Two excellent reads to start your day *UPDATED*

GM’s Place discusses the way in which the Obama Administration is using a splitting technique that’s pretty classic for patients with Borderline Personality Disorders.

Chicago Boyz looks at the way that, counterintuitively for those who aren’t paying attention, liberal orders suddenly collapse, turning authoritarian regimes when they fail to fulfill basic citizen needs.  (Hat tip:  Ymarsakar)

UPDATE:  Make that three excellent reads by adding Conrad Black’s article destroying liberal mythology about late 20th Century presidents.

UPDATE II:  Can’t resist a fourth, which is a rundown of Obama’s ever lengthening, and aggressively acted upon, enemies list — as if we need a reminder that he is a thin-skinned man who knows how to carry a grudge.

UPDATE III:  Let’s go for five:  Charles Johnson may have started a war, but Robert Spencer isn’t taking it lying down.

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

  1. Charles Martel says

    Not related at all, but still an excellent read is the news on Drudge that the San Francisco Chronicle, the West Coast’s proudest leftist echo chamber, lost 25.8 percent of its circulation from April through September of this year. At just under 252,000 current circulation, the Chron trails the major dailies in Cleveland and Seattle, two metro areas that are each smaller than the Bay Area by at least 3 million people.

    Only four years ago, the Chron’s daily circulation was 392,000. At its peak in 1990, the paper sold 566,000 copies daily.

    Craigslist killed the Chron’s class ad base, while the paper’s predictable sandbox leftist take on culture and politics alienated scores of thousands of readers—me among them. (My wife subscribes to the Sunday paper and our neighbor drops off weekday issues a day or two after the fact.)

    You can count on one hand the number of good writers and columnists left at the Chron. The rest are either tired old whores who crank out the same swill over and over (Quick, Charles, how long before Carla Marinucci tells us what a swell prez Obama is?) or else young ethnics that were hired because they are cheap—salary-wise and as a source of grace for their ostentatiously diversity-embracing white managers.

    It’s obvious the end is near. I will miss Dear Abby, Zits, Luanne, the food section and the little Sunday comic where you have to spot the six things that are different in two otherwise identical panels.

  2. says

    As far as I’m concerned, Charles, the paper died when Herb Caen died. He was a somewhat soggy old gossip in the end, but he still wrote the best column the paper had, if only to get a feeling for the old San Francisco. I started reading Herb Caen back in 1970, when I was only 9, and he still colors my visions of the San Francisco of my childhood.

    As for Dear Abby, I still remembering a column (also from when I was 9, when I started reading the paper), in which the writer described an old lady getting up, cleaning her house, cooking food, and waiting all day for the family that never visited. For whatever reason, that story shook me to the core, so that I not only cried when I read it, I humiliated myself during 4th grade show-and-tell when I tried to read the same letter out loud to my classmates.

  3. SADIE says

    Good reads – all of them Book.

    For some odd reason, I read from the bottom up starting with Spencer, who very clearly explained Koran and the Hadith.

    If I absorbed the interview correctly, the Koran is scatological, while interpreting people, events, to suit the intentions of Mohamed. The Hadith is companion reading that justifies what was written in the Koran.

    Summary:
    One lies and the other swears to it. All of which can be applied to the links above it, rounding it all off with Borderline Personality Disorders, which brought me full circle and back to Spencer’s comments about Charles Johnson.

  4. says

    I just read Denise Jackson’s book concerning her marriage to Alan Jackson, a somewhat famous country singer of the last decade.

    It’s a very interesting insight into Christianity and its effects on people.

    I’ve often said that I don’t care what you believe in, so long as you believe. But why is belief so powerful or useful, when we know that terrorists have the same strength of belief, just in other things? Because nothing can be accomplished without that belief. If you believe in God, nothing can be accomplished without sinking roots into the Bible, the Word of God, and the body of Jesus Christ, which includes his removal of human sin, once and forever. If someone believes in God, but he makes all kinds of mistakes and does harm unto others, it may be time for the rest of us to say that his God isn’t our God, if he truly believes in his God.

    If you have belief, you have a chance for redemption and salvation. Christians believe that belief in Jesus Christ gives people guaranteed current and future lives. There’s some paradoxes present in the actual philosophy, but I can’t argue with the results on the actual people. And, after all, nature is full of paradoxes. Why should it matter if someone believes the supernatural as well, and the supernatural creates a paradox in the natural world? All that matters is objective reality, as a criteria. Does this religion actually promote the Good in people’s lives, helps people become stronger through tragedy and hate, or does it nurture hatred and promote bitterness, strife, and violence? I don’t have to judge the TRUTH of a religion’s dogma or Revealed Texts, to be able to see the actual effect on people. That’s the advantage of Free Will.

    Of course, what about the people with no belief in anything that they would kill or die for? What about the people who won’t even put work into their beliefs for fear of the cost? Well, the Left will need the energy and power of others, like a vampire. They subsist on your blood and vitality, because they themselves are hollow. They are the Hollow Men and Women. They exist only as a leech on our body and our tax base.

    We come eventually to Jesse Ventura, Christopher Hitchins, and the various other Born Again Atheists. Ventura said that religion is for weak people. That if you need religion as a crutch, then it should be fine for you. This rests upon the doctrine that there are strong and weak people in specific categories. But my study of humanity shows that this is untrue. We are all vulnerable, many to the same things. One person is as weak to a bullet’s trajectory as another, even if one person has better body armor, body guards, a financial position to support security, or social status to shield against popular hatred. Are so called strong people supermen? Are they immune to mortality and mistakes? Are only ‘weak’ people supposed to be mortal and fallible? You see, the construct fails on its face. If weak people need religion, then all of us need religion, for we are all at one time or another weak.

    Let’s cover Christopher H. He said that God cannot exist because God would have to be a horrible entity to allow so much suffering in the world. As if suffering needed an active component. Even in the natural world, atoms and molecules are shredded, things die and are exterminated for being weak. If you eliminate God, do you get utopia? No, you get savagery and merciless competition, which exterminates the weak. Natural evolution doesn’tm love the weak, btw. So what do you want God to do, change the physical processes of the world so that there is utopia and an existence free of pain? Hey, pain serves a useful purpose because in the real world, there’s real stuff happening. And real stuff is equal parts failure and success, pain and pleasure, death and life. Can’t have one without the other. If there is a constant in the universe, it would take a similar form. Can’t have something for nothing.

    I’m sure when Hitchins eliminates God from existence, no Nova or Supernova will happen to a star that has 2 planets full of sentient life on the verge of space exploration…. yeah, sure. Maybe he thinks he can do a better job as God. Which is consistent with his liberal policies. Certainly he can try, but his limitations most definitely will ensure his failure.

  5. says

    Apropos of the Chicago piece, recognize that the Republican reaction to the Republican higher echelon elite leadership is the same. They can’t performing any where near expectations…. so the NATION VOTES FOR OBAMA. Who will perform to expectations, which are expectations of totalitarian big government, anti-liberty, and statist protection/control.

    When freedom fails to provide legitimacy through concrete and publicly RECOGNIZED successes, people will try for ‘another solution’. It’s a coin toss whether that ‘other solution’ will become the Final Solution or not. But the thing is, the coin toss never stops. As failure meets failure, as manufactured crisis creates manufactured solutions, the coin gets tossed again and again. It doesn’t stop. And just as with Russian roulette, eventually you’ll hit it on the dime, the knife edge where things are balanced between death and life, victory and defeat.

  6. suek says

    >>Christians believe that belief in Jesus Christ gives people guaranteed current and future lives.>>

    That’s not exactly a universally correct statement, Y.

    For your example, it will suffice, but if that’s your complete understanding of all Christian faiths, you need some instruction!

  7. says

    In addition to the Internet competition, the big papers are probably being impacted by the free newspapers (almost universally run by hippie sorts and slanted way to the left) which exist in every city and cover local entertainment, etc.

  8. says

    Suek, I realize I am skipping over much of the details and the theology. I am certain there are those better able to describe the process of personal relationships between God and those on earth.

  9. says

    Kay Graham’s version of what her late husband called the “rough first draft of history” became liberal holy writ. It was genuflected to like the Infant of Prague, and defended with the tenacity of the garrison of the Alamo. The conservative talk-show personalities who have grown like dandelions in opposition to this orchestrated groupthink, and the media controlled by Rupert Murdoch (Fox and the Wall Street Journal), are reviled as rabble-rousing muckrakers.

    I think it is important to deconstruct the Left’s lies about the past. Only then can we build a truer and better future. The Left were able to deconstruct the true narrative of Tet, America, and our historic actions, to be replaced by manufactured lies. Are we going to say ‘no, we won’t even try to deconstruct their lies and replace it with truth’?

    How pathetic would that be for this still greatest nation on earth.

Leave a Reply