Can it happen here? *UPDATED*

In an earlier post, I directed your attention to the incredibly disturbing footage of Pakistani village authorities brutally whipping a teenage girl before a throng of men, because she violated Sharia norms by being seen in public with her father in law.  The footage is disturbing on many levels, not the least of which is the fact that the whole spectacle has a pornographic smell to it, one that makes clear how much of Sharia law is driven by Muslims’ deep fear of female sexuality — but that’s a rumination for another day.

What I want to talk about is whether this could ever happen here.  Certainly Muslims want it to happen here.  Their oft stated goal is a Sharia-compliant world, with every nation having as its one and only law Sharia law.  Given this goal, and given the Islamists’ willingness to steal planes and acquire bombs and lust after anthrax, it’s more than just a hypothetical possibility.

But I don’t think we need to worry right now about Sharia appearing in the West courtesy of a mushroom shaped cloud or virulent bacteria.  The more immediate concern is the fact that, through political correctness, the Western world is already reading itself to deal with creeping sharia law.

Leading the way, as always, is England, which is allowing sharia courts, even though there is every indication that this will trap Muslim women in a British sharia hell; routinely banning pigs from public discourse (Oh Piglet, Piglet, wherefore art though Piglet?); slavishly redesigning innocuous packaging to avoid ruffling Muslim sensibilities (ice cream, anybody?); protecting men from being charged with dangerous traffic violations so they can speed from one wife to another; etc.  The list is endless.

In America, we periodically hear stories about accommodations for Muslims who don’t want to drive people carrying alcohol (as if it could leap out of the bottle spontaneously and attack the driver); about Muslims refusing to share public university prayer spaces; about Muslims demanding special foot baths at public universities (and weren’t those high tech “required” foot baths a popular item in the vast Saudi Arabian desert in the 7th Century); or about Muslim women insisting that their driver’s license show nothing more than their eyes, rather than conceding that, if they want to practice the extreme Islamic tradition of a hijab, maybe driving is not an option.

On the whole, we in America are a solicitous people and, with our pluralist religious history, we’re willing to make reasonable accommodations.  Generally, we like it that people are able to live religious lives — as long as they don’t impinge on our own lives.  What’s different about the Muslim demands is the impingement that goes with them — you may not drive in our publicly licensed taxis unless you change your behavior; you may not worship in this public space unless you worship our way; you must abandon the commonly accepted public safety feature of a photo ID card so our women can be anonymous; and so on and so forth.

Each of these Islamic incursions on the public space has resulted in a hoo-ha (otherwise we wouldn’t know about them), and most, when they become known, have been reversed.  The fact remains, however, that there cumulative effect from these sharia attacks on our culture that is akin to water dripping on rock.  One drop has no effect.  Two drops, no effect.  A thousand drops, no effect.  But you get enough drops and the shape of the rock — in this case, the shape of the American body social and politic — begins to change and to conform to the water’s ceaseless demands.

I have an Irish friend who firmly believes that America’s deep rooted sense of liberty cannot be so easily drip-dropped away, whether the drops fall from the Sharia cadre or from the statists in the Obama administration.  He believes that a deep, long-lived history focused on individualism and independence will rebel.  I wonder.

I’d like to think that, if I were that teenage girl about to get flogged, I’d fight and fight and fight.  I’d be hurt anyway, but at least I wouldn’t just yield to barbarity.  But even if I fought, even if I waved the flag of independence, and humanism, and freedom, would it matter if everyone stood around me and stared, as those men in the crowd watching the beating stand and stare.  I’d be willing to bet that, in that crowd, many were true believers, and many were men whose stomachs churned at the horror, but who said nothing, because they were trained to accept. Whatever their reason, they stood and they stared.

In this regard, it’s worth noting that, when Hitler came to power in 1933, he did so with just barely more than 50% of the popular vote.  There was never a time when the majority of Germans were members of the Nazi party.  For most Germans, right through the end of the War, their crime wasn’t active complicity with Nazi atrocities, it was passive complicity.  From a mixture of fear and brain washing, they just went along.

As I said, my Irish friend thinks Americans won’t just go along.  But when I look at what passes for education in our public schools, I’m very worried that we’re raising a generation that will be so compliant and so lacking in a non-relativistic sense of right and wrong that, first, they’ll allow creeping sharia to become dominant sharia (so un-PC to object) and, second, once it’s dominant they, through a mixture of fear and braining washing, will just go along.  And they too will stand their silently and watch when one of their school mates is flogged bloody or hanged or decapitated for having violated sharia norms.

The 2010 election matters.  It matters not just because I don’t like Obama’s economic and social policies.  It also matters because it is the last election in which Americans will have a chance to renew their sense of individualism and liberalism.  You see, while Obama thinks he’s paving the way for a wonderful socialist state, I think he’s unwittingly grooming the population to be the passive recipients of law laid down by true believers who make Obama and his progressives look like impotent little children.

UPDATE:  I was spurred to write the above post because of the video I watched showing the girl getting beaten.  Turns out, though, that creeping sharia is on other people’s minds — not how we might respond to the more extreme demands, but how we are responding to the “reasonable” demands.

Be Sociable, Share!


  1. Danny Lemieux says

    Before this election, Book, I would have unequivocally said that there is no way that Americans would passively accept the barbarism that is militant Islam and its attendant sharia law.

    However now, five months later, I have to accept that there is a very large contingent of Americans, perhaps even a majority, who are ready for serfdom and life in the Liberal/Left hive. They are sheep and they will acquiesce and submit in their own minds, no matter what their mouths utter today.

    During the Nazi occupation of France, it was said that 25% actively resisted, 25% collaborated and 50% just went along…whatever. I don’t think that we are any different. Liberals think like children. Here’s an example: a good friend of mine whose wife is very liberal told me that his wife refuses to confront or listen to bad news. She just wants to think happy thoughts and listen to happy news all the time. If the facts don’t conform to that happy vision, she cuts off the information flow and stops listening. Her response to 9/ll? She went to bed and stayed under the covers. Unfortunately, I think she represents a large faction of the Liberal/Left voter basis today.

    However, I have to take heart in the many, many Americans who are still willing to stand for what is right and good. Just look at the news about our military and ponder what kind of country gave birth to such magnificent warriors. It ain’t over yet…not by a long shot!

  2. Charles Martel says

    When I was a young radical in the 1960s, I used to hang out with a law student and discuss what the future would bring.

    One night I asked him where he thought things were going and why he was involved in “the Movement.” He said that he saw an eventual revolution that would overthrow the U.S. government.

    I realize when he said it that I had reached a line that I would not cross over. I remember thinking, “I don’t like what the government is doing in Vietnam, but it certainly is not an evil or oppressive government. Why would I overthrow it?”

    Now, 40 years later, I realize that I have been thinking lately that it may reach the point where we will have to have a third revolution (I think the Civil War was the second) to overthrow an increasingly imperious, freedom-hating government. Such a revolution will probably take the form of a seond civil war. I can see states like Texas, Utah and Idaho telling the federal government to bugger off and backing that demand with men and arms. I can see hugh swaths of the military coming over to the rebel side.

    This time, I think the rebels will succeed. If it comes down to that terrible turn of events, I will pray that they do.

  3. says

    Don’t forget Canada, which has been both toying with Sharia law and supporting Muslim efforts to suppress speech (their activities in Canada were a precursor to the recent UN policy making blasphemy a global crime). For an excellent summary of this, check out the recent book by free speech hero Ezra Levant, Shakedown.

    Also, to pimp myself, I regularly track the incursion of Sharia onto civilized countries and especially Canada on my blog. Also, for those concerned about this, PJTV has a daily 5-minute show on their site covering Sharia news of the day.

    From my perspective there is no greater danger to civilization than Sharia law, which already has the distinction of having destroyed multiple modern societies within recent memory.

  4. Mike Devx says

    Many of the examples of creeping Sharia in America occur in parts of Minnesota and in Dearborn, Michigan, where Muslims have greater numbers and greater influence at the ballot box – and greater influence, therefore, in politics.

    This deplorable situation is “advanced” in Great Britain and Sweden, where the politicians are much further along in allying themselves with Muslim voters. The Statists and multiculturalists also hold far greater control there than here, which makes the path of creeping Sharia much easier.

    I bring up the multiculturalists for a reason. Assimilation used to be an overwhelming cultural norm in the USA. It no longer is. The immigrant himself or herself – if above a certain age – could survive within an ethnic ghetto even here in America, but by the next generation, Americanization was always well under way.

    Creeping Sharia will definitely occur here – until something like the beating we see in this video happens and is captured. At that point the American people will face a decision on creeping Sharia, and whether to continue to allow communities to be ruled by it.

    It will be an amazing fight. There will be plenty of secular liberals, especially ivory-tower types, engaging on the Sharia side! As amazed as we are that these secular liberals take the side of a militant theocracy – anathema to them when it is Christian in nature! – as amazed as we are that they are so accommodating to its vicious, monstrous, bitter Islamic form – you ain’t seen nothing yet.

  5. suek says

    >>As amazed as we are that these secular liberals take the side of a militant theocracy – anathema to them when it is Christian in nature! – as amazed as we are that they are so accommodating to its vicious, monstrous, bitter Islamic form – you ain’t seen nothing yet.>>

    Well duh. As long as they’re “safe”, they’ll go along with anything. Sharia doesn’t tolerate much disagreement. Disagree and lose everything – maybe even your life. So of course they’ll go along. They believe in nothing, so it’s no big deal to believe in anything – especially if there’s a penalty to be paid for not believing.

  6. says

    A couple of weeks a colleague at work explained to me that when the right-wing types needed a new enemy after the cold war was over, they settled on Islam, but this was a mistake since there’s no plausible threat from Islam or Islamic countries.

    I was momentarily stunned, then instead of going rabid (which I’m all too likely to do), I mentioned that I was concerned about the incursion of Sharia law in Canada. My colleague, of course, had never heard of this.

    I remain amazed at how I’m surrounded extremely intelligent, well-read, well-educated people who have steadfast opinions about foreign policy, and yet don’t have the slightest concept what’s going on the in the world.

    Christopher Hitchens (who goes rabid in a much more entertaining manner than I) was being interviewed at a local venue and someone in the audience only then realized he was pro-Iraq invasion, and challenged him on the lack of connection between 9/11 and Iraq.

    Hitchens sighed, spit out several historical facts, then leaned forward and said (paraphrasing), “You know this stuff, right? You do know SOMETHING about what’s happening in the world, right? I’m one of the only reporters who has actually been to every axis of evil in recent times. Do YOU know any history of these areas?”

    He was clearly frustrated not so much over disagreeing (he loves an argument), but because he couldn’t actually debate people who had so little knowledge that there was no basis of discussion.

    Also, in that same talk, when a guy started a question with, “Since we now know that 9/11 was an inside job…”, Hitchens cut him off and yelled, “Now we know where the f*ckwits in the audience are sitting!”

    Man, Hitchens is my personal hero.

  7. Tonestaple says

    Back to the first paragraph, yes, that was definitely pornographic. If it had been pure punishment, striking against (their warped notions of) evil, it would have taken half as much time. The piece of shite wielding the whip was definitely enjoying himself and if the film had not been so grainy, I think we would have seen some evidence in his dhoti.

    This is why I always have second thoughts about torture. It’s way too tempting to the wielder of so much power to start enjoying it and that way, literally, lies madness.

    People here don’t even want to know anything about Islam. They think it’s a religion and therefore emminently ignorable instead of understanding it’s a complete way of life, and a hideous one at that. This city is wall-to-wall ostrich and I have no idea what to do about it.

  8. Charles Martel says

    They say ostrich tastes remarkably like beef and is low in fat, to boot.

    Maybe we should start eating “progressives.”

    “Dear, could you pass me a slice of that holier-than-thou in the NYT papillote?”

  9. says

    Were I a betting man, I would bet that is has already happened in the U.S. The real question is: could it become legal (de jure or de facto) here.

    I do not know, but I would not be astounded to find that it has already happened and been ignored by the local police or district attorney.

    I hope I’m wrong.

    Charles, you have some interesting speculation.

  10. Mike Devx says

    Tonestaple #9:
    >> This city is wall-to-wall ostrich

    Now that’s a new phrase to me, and a welcome one! Neat turn of phrase!

    Interesting and true speculations, in general, on the effects of torture on the torturers. “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely”, and so on. But I think the same would be true, in general, on the effects of killing on killers, as it relates to soldiering. But in the case of our military, I don’t think either applies. Part of the focus on professionalism in our military is on doing what you do as a job, a profession. That removes the worse effects you describe.

    When the professionalism breaks down, especially towards the top, within leadership – as in at Abu Ghraib – what you describe becomes more likely.

  11. Quisp says

    “Dear, could you pass me a slice of that holier-than-thou in the NYT papillote?”

    Great, now I’m going to spend half the afternoon looking for my copy of Sweeney Todd (the George Hearn version).

    Does anyone know if the Dallas police are still looking for the father who shot those beautiful girls in his taxi for talking to boys?

    I’m thinking about the brou-ha-ha in VA over a license plate that said “Choose Life” and wondering how the people who were incensed over such an “affront to the rights of women” could ever go along to get along if it involves covering their heads (legs, arms, pierced belly buttons, etc). I suspect that’s far more likely to be the tipping point in their unrequited tolerance than the public flogging of a Muslim teen.

  12. SADIE says

    Here’s an example: a good friend of mine whose wife is very liberal told me that his wife refuses to confront or listen to bad news.
    She just wants to think happy thoughts and listen to happy news all the time. If the facts don’t conform to that happy vision, she cuts off the information flow and stops listening. Her response to 9/ll? She went to bed and stayed under the covers.

    Danny’s example reminds me of the 1960’s tag, “Drop Acid – Drop Out”

    I could never understand the human condition that would send someone under the sheets, head in the sand, thumb up their kazoo, fingers in ears yelling. All I see is the three monkeys, except for the fact even if you refuse to see the evil, hear the evil, you still are, by proxy, are doing evil, by doing nothing. She is the American example of those that watched the young woman being held down and beaten by the Taliban.

    I guess she figures if she can still hide under the sheets rather than being forced to wear one with a veil – she’s fine.

    #8 – I am not surprised at the total lack of knowledge of those asking inane questions, what surprised me is the fact that ostriches could talk and lay eggs at the same time.

  13. suek says

    >>I guess she figures if she can still hide under the sheets rather than being forced to wear one with a veil – she’s fine.>>

    Of course she’s fine. After all, a burka is just a sheet in the perpendicular position…!

  14. Mike Devx says

    Ronald #8:
    >> a colleague at work explained to me that when the right-wing types needed a new enemy after the cold war was over, they settled on Islam, but this was a mistake since there’s no plausible threat from Islam or Islamic countries.

    I didn’t have anything to add to Ronald’s excellent, thorough post. But then I thought…

    I wonder what that colleague would say about the Iranian takeover of our embassy during Carter’s feckless, cowardly presidency? That occurred in November of 1979, and lasted until Reagan moved on into the Oval Office.

    The Cold War ended in 1991. The embassy takeover was in 1979. Yep… we evil, manipulative right-wingers started it! And all those hostage situations… One example: the Achille Lauro boat hijacking in 1985, where wheelchair-bound American passenger Leon Klinghoffer was murdered and his body thrown overboard. Yep… that’s us again!

    (And just how bad does the Shah of Iran look now, Jimmy Feckless No-Spine Carter? I’m just askin’, ya know? You creep.)

    >> Man, Hitchens is my personal hero

    I admire his steadfast resolve against jihadist Islamofascism and other forms of dictatorship. I wish there was anything else in his positions I could admire; I haven’t found them yet.

  15. suek says

    >>Yep… we evil, manipulative right-wingers started it!>>

    And of course, you could remind him of the Marine battle hymn… “From the halls of Montezuma” (that would be the coast landing to invade Mexico City that ended the Mexican-American war…the one where we bought the southwest from Mexico) “To the shores of Tripoli” which refers to our war with the Barbary Pirates – muslims who attacked passing ships and took the crew and passengers prisoners, to either ransom or sell as slaves. That was in Jefferson’s presidency, I believe. Hard to blame _that_ one on us “right wingers”…!

  16. Charles Martel says

    So, that would actually put her in a burkendicular position (giggle).

    Best worst pun I’ve seen in a long time. So here’s a =GROAN= out to SADIE.

  17. suek says

    Getting back to the original post…

    I hadn’t read this particular article earlier, though I’d seen the article Book mentioned. This article is interesting though, because of this:
    “The footage is disturbing on many levels, not the least of which is the fact that the whole spectacle has a pornographic smell to it.” and several of the comments that refer to the possible sadism link. In this particular AP article is this quote:
    “He defended the punishment, although he said it should not have been done in public and should have been carried out by a boy who had not yet reached puberty.”

    “…by a boy who had not yet reached puberty” ? Now _that_ raises a whole new spectrum of questions. Is it meant to minimize the punishment? awareness of muslims of the sadistic possibilities, and an effort to remove the sexual connection? training the young male? The fact that it’s stated that it should be carried out by a boy who had not yet reached puberty indicates to me that they are well aware of the possibilities of a sexual nature to the flogging. That in itself is interesting…

  18. SADIE says

    Short of sending in a psychiatrist to sort out the possibilities, it may be a virgin on virgin beating, providing as you suggested – training the young male.

    They send in the ‘so called’ men to beat the women down the road.

  19. SADIE says

    I received a copy of FITNA some months back. I think it’s a must watch for those still hiding under the sheets, beds and in the closets.

    Let’s hope he’s correct that people are getting fed up in the Netherlands and that it spreads. I honestly don’t know how many horrific stories one has to see and hear to see that the message gets home. I just know that history tells me that there are too many before the human world reacts.

  20. Mike Devx says

    We now see taqiyya in action (many alternative spellings as well, eg takkiya).

    Taqiyya: The deliberate use of lies by Muslims when it effectively advances jihad against the infidel. This is considered an honorable and correct tactic in Islam, when used against the infidel.

    Remember the video of the seventeen year-old teenager that was whipped by a Taliban man, while held down by two other Taliban men. While watched by about a hundred other Taliban men, who apparently enjoyed the near-pornographic spectacle, and who heaped verbal abuse on the girl after the beating as she fled into her home. (It seems she was dragged from the house by the men so that the public beating, sexually enjoyed by the men, could begin.

    Remember how after the fourth stroke of the whip, she began to scream.

    Well, the 17-year old girl now claims that the beating never happened.

    I am certain she is refuting the video evidence entirely on her own. The firestorm of controversy and the worldwide revulsion certainly has not caused the oh-so-noble and courageous men to decide, as in all true dictatorships, that the event must become a non-event. It never happened.

    Time to obscure the truth by engaging in deliberate deception against the infidel world. Time for taqqiya, in other words: “To all you hated infidels: this is an infidel plot meant to defame Islam! This event never happened! The video is a fake!” And then the victim is forced to participate in the taqiyya as well.

    Too bad we live in a video age, even in the primitive, backwards, near-retarded areas of the world ruled by such as the Taliban.

    A link to a story in which the girl is forced to declare that “it never happened”:,2933,512785,00.html

    And then there is this tidbit from the weekend, which you can google:
    Federal Minister Senator Azam Khan Swati of the Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam (JUI-F) said on Saturday that the flogging of the 17-year-old girl in Swat was a Jewish conspiracy aimed at destroying peace in Swat and distort the image of those Islamists who sport beards and wear turbans.

    Ah, Yes! What would a day be without a Muslim somewhere blaming the Jews for something?

  21. SADIE says

    Well said, Mike. To add insult to injury, the term of moderate Taliban is now part of the new lexicon. The last sentence sums it up below.

    The spelling of taqiyya is easily cleared up.. can you spell L I A R.

    KABUL, March 9 (Reuters) – U.S. President Barack Obama’s proposal to reach out to moderate Taliban will fail to end the Afghan insurgency as it is inflexible Taliban leaders who are orchestrating the war, not moderates, analysts said.

    Obama, in an interview with the New York Times newspaper published on its website on Saturday, expressed an openness to adapting tactics in Afghanistan that had been used in Iraq to reach out to moderate elements there.

    Afghan President Hamid Karzai welcomed Obama’s proposal but analysts were doubtful.

    “Obama’s comment resemble a dream more than reality,” said Waheed Mozhdah, an analyst who has written a book on the Taliban.

    “Where are the so-called moderate Taliban? Who are the moderate Taliban?” asked Mozhdah, who was an official in both the Taliban and the Karzai governments.

    Karzai’s pro-Western administration and the growing number of foreign forces in Afghanistan have increasingly come under attack from a resurgent Taliban, with Obama now describing Afghanistan as a top foreign policy priority for his new administration.

    “‘Moderate Taliban’ is like ‘moderate killer’. Is there such a thing?”, asked writer and analyst Qaseem Akhgar.

  22. Mike Devx says

    Sadie #28:
    >> U.S. President Barack Obama’s proposal to reach out to moderate Taliban will fail to end the Afghan insurgency as it is inflexible Taliban leaders who are orchestrating the war, not moderates, analysts said. >>

    Obama said a lot of things while in Turkey.

    One thing he said: “Let me say this as clearly as I can: The United States is not, and will never be, at war with Islam.”

    Now, that one is rather standard political-speak that I don’t take offense to. It *is* rather grandiose, to say we’ll never be at war with Islam, but OK. Standard political. He could have stopped there.

    But no! This is Obama, remember. He then went on to say: “Islam has contributed much to America.”

    Now this one, I have a problem with. Can anyone identify anything specific that Islam has contributed to America?

    It’s possible to say that Hindu has contributed to America (I suppose). You can point to the Maharishi Mahesh Yogi’s influence on the Beatles, and their subsequent contributions to the avant-garde musical scene. You can point to our use of transcendental meditation in many quarters, as a result of that influence. Much of “eastern mystical influence” among non-Christian influences in our society can be traced to Hindu and Buddhist influences.

    But Islam? If anyone can list contributions to American society or culture, in any way, I’d like to see it.

    Don’t include the Zero. The use of zero was developed in India, and Islam served solely as a conduit. You can include Algebra if you wish. It was developed by the Babylonians, but it is certainly true that while Western civilization was descending into the Dark Ages, Islamic civilizations were extending algebra. But that was 1,200 years ago. America is only 233 to 400 years old, depending on whether you date to 1776 or earlier…

    So for me the question stands. In the last 300 or 400 years, how has Islam contributed to America?

  23. SADIE says

    I just knew someone would make me break out ‘THE LIST’ – can you say 6. Of course, the use of ‘0’ goes to fishy lips arafat (that name always gets lower case) which means the list drops to 5. I have mixed feelings about Sadat taking it to a 4.5. I read and enjoyed Mahfooz but I can’t qualify his writing as a contribution.

    The newer list of contributions include:

    Foot baths
    Falafal stands
    Formation of TSA

    I don’t mean to diminish your well thought out and written response, Mike, with humor. Some days, actually most days, I just don’t have the patience to express myself with anything, other than the obvious.

    Arab/Islamic Nobel Prize Winners
    From a pool of 1.4 BILLION Muslims which are 20% of the world’s population (2 out of every 10 people)


    1988 – Najib Mahfooz


    1978 – Anwar El-Sadat

    1994 – Yasser Arafat

    2003 – Shirin Ebadi


    1999 – Ahmed Zewail


    Abdus Salam

  24. Charles Martel says

    Islam has contributed the following to America:

    —A new consciousness about the impending epidemic of wife beating and daughter killing.

    —A new consciousness about the impending epidemic of toppling badly built walls (those damned Jew masons!) on homosexuals.

    —A new consciousness about how important it is to keep female temptresses from subverting the proper male order (Ohmiallah, I just saw your ankle, you whore-tart-make-me-a-slobbering-out-of-control-fool you!).

    —A new consciousness about the absolute necessity to wipe your arse with the proper hand.

    —A new consciousness about the need to believe that the Holy Quran holds all we need to know about chemistry, physics and global climate change.

    —A new consciousness about the need to hate Joos.

    —A new consciousness about the need to assault Joos.

    —A new consciousness about the need to kill Joos.

  25. SADIE says

    A Threat to America (The Third Jihad) posted by Bookworm – well worth watching.

    Since I am on east coast time, entirely too late to be creative. Just watched the post above (30 minutes). which doesn’t give the Christians much of a chance either. Of course, the Joos always take top billing on the #hit list but that’s not to say they don’t have plans for Christians. In fact, church burning seems to be quite popular along with the murder of priests. Since they don’t give a damn about who dies for the ’cause’ the continuing abuse and murder of Muslim women and children are on the list as well.

    The real list exists in the film. The real threat is here.
    May their view of the future crumble like a sheet of matzah in the palm of my hand.

    In the spirit of the Passover holiday, can I offer you some ‘bread of affliction’ a/k/a matzah (wink-wink).

  26. suek says

    >>Of course, the Joos always take top billing on the #hit list but that’s not to say they don’t have plans for Christians.>>

    I understand that the goal is expressed as “First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people”.


  1. Obama – What’s His Endgame?…

    Charles Krauthammer thinks President Obama’s endgame is “Leveling“:
    Obama is a leveler. He has come to narrow the divide between rich and poor. For him the ultimate social value is fairness. Imposing it upon the American social order …

  2. Watcher’s Council nominations…

    Heeeerrrrre they are: * The Glittering Eye – Risking It * Mere Rhetoric – New J-Street Poll Is Rigged In Particularly Stupid, Obnoxious Ways * Bookworm Room – Can it happen here? * The Colossus of Rhodey – Just ………

  3. Watcher’s Council Results…

    Well, the results are in on this week’s Watcher’s Council vote. There were some fine pieces submitted, and a couple of fine winners chosen. Council Submissions First place with 2 points! – Bookworm Room – Can it happen here? Second……

  4. Watching the watchers…

    Regular readers know that I am a member of the Watcher’s Council. I’m part of a group of bloggers who submit posts for consideration on a weekly basis and vote on them. Because of Passover I haven’t been keeping up with my obligations regarding the …

Leave a Reply