but carries a leftist bias (most comic book artists nowadays are progressives on steroids). Osama Bin Laden, the murderer of 3,000 people on 9/11/2001, is displayed as a tired, wise old man, a rather sympathetic figure:

Five years -- six?  Caged in these rooms and NOW FINALLY--the end sounds close and far at the same time -- the walls around him complicate things --

The web comic ends with Osama taking a bullet to the head, with the blazing legend "FOR GOD AND COUNTRY".

The cynical legend is subtly sarcastic and reflects leftist biases against both "God and Country."  Only Christian religious fanatics and wildly patriotic jingoists machine gun kindly, tired and wise old men.  (Yes, his tired eyes seem to silently and sadly lament the strife and violence -- oh, why can't this be a better world?  Why can't we all just get along?  Why does it always have to end this way?  Aren't we supposed to be better than this?) 

The answer to kindly grandpa's silent questions is simple.  It is because dangerous and slightly mad rightwingers believe that killing is the ultimate expression of religious ecstasy and love of country.   Never mind the murdered Americans and billions of dollars of damage to the World Trade Center and Pentagon.  Let's just focus on the kindly old man with his lovable grandpa-like beard and his tired eyes.  Let us not dwell on his crime.  He was merely a victim of American religious fanaticism and mindless patriotism.  Every college sophomore knows that these two evils account for all the violence and hatred in the world.  Hey, that 9/11 thing was just an excuse...or an inside job used to justify the murder of non-Christians.

For God and country my ass.  For justice.  Thank God the S.O.B. is dead.  I only regret that it took ten years to find him.

Read it here.

Hat tip:  Infidel Bloggers Alliance

Can You Pass The National History Test?

I stumbled on this page at "Good Education" online magazine (it appears to be quite liberal-biased).  However, they say this about American kids' proficiency in U.S. History:

When it comes to history, are you smarter than a fourth grader? The just-released results of the National Assessment of Educational Progress U.S. History 2010 Report Card show that of 30,000 students tested in 2010, only 20 percent of fourth graders, 17 percent of eighth graders, and 12 percent of seniors are proficient in American history. Federal officials celebrated a slight increase in scores for eighth graders since 2006, and scores for all grade levels are higher than they were in 1994, but only 2 percent of 12th graders correctly answered a question about Brown v. Board of Education, and only 9 percent of fourth graders could identify a photograph of Abraham Lincoln and give two reasons why he's important.

 They then give five questions each from the 4th, 8th and 12th grade tests.  I scored 100% on all of them, but then again, I graduated from the 12th grade some time ago so I should know these things.

Test yourself!  Answer the questions here.

Solving the Problems of Race in America

Following the brouhaha over Ron Paul's old newsletters, I want to clarify my position on some points and make some tentative suggestions for improving racial disparities in America.

1.  Races do vary in many ways.  Some of us are better at higher math, some of us are better at sinking three-pointers outside the line.  There is no harm or foul in acknowledging these differences, as long as we understand these are tendencies, not universal laws.  Everyone is an individual and should be judged by his own abilities and attitudes.  Everyone should be allowed to pursue his goals and achieve as much as his talents and ambition will allow.  On the other hand, no one should be given a free pass or supplied with a standing excuse for destructive behavior.

2.  IQ is an important factor in higher SAT scores and academic achievement.  Research shows that blacks, as a group, have the lowest average IQ of all racial groups:  85, compared to 95 for hispanics, 100 for whites and 105 for Asians.  This, more than any other factor, explains the failure of blacks to achieve SAT scores as high as whites or Asians.  It explains the lack of blacks in higher math, physics and other demanding disciplines.  It is no one's fault, it just is.  However, some pertinent observations:

• By acknowledging this reality, I take no joy or pleasure in it, nor do I wish to use it as an excuse to bring back segregation or to assign an inferior citizenship status to blacks or anyone else, or to engender hostility towards blacks or anyone else.
• I WISH this IQ business weren't true.  I WISH blacks could enjoy the same level of achievement, productivity, success, prosperity and happiness as any other racial group.  I would be DELIGHTED if someone could find a solution to the problem by sometime tomorrow.  However, reality is something of an ass, as it doesn't care a damn about my preferences...or yours.  It just keeps on being reality.  It's a lot like the IRS, if you want to know the truth.
• I do not believe that DENIAL will have any bearing on the problem of IQ disparities by race.  I do believe that honest discussion could lead to possible solutions.  Is there any way to improve the IQ of blacks?  If not, is there any way to work around the problem, by offering trade school education to those for whom college is not an option?  How high an IQ is needed for (1) graduating high school, (2) graduating college, (3) becoming a doctor, lawyer, accountant, computer programmer, auto mechanic, fry cook, musician, etc?  The idea is to find the optimum training and employment that will maximize an individual's earning potential and give him or her the best chance for a successful life.  The forceful introduction of individuals into careers for which they are not suited (i.e., affirmative action, racial norming, racial quotas) harms both the unqualified (by setting them up for failure) as well as the qualified persons forcibly replaced (by denying them opportunity).
• Another training point would be to (1) recognize potential trouble before it happens and (2) take steps to prevent it.  Things to avoid:  drugs, drop-outs, gangs, crime and unwed pregnancy, resisting sudden impulses that lead to trouble.  How people fall into these traps, how to plan your life to avoid them.
• I believe that we should acknowledge black dysfunction, e.g. fatherless households, illegitimacy, school drop-outs, unemployment, alcoholism and drug use, crime and in general, a really bad attitude.  Next, we should find ways to alleviate this dysfunction, possibly by (1) the shame factor, assigning blame where it belongs, on blacks themselves, for making bad life choices, (2) providing some kind of training or schools that teach civilizational skills, e.g. working cooperatively with others, social skills such as manners, personal space, tact; employment skills such as arriving at work on time, getting out of bed when you'd rather not (per Woody Allen's dictum that "85% of success in life is in just showing up.")  Also, we should stress the importance of delayed gratification, the necessity of patience and persistence while learning the skills one needs to achieve a better life.   What we should NOT do is provide blacks with the ready-made excuse of "white racism" as the source of their problems, since that excuse is neither true nor useful in solving the problem.

Those are my thoughts on the thorny problem of racial stress in America.

Update:  Ron Paul's assertion that "blacks perpetrate crime all out of proportion to their numbers" has again been proven true.  Heather McDonald, writing in the New York Post three days ago, in an article called "The Real Outrage," noted:

Nearly every day, the police experience a reality that is kept assiduously out of public awareness: the overwhelming disproportion in crime. In 2009, for example, blacks, who are 23 percent of the city’s population, committed 80 percent of all shootings, according to reports filed by the victims and witnesses. Whites, who are 35 percent of the population, committed 1.4 percent of all shootings.

 It is time to openly discuss the problem of black crime and to seek solutions.  Self-censorship accomplishes nothing.  It is time to tell the truth.


Update:  Lawrence Auster of View From the Right discussed IQ and cultural influences back in 2008.  That article has a lot of bearing on my post above.  Auster points out a highly pertinent interview with Arthur Jensen, who discussed intelligence testing in a two-part interview in American Renaissance in 1992, here and here.

Stogie the Grinch

Ugh, I used to stay away from topics like racial reality and American history.  It is too easy to offend friends and give ammunition to the enemy.  However, I have decided that a relentless pursuit of truth is my highest priority, and let the chips fall where they may.

Nevertheless, I don't enjoy being so brutal, so if my last couple of posts offended anyone, then I do regret that. I apologize, not for telling the truth, but for telling it with so little tact.

On a more positive note, I added a deer and a log cabin to my Christmas blog banner.  Am I sensitive or what?

"He Who Controls the Past, Controls the Future": Reconsidering Bill Whittle

There is a tendency among modern-day politicians to misuse and misinterpret history in order to advance modern political positions.  This isn't a good idea, no matter how worthy the position.    As historian Arthur M. Schlesinger told us in his book "The Disuniting of America," history is too often used as a weapon.  Using history as a weapon generally means misrepresenting history to justify modern day partisan politics. 

This was the meaning of Orwell's "1984" slogan, "He who controls the present, controls the past.  He who controls the past, controls the future."  If you control the interpretation of history, you can create heroes and villains and justify all sorts of political positions in the here and now.

Bill Whittle demonstrates this tendency (probably without realizing that he is doing so) in his recent Pajamas TV video  "A Voter's Guide to Republicans."  Whittle begins with a worthy objective, to disprove leftist claims that we Republicans are motivated by hate, are fascist and racist. However, he uses false history to support the moral purity of the Republican Party.

Bill Whittle is a conservative writer and commenter extraordinaire. I generally enjoy his expository writing and commentary on Pajamas TV. However, when it comes to Abraham Lincoln, the Civil War and the early Republican Party, he is not to be trusted. Whittle's false history in favor of Republicans claims that the early Republican Party of 1860 was anti-racist and committed to freeing the slaves.  It was neither.

The early Republican Party was dead-set against allowing slavery into the territories, those areas that had not yet become states of the union.  However, it wasn't a Republican belief in racial equality or modern-day morality that formed the basis of their anti-slavery sentiment.  The early Republicans hated blacks and didn't want them polluting the racial purity of these new territories.  Also, they understandably didn't want to compete with slave labor.  One of the first Republican Party platforms identified the Republicans as "the White People's Party."  The new territories were to be set aside for the benefit of the white race.  Early Republicans were hardly the great moral crusaders of the 19th century.  They were pretty much like most other white people of the time period:  highly prejudiced against blacks.  In this they were no better or no worse than mainstream America of the 1860's.

Now let me be clear:  when discussing the Republican Party of the 21st century, Bill Whittle is absolutely correct:  we are neither "racist" nor fascist nor motivated by hate.  However, how we got to this point has little to do with Abraham Lincoln or the Republican Party of 1860.

The truth need not be defended by falsehood.  As the late Vaclav Havel once said, "Lying can never save us from another lie."

Village Voice Expresses Sarcasm Against the Stogiemeister...Without Rebutting Him of Course

The leftwing rag, the Village Voice, has jumped into the Ron Paul fight, quoting rightwing sources that both attack and defend Ron Paul. Here's what they said about me:

Paul had his defenders. SaberPoint didn't see what was so racist about the racist comments in the Paul newsletters. "Paul stated that young black purse snatchers are unlikely to be caught because of their swiftness of foot," said SaberPoint. "However, Paul is right, black men do run faster than men of other races. This is a biological fact. It is the reason why blacks make up a disproportionate number of men in professional sports like basketball or football." (Now we're beginning to understand why Bell Curve fan Andrew Sullivan endorsed Paul.)

The Village Voice misrepresents my position, of course. First off, I have never endorsed Ron Paul.  Secondly, I argued that if unpleasant facts about race are true, then they cannot be "racist." Racism implies an irrational prejudice, and fear of black crime and violence is hardly irrational -- just as Ron Paul pointed out. Dinesh D'Souza in his 1995 book "The End of Racism" calls this fear "rational discrimination." D'Souza's book is also my source for the reality of other racial differences, like black mens' ability to run faster than those of other races.

Here is my comment and response to Village Voice (will they let my comments stand?):

Ah, the liberal position, so clearly explained herein, is that reality is racist, and therefore to be repudiated. Yes, I wrote that black men (in general) run faster than white people. However, they aren't good swimmers as their bones are too heavy. Remember a few years ago when our all-black Olympics track relay team beat Canada's all-black track relay team for the gold? Probably just a coincidence that the team didn't have any whites...or hispanics...or Asians. Don't blame me, blame God...or nature.

As far as the Bell Curve is concerned, it also told the unpopular truth: that the average IQ among the black race is 85, the lowest of any racial group. If the "Village Voice" wants to disprove this, please do so and publish your results so we can all be enlightened. It shouldn't be difficult; just test for IQ among a statistical sample of blacks vs whites vs Asians vs hispanics and record and summarize the results. Will you do it? No, because outside of using race as a political cudgel, you know damn well that the Bell Curve is correct.

I don't take any joy or satisfaction in these grim facts, but no good will come from lying about them....as you do.

Kim Jong Il Kicks Bucket

The Glorious Leader of the world's most insane state, North Korea, has croaked, as in "kicked the bucket," cashed in his chips, assumed room temperature, bit the dust, bought the farm, fell off his perch, handed in his dinner pail and went west.

And with all that exertion, it's no wonder.  The man's dead. Kaput.  Past his expiration date.  Food for worms. Through.  Finished.  Washed up.

Now the only question is, will Kim Jong Il Jr. be just as nuts as dad?

"Saturday Night Live" Bravely Satirizes Muhammad's Most Ardent Follower!

Kathy Shaidle of "Five Feet of Fury" writes that  'Saturday Night Live’ (SNL) bravely makes fun of Mohammed and his most devout followers.  Then she says, "Naw, just kidding."  SNL was not making fun of Islam or Muhammad.  SNL was, once again, making fun of Christianity and one of its ardent followers, Tim Tebow.

In SNL's skit, Jesus appears in the Denver Broncos' locker room to confront religious quarterback Tim Tebow.  Jesus tells Tim Tebow to "take it down a notch," and not to get in "everyone's face" about his religion. "Jesus" rolls his eyes at key moments to express his disgust for Tebow.  Apparently, Christianity is such a dumb religion that not even Jesus likes it.

Liberals always have a huge chip on their shoulder when it comes to Christianity.   Any Christian religious observance just pisses them off to no end.

Kathy's ironic observation gave me an idea:  why not Photoshop the Saturday Night Live episode as if it were criticizing Islam and depicting Muhammad instead? Voila, herein was born the Photoshop inspired by Kathy Shaidle.  It features "Jesus" reborn as Muhammad, with turban, and Tim Tebow as the ardently religious Muslim, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, a leader of Iran.  Ahmadinejad is so ardent in his faith that he wants to "wipe Israel off the map" as a show of devotion, and fervently believes that the "Mahdi," or 12th Imam, will soon emerge from a well to lead the faithful.

Muhammad appears in Ahmadinejad's locker room to tell him to "take it down a notch."  A wise decision, since Muslims are more "in your face" about their religion than anyone else.  Yes, no doubt the SNL Muhammad rolled his eyes at key moments to express his disgust with the faith, made snarky comments while the audience roared with laughter, and oozed with the cool cynicism that liberals seem to love.

Way to go, SNL, you big, brave proponents of cool.

Greeaaaat! I Have a Cold.

Nuts.  I went into the office yesterday to study updates on taxes.  While there, I caught a cold, probably from one of the other accountants.  I always think I am going to escape, but I never do.

Lawrence Auster Rebutted "Racism" Charges Against Ron Paul in 2007

Lawrence Auster of View From the Right considered and rebutted racism charges against Ron Paul in May of 2007.  Note, Auster does not support Ron Paul politically.  He, like I, simply resent conservatives resorting to leftist arguments to attack another conservative.

Auster wrote:

Now, let's list Bernstein's [Alan Bernstein of the Houston Chronicle] verbatim quotes and partial quotes of Paul purportedly showing that Paul is racist:

• "If you have ever been robbed by a black teen-aged male, you know how unbelievably fleet-footed they can be." 
• "Opinion polls consistently show that only about 5 percent of blacks have sensible political opinions, i.e. support the free market, individual liberty and the end of welfare and affirmative action..." 
• "Paul continued that politically sensible blacks are outnumbered 'as decent people.' Citing reports that 85 percent of all black men in the District of Columbia are arrested..." 
• "Given the inefficiencies of what D.C. laughingly calls the `criminal justice system,' I think we can safely assume that 95 percent of the black males in that city are semi-criminal or entirely criminal..." 
• "Paul also wrote that although 'we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.'" 
• "We don't think a child of 13 should be held responsible as a man of 23. That's true for most people, but black males age 13 who have been raised on the streets and who have joined criminal gangs are as big, strong, tough, scary and culpable as any adult and should be treated as such." 

Now let's list Bernstein's quotes of Paul purportedly showing that Paul is an anti-Semite:

• "Stating that lobbying groups who seek special favors and handouts are evil, Paul wrote, 'By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government' and that the goal of the Zionist movement is to stifle criticism."

Auster's rebuttal of these charges can be read here.  Basically, he says, like I did, that Paul's comments are either true or are not unreasonable, and those who think they are "racist" have adopted the P.C. straitjacket of allowable thought and speech.

I am not planning to vote for Ron Paul, but his above comments have no bearing whatever on my decision.

"Racism" Charges Against Ron Paul Appear Exaggerated at Best

Lawrence Auster of View From the Right often points out how mainstream "conservatives" often adopt leftist arguments and positions on the subject of race.  These conservatives have swallowed the progressive Kool-Aid, and rush to display themselves as greatly enlightened anti-racists.  They pose and posture just like liberals do, acting out a script that says "Look at me, I am so tolerant and enlightened!"

Conservative Networks appears to represent such types.  No one is allowed to discuss aspects of black people because such topics are strictly verboten.  Conservative Networks has published a bunch of links to Ron Paul's old newsletters, describing them as "Racist Newsletter Links."  I clicked on several of them and didn't find anything that I considered especially offensive.  Indeed, a lot of the links don't discuss race at all.  One link merely described how militant gays invaded a Catholic church to disrupt services and insult Catholicism.  I have copied and pasted their links below; feel free to peruse them.

So far, the only "offensive" remarks that have been attributed to Ron Paul are these:
1.  Only about 5% of blacks vote sensibly in any election.  Yes, that's about the percentage who vote Republican, so it appears Paul's statement is true.

2.  Statistics infer that about 95% of black men in the Washington, DC area are either criminal or partially criminal.  I agree that this statement is stupid.  It is too vague and unsupported to be credible and appears highly exaggerated.  However, statistics do show that almost 40% of young black men are, or have been, in the justice system.  The truth is outrageous enough without exaggerating it.

3.  The "swiftness" of young black men:  Paul stated that young black purse snatchers are unlikely to be caught because of their swiftness of foot.  However, Paul is right, black men do run faster than men of other races.  This is a biological fact.  It is the reason why blacks make up a disproportionate number of men in professional sports like basketball or football.   It is the reason why the top track stars are generally black. The statement that "white men can't jump" is a true comparison of white basketball players vs black ones.  So why is the truth offensive?  What am I missing here?

4.  Blacks commit crime in a higher proportion to their numbers in society.  Again, a true statement.  As I pointed out in my last post, making this observation without offering possible solutions is unwise from a political point of view.  Some have pointed out that Paul's comment seems designed to pander to prejudice against blacks.  Maybe so.  But that prejudice is fed by black behavior more than any other factor.  Paul's statement was tactless, but how can the truth be "racist"?

Anyone who reads this blog knows that I am not a supporter of Ron Paul.  Paul is a paleolibertarian, and as such, holds foreign policy views that seem similar to those on the far left.  For that reason, I cannot support him as a candidate.   However, truth is truth and fair is fair.  Ron Paul's views on race are often tactless and unhelpful, but not necessarily wrong.

Links to Ron Paul's old Newsletters, copied and pasted from Conservative Networks:

Link Link

Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link

Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link Link LinkLinkLink Link

Link Link Link Link

White Pride World Wide: Ron Paul and the Politics of White Power

As Ron Paul moves up in the polls, conservatives are vetting him and saying that Paul has a dark past and a shaky present.

Apparently, in the 1980's and 1990's, Paul either authored, or allowed others to author, newsletter articles in his name, expressing hostility to non-white people.  Hot Air has the story here.

Hot Air quotes Ron Paul complaining that only about 5% of blacks vote right.  The quote ends with this:

Paul also wrote that although “we are constantly told that it is evil to be afraid of black men, it is hardly irrational. Black men commit murders, rapes, robberies, muggings and burglaries all out of proportion to their numbers.”

Hot Air doesn't explain why this quote is erroneous but, liberal-like, simply put it out there as if the wrongfulness or immorality of the quote is obvious for all to see.

But the quote isn't wrong.  Blacks do indeed vote overwhelmingly Democratic, and 95% sounds about right.  Also, black crime is indeed "out of proportion to their numbers."  Read any FBI report of nationwide crime statistics based on race.

What is wrong with the quote is that it does not even hint at a solution to the problem of black crime.  Its only purpose seems to be engendering hostility towards the black race.  Now, if Paul were arguing that public disclosure of black crime would help suppress black crime, through the shame factor, that would put the statistics into a better context.  Or if he were advocating an honest discussion on race for the purpose of solving related problems -- that would make his comments helpful instead of provocative.  An honest discussion of race is what we need, not a P.C. ain't-it-awful approach like that of Hot Air.

Hot Air also vettes Ron Paul's stand on Israel:

Stating that lobbying groups who seek special favors and handouts are evil, Paul wrote, “By far the most powerful lobby in Washington of the bad sort is the Israeli government” and that the goal of the Zionist movement is to stifle criticism.

On this point, I agree with Hot Air that the comment is over the top.  I doubt that it is even true (that Israel is the most powerful lobby in Washington).  In any case, Congress should support Israel.  Israel is a force for good in the world.  However, although I disagree with the comment, I don't find it to be a campaign-ending outrage.

Hot Air makes some solid points against Paul by pointing to his friendly relations with Stormfront, a Neo-Nazi organization. Stormfront's motto is "White Pride World Wide."  Oh yes, I am so proud of my epidermis. When I die, I intend to have myself skinned and my white hide tacked to the wall for others to admire.  Or, as an old Aussie song goes:

            Tan me hide, when I'm dead, Fred

            Tan me hide when I'm dead.

            So we tanned his hide when he died, Clyde,

            and that's it hanging on the shed.

Now I am not ashamed of being white, not one bit.  Europeans and their descendants have done much to advance civilization and knowledge.  I will truck no racism against white people, nor give credence to anti-white sentiments from other epidermal persuasions.

However, the white supremacists seem to think, quite wrongly, that if you are of a different race than I am, then we must be enemies, that different races must hate each other due to some inherent tribal instinct.  Oh horse radish.  Such a philosophy can produce nothing good.

So, in conclusion, Ron Paul isn't completely wrong about black crime and discussing it isn't immoral, though it may be politically disadvantageous.  Society is not yet ready to discuss race, no matter how badly we need this discussion.  I do believe that Paul is somewhat anti-semitic, a trait of the paleoconservative movement of which he is a part.  That in itself would be enough for me to pass him by.

More troubling is Ron Paul's association with conspiracy nutcases like Alex Jones, who isn't merely a 911 "Truther" on steroids.  Jones is nuts and belongs in a rubber room.

Ron Paul could never be elected president with his associations.  Let's not even go there.

Should the GOP Candidate be Mitt Romney?

Newt Gingrich's poll numbers are descending as other Republicans attack him.  The attacks are not without merit, as explained by the Washington Times.  Newt has a lot of baggage, and it will be used against him should he become the candidate.  Gingrich is very polarizing, apparently.  Ann Coulter explains why Newt is a bad idea for our standard bearer.

The Washington Times argues that Mitt Romney is the best choice of the Republican candidates.   They say that Romney has the best chance of winning.

I am not wildly enthusiastic about either Gingrich or Romney, but I will vote for whoever the GOP candidate is.

I would vote for a fire hydrant over Barack Obama.

Is Mormonism a Cult? Well, Yes, But So What?

  

Joseph Smith

I read in the news that Newt Gingrich fired a campaign staffer for saying that "Mormonism is a cult."

That was an impolitic thing to say, for sure.  Mormons tend to be good Americans and are a conservative lot, as a whole.

But is it true?

Yes, it's true.  The Mormon religion has very little resemblance to traditional Christianity.  It was started by one Joseph Smith in the 19th century.  Smith was just one of many false prophets to invent their own religion for power, wealth and booty.  (Girl booty, I mean.)  The falsity of this man and the incredibly stupid fairy tale he devised should be obvious to anyone with a brain.  Basically, Jesus appeared in America after his stint in the Holy Land, and did something with the two different races on this continent, one being the American Indian and the other a race of Roman-like characters who were wiped out by the former.

Smith, like Muhammad, was advised of this alternative religion by the appearance of an angel.  The Angel Moroni (Italian for "morons") appeared to Smith, whereas the Angel Gabriel (Arabic for "What a Schmuck") appeared to Muhammad.  Apparently, neither of these famous prophets noticed that the angels had hoofs for feet and a tail.

Mormons are nice people, but their religious beliefs seem incredibly stupid to me.  Why is there no archaeological evidence that the Roman-type race ever existed?  It is an obvious fairly tale that strains credulity to the breaking point.  But so what?

As Thomas Jefferson once noted, the fact that other men have a different religion than I, or no religion at all, doesn't harm me.  It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg.   So Mormons, have your fun, believe your beliefs -- it's no skin off my nose.  Since Mormons aren't practicing jihad or blowing up trains or sawing off heads, I don't mind.  What I like about Mormons is their strong family values and community and cultural ties, which however they were instituted, are a very good thing.  In spite of their dubious origins, I have a lot of respect for the people of this faith.

Mormons' punishment for following the faker Smith will be incredulous laughter when they get to heaven.  Peter will welcome them at the Pearly Gate with tears running down his cheeks from mirth as he chokes out, between guffaws, "What on earth were you thinking?"  But he will let them in.

I'm not sure what God will do with Joseph Smith, however.  Maybe reincarnate him as a toad.  On the other hand, Smith might win the all-time Tall-Tales or Whopper contest.

Motivations Behind Liberal Beliefs

Some recent nasty encounters with liberals makes me want to list the reasons behind liberal beliefs.  So here goes a list, subject to revision:

1.  Liberals believe that reality can be altered by simple denial.  If we all believe, say, that Islam is a peaceful religion, then by God, Islam is a peaceful religion.  You must ignore widespread Islamic violence, aggression and mass murder, or explain it away, or seek to establish "moral equivalence."  So Muslims just blew up New York?  Hey, the ancient Israelites did some pretty nasty things 4,000 years ago, and the Christians had the Spanish Inquisition.  How these factoids are to protect us from terrorism in the here and now isn't clear.

2.  Related point to number 1 above:  liberals believe that all people, everywhere and in every epoch of history, used the same paradigms, believed the same things, held the same values and are almost identical to modern liberals in thought, behavior and outlook.  The fact that mass murder could be highly desirable to a different culture is just unacceptable.  So they mentally screen it out.

More along these lines later.

Studying for Spanish Final

Posting will be light if at all today and tomorrow.

I am studying for my Spanish final.  It will be all about the past tense, or preterit form of verbs.

Preterit verbs follow consistent patterns in regular verbs, but there are many exceptions for irregular verbs.

So here I am, trying to sort it all out.

Barack Obama as "The Grinch" (Photoshop)

The man who stole Christmas...for many.

Newt Gingrich Tells the Truth About the So-Called "Palestinians"

In last night's debate, Newt Gingrich stated that the "Palestinians" are "an invented people," that they have no history or tradition.  He also stated that the "peace process" in the Middle East is a farce.

He was right on both counts.

The "Palestinians" are Muslims whose religion commands them to hate and kill Jews; their bigotry is ordained by their false prophet, Muhammad, and his ventriloquist dummy, Allah (or is it the other way around?).  Seems Muhammad was annoyed when the Jews refused to believe the ventriloquist dummy's insistence that Muhammad was the new prophet to whom obeisance was due.  Muhammad then closed his act by having the dummy shout "Kill Jews wherever you find them!"  The ancient Bedouins, believed the dummy was real, since ventriloquism was still pretty new in the 7th century.  In any case, they still follow his dictates to this day.

Because of this, the "Palestinians" have only one goal, and that is the destruction of the State of Israel and the removal of all Jews from the area (preferably through mass murder).  Any negotiations with these vermin will produce nothing of value.  They see the negotiations and the "peace process" as mere stratagems, pretenses for obtaining their real goal, the death of Israel.  There is no possibility that the negotiations can ever lead anywhere, or can ever produce peace in the Middle East.  They are a complete waste of time, except to provide yet another photo op and sound bite for American presidents in search of "legacies" or re-election.

Gingrich's strong support of Israel expiates many of his sins.  I will vote for this man.

Disgusting: Iran's Capture of a High-Tech Drone

I am so disgusted with Obama.  One of our high-tech, stealth drones was somehow captured by Iran, apparently in one piece and good working order.  Obama could have either sent in commandos to retrieve the drone, or could have had them destroy it to keep it out of enemy hands.  But he did nothing.

Iran is expected to sell the drone to Russia or China so they can reverse engineer the drone and one of our strategic advantages will be lost to our potential enemies.

What I want to know is this:  why aren't such devices equipped with a self-destruct charge that could be triggered remotely?  Then we could destroy captured drones without having to put our commandos in harm's way.

"Five Feet of Fury" Has a Newly Tweaked Blog Banner

I often tweak photos in Photoshop just to learn some new tricks and techniques.  A week or so ago, I noticed that Kathy Shaidle's blog banner didn't look quite right.  The chrome-like lettering on the car grille didn't have the right perspective.  It should appear to conform to the angle of the grille and appeared to be just hanging there.  So I fixed it, using a better and bolder font and sent her my suggested correction.  She finally swapped it out for the old one and now it looks better.

See for yourself:  Original on top, my amended version on the bottom:

The Republican Debate in Des Moines, Iowa

Last night I watched the Republican debate in Des Moines, Iowa.  It was only the second time I watched one of these debates.  This was the 12th debate.  It was eye-opening in many ways.

Here are my impressions:
1.  Newt Gingrich is a powerful debater and speaker and would destroy Obama in any debate.  He looked and sounded very presidential.  This guy could dispute the law of gravity and make a compelling case for it.  He did a good job of explaining his prior involvement in controversial issues.  His belief in man-made global warming is of continuing concern to me, but of the bunch, I would give him the highest marks.   I like him better than Romney.  His credibility with me:  up a lot.

2.  Mitt Romney is also a good speaker and debater and justified Massachusetts' socialized health care experiment as within the purview of the 10th Amendment, i.e. powers retained by the states.  On this he is absolutely correct.  Socialized medicine is a bad idea, but if any state wants to enact bad ideas (like this and gay marriage), they have a Constitutional right to do so. (The federal government, he stressed, has no Constitutional right to impose socialized health care on the states.  Right again.)  Further, the people of Massachusetts wanted socialized medicine by a margin of 3 to 1.  Romney had little choice or power to resist the popular will.  His credibility with me:  up somewhat.

3.  Rick Perry wasn't scintillating, but showed none of the mental confusion described for prior debates.  He seemed reasonably presidential, but did not excite me with the possibilities.  My impression of him:  up very slightly, but based only on the fact that he didn't fall on his face.

4.  Rick Santorum didn't say much that I remember.  He said his venture into politics was inspired by listening to tapes of Newt Gingrich speeches.  He would make a good VP pick.  His credibility with me is about the same as before the debate:  a good guy, but far from convincing that he is ready for the top spot.

5.  Ron Paul continues to be the kindly grandfather of the Republican Party; you love him even though you think he's getting a bit senile or going batty in his senior years.  He continued to insist that the USA withdraw from the world and stop being "the world's policeman."  He is partially right.  We had no business in Libya and our "nation building" in Iraq and Afghanistan was a fool's errand.  No more of that expensive foolishness. His credibility with me is unchanged, and I still don't want him to be the Republican candidate.

6.  Michele Bachmann was a disappointment.  She relied on cheap pot-shots, slogans and sound bites to argue that she is the only "consistent conservative" and therefore worthy of the top spot.   She made the debate into a struggle for "one upmanship," did not show any real insight into the major issues.  Her credibility with me is down.

Based on this one debate, I would say the ticket should be Newt Gingrich/Rick Santorum as the president/vice president ticket for 2012.

And if that doesn't work, vote "anyone but Obama" and you won't go far wrong.

Did Hollywood Shooter Shout "Alihu Akbar"? Did Lincoln Free the Slaves?

Self-delusion takes many forms, and Americans are hardly immune to replacing reality with myths and fantasies.

Yesterday, some schmuck in Hollywood walked down the street firing random shots from a handgun, wounding one person.  The police arrived on the scene and promptly shot him dead.  (Thank God for the police, who always man the skirmish line between civilization and chaos.)

Now some people are saying the 26 year old man, one Tyler Brehm, was shouting the Muslim war cry "Alihu Akbar" as he fired the shots.  If true, none of the mainstream media are reporting this aspect of the incident.  We have all noted how the MSM filters the news, deliberately omitting facts that could have a bearing on public opinion and the safety of the American people.  Never mentioning the Muslim connection to crimes is at the top of their list.  Many reports still refuse to mention Major Nidal Hassan's radical Muslim ties in the Fort Hood shooting and massacre.  They refer to it as "workplace violence" instead of what it was, Islamic violence based on religious beliefs in jihad.  It was Hassan's belief in Islam that compelled him to commit mass murder.

I don't know if Tyler Brehm was a Muslim or not.  He could very well have been nuts, acting out a scenario he learned from somewhere (probably not the MSM).   However, this latest incident proves that many Americans have an irrational belief in reality-alteration:  if you refuse to admit unpleasant truths, well then they just aren't true after all.  Islam isn't violent unless we SAY Islam is violent, external reality notwithstanding.

Conservatives, as a whole, aren't any better than liberals in this regard.  This was made clear this week when Zo of Zo-Nation, of Pajamas Media, called for the permanent furling of the Confederate flag.  Such foolish comments always set off a round of nasty debates on the Civil War:  who was right?  What was the reason for the war?  The short and sweet answer is that the South was right and the North completely, irrefutably and indelibly wrong.

Many conservatives continue to insist that Abraham Lincoln was the second coming, a great prophet of racial equality, human rights and enlightenment, who had no choice but to fight the Civil War in order to free the slaves, because he was just so darned moral and righteous.  He wasn't.  What he was, was a ruthless politician who hated blacks and loved high taxes and a strong central government.  His rule was a reign of terror.  The mass death and destruction didn't bother him.  He was concerned with the larger questions, like, "Let the South secede?  Who will pay my tariff?"

Lincoln is a historic fraud whose statue in Washington D.C. should be jackhammered into rubble and thrown into the Potomac.  He was the antithesis of everything that conservatives are supposed to believe in, and there's the rub.  We love limited government, the rule of law and the Constitution, yet we worship a man who was the exact opposite of our ideal.

Lately I have been arguing with "conservatives" over at YouTube over Zo's unfortunate claim that it is "time to furl the Confederate flag."  Needless to say, I weighed in, dispelling the Northern myth with facts, only to receive in return some rather vicious, insulting and hateful responses.  "Conservatives," like liberals, get mightily pissed when their shining myths are replaced with the cold and sober truth.  Will that make me shut up?  Not on your life.

Facts About the U.S.S. Arizona and the Attack on Pearl Harbor -- Inside the Wreck (Facts, Photos, Videos)

The Arizona Underway

I saw an interesting documentary on the History Channel last night.  It was about the days following December 7, 1941; what FDR thought and did, how he dealt with Congress, how he wrote his simple but inspiring speech delivered to the American people a few days later.

Many ships were damaged or sunk during the Japanese air raid, but only the Arizona and the Utah were put permanently out of action.  The wrecks of both remain sunken at Pearl Harbor.

The Arizona was launched in 1915 and commissioned in 1916, though she saw no action during the First World War.  Between the wars she was used mainly for training and was berthed in California. During the 1930s, the ship was modernized.  In April 1940 the ship was ordered to Hawaii to act as a deterrent for Japanese aggression, a plan which regrettably failed.

During the Japanese attack of December 7, 1941, the Arizona was sunk by a Japanese bomb that penetrated the forward deck, possibly through an open hatch.  The bomb ignited ammunition magazines in the forward deck, causing a huge explosion that rapidly sunk the ship, killing 1,177 officers and sailors.  Due to the dangers of recovering bodies from the ship, the dead were left within and the Arizona became their tomb.

The USS Arizona After Modernization
in 1935

The mangled superstructure of the ship towered above the surface of the water for many months, until it was removed for spare parts and salvage.  In 1962, the Arizona Memorial was built over the Arizona's sunken hull in Pearl Harbor, with a marble wall with the names of the Arizona dead inscribed thereon.  I have been to that wall and it is a touching and sobering sight.

No one is allowed to dive on the Arizona except those authorized by the U.S. Navy or U.S. Park Service.  No one is allowed to retrieve artifacts from the wreck, as it is an official military grave.  The Park Service has filmed inside the wreck to learn how to preserve and protect the integrity of the site.  Below is a video taken of scenes inside the wreck.  It shows a telephone on a desk, desks with lamps, a closet with hangers and Navy pants hanging from one; a bathroom with a cup on a sink with a tube of toothpaste in it.  Other divers have reported seeing other artifacts on the deck: a cooking pot, a desk fan, bottles of aftershave, a medicine case containing a razor, disposable blades, and a shot glass.  In one film (see list below) I saw a Coca Cola bottle with the top broken off.

Strange to see all the detritus of human life as it was in 1941, suggestive of the lives so suddenly taken.




Other photos worth your time:
Raw footage of another dive to the deck of the Arizona, showing artifacts on the deck.
US Military History Files - Many Pearl Harbor photos rarely seen by the public.
The Memorial Wall in the Arizona Memorial.
Another Photo of the Memorial Wall.
History of the USS Arizona
Photo of wrecked Arizona (after all fires extinguished), its superstructure extending from surface of the water
A series of photos of December 7, 1941, including battleship row and Japanese planes

70 Years After Pearl Harbor (Rare Color Video of the Attack)

 

Seventy years have passed since the Japanese military attacked Pearl Harbor in Hawaii.  December 7, 1941 was, as President Roosevelt described it, a date that will live in infamy. 

Seventy years.  A lifetime ago. The ship still sits on the bottom of the channel there, sunk by Japanese bombs all those years ago.  The bones of most of its dead are still inside the ship. I recently saw a television show that showed a submersible robot sent into the wreck to film inside the ship.  There was a closet with its door open, and inside hung three or four Navy officer's jackets, still on their hangers.  They looked imminently wearable.  Strange that they had survived the conflagration and seven decades under water. God bless the men and women who died in the attack, both military and civilian.  May we never forget.