Conservatives deal with facts and reach conclusions; liberals have conclusions and sell them as facts.
I read yesterday in Power Line that Harvard students are getting advice from faculty about now to “rebel.” John Hinderaker suggests that all these “rebellions” are Kabuki theater with predetermined outcomes. He may well be right. But I thought of another way of challenging what’s going on:
Bush didn’t, Obama wouldn’t, but the next president should: Call into the Oval Office the leaders of Muslim communities throughout America to say, “Because of the First Amendment, the fact that you and the people in your community practice Islam is irrelevant to us in America. Your faith is your business. What is relevant to me as leader of this nation is whether you support America or not. When all of you leave this office, you need to carry a single message to your communities: ‘You are either supportive of America or working to undermine America. If you’re in the latter category, you are on notice here and now that my administration will use every constitutional means available to track you, capture you, prosecute you, and imprison or deport you.’ End of story. Thank you for coming. Goodbye.”
Having got that off my chest, I’m about to engage in a speed round-up, because I’ve got about 40 articles — really good articles — to share with you.
A Cruz convert explains why. The most interesting point is that Trump started with something no other Republican has had since Reagan — vast name recognition.
Slowly catching on to the fact that Trump is the Republican Obama. I’ve been saying from Day 1 that Trump is a white Obama. He promises hope and change by using government power to shape America to his will. And let me say, that is my sole problem with Trump: That he’s all about big government, precisely as Obama is. I find that unacceptable. Jonathan Tobin is another one who’s finally figured out the whole Obama Doppelgänger thing.
Trump is a special interest candidate. And that special interest is Donald Trump.
Is the media sitting on big Trump stories? Ted Cruz thinks that there are some horrible stories to be told about Trump, which wouldn’t surprise me given his sordid personal life and . . . ah . . . colorful business life. Once Trump is the candidate, says Cruz, the media will “suddenly” discover stories that make Trump unelectable. I think Cruz is right because we all know the media, don’t we?
Trump’s enemy list makes me like him. George Soros has given money to 187 different special interest groups that are attacking Trump. (To be honest, a lot of them are attacking Cruz too. Indeed, on Sunday, I heard a New Yorker news hour on NPR during which the speakers agreed that Cruz is the more dangerous of the two leading Republican candidates because he actually believes in the Constitution.) In other words, here’s a list of 187 Soros-funded organizations that try to destroy anything conservative.
Will Trump win the nomination? Scott Elliott, an extremely astute election watcher and a man with a history of accurate election predictions, is not a Trump fan. He’s therefore created the “Stop-Trump-O-Meter,” which tracks the outcomes of state primaries and projects the outcome at the convention. Even if you’re a Trump fan, you’ll like Scott’s meter, because, if you ignore the name, it tells in a clear way where the candidates stand in the Republican primary.
If you destroy the polite people, you create room for the impolite ones. Glenn Reynolds points out that the GOP, RINOS, and the Leftist media establishment did everything possible to destroy the happy, tidy, law-abiding Tea Party. Now they’re horrified that destroying the Tea Party left rage in its place.
USA Today editors question Hillary’s fitness for office. USA Today, in its quest to be “America’s newspaper,” the one read in more hotel lobbies than any other paper, is careful about taking strong partisan stands. That’s why it’s impressive that the editors see Hillary’s penchant for secrecy, and the security-evading steps she took in pursuit of her paranoia, as a serious impediment to the presidency.
I admit it. I can’t keep my eyes off the spectacle playing out at Yale and UMissouri, with side shows now taking place at campuses across America. I’ve been saying since my Berkeley days that American higher education is sick, sick, sick and, in a sad way, I feel vindicated. The rot that I sensed there in the early 1980s is finally working its way out from the center of the fruit, with the whole thing rupturing and spilling out its disgusting toxin. There are innumerable superb articles on the subject, and I’ll link to them below. I just wanted to point to one thing that I haven’t noticed anyone else mention.
When you read the articles about what happened at Yale, you’ll read that the Yale kerfuffle started when the “Department of Intercultural Affairs” (and God alone knows how much that department contributes to Yale’s hefty tuition) got the ball rolling shortly before Thanksgiving when it sent an email to all Yale students warning about the hidden dangers of Halloween costumes. And no, we’re not talking about costumes that (per elementary school lore) come from the undertakers and are soaked in deadly embalming fluid or costumes that make one blend into the darkness so perfectly that they raise exponentially the risk that a car will unknowingly crash into the wearer. Instead, the email warns about the horrors of costumes that — yikes! — might offend someone.
I believe this administrative email deserves to be quoted at some length, not just because it’s painfully, horribly, victim-centrically stupid, but also because of the Miss Nancy tone that I associate with the old Romper Room show from my childhood:
The current crop of Michael Brown and Eric Garner themed protests apparently have as one of their goals educating white Americans about the horrors of racism in America. (I say as one of their goals, since their primary goals seem to be twofold: the rapture of riot and the opportunity for looting.) I strongly believe that the protests will fail to achieve this goal.
For starters, when you see a million dollar athlete parading around in an “I can’t breathe” t-shirt, or writing the “I can’t breathe” slogan on his $300 Nikes, do you immediately think, “Oh, my God! Blacks in America are sooo oppressed”?
I don’t. I think “I want to be as oppressed as you are.” That’s what I think. (Except without the part where I have to play pro-football.)
Saul Alinsky was a wicked man, and perhaps the wickedest advice he gave his acolytes was “make them play by their own rules.”
So here’s a thought experiment: What are some non-violent acts that resistors to the current federal regime could commit that would royally gum up the government bureaucracy and perhaps starve the beast of funds–all the while playing by its rules?
Please ransack your imaginations and offer some tactics. To get things started, I’ll offer two:
Create a Geezer Shock Corps (not pronounced “corpse,” Barry) where tens of thousands of old farts like me who really don’t have anything left to lose engage in acts of civil disobedience. We’ll flood the courts and jails with old-people stink and cost the gubmint an arm and a leg to keep us locked up. When the Feds begin mistreating us–and they will, because it’s their nature and we’re going to cost them a lot–even the Whore Media will get off its knees long enough to report the elder abuse.
Fill in the wrong race or sex on every application for college or government funding. Force the authorities to reveal their criteria for determining who belongs to which race or sex. Sue them for violating what the Supremes have said is every person’s right to determine his/her/its own take on what makes the universe run and his/her/its place in it.
Any and all ideas for non-violently sabotaging the elitists who have hijacked our country are welcome.
NSA Disclaimer: Chuck Martel is not calling for the violent overthrow of you cretinous yahoos. He simply wonders what intelligent people might do to get you all in a panties-tied-up-in-a-bunch tizzy.
Long ago, in ancient Phoenicia, arose a religion reviled in Biblical as well as in Greek and Roman lore, that worshiped a deity most commonly known as Molock, Moloch or Moleck. To this deity, parents sacrificed their infant children by cremating them alive in the bronze hands of a bull-shaped statue of the deity (the golden calf all grown up?).
The religion generated revulsion among the Jews, Assyrians, Greeks, Romans and other Mediterranean peoples of that ancient time. In Judaic and Biblical lore, Molock was associated with demonology and Satan’s reign. The Romans purportedly destroyed the last vestiges of this religion in the rubble of Carthage, destroying and scattering every structure down to the last brick, so that it could never ever spring back anew. However, this rationalization for infanticide, just published in the Journal of Medical Ethics, makes me wonder if Molock isn’t stirring anew in the ebb-tide of the Judeo-Christian West.
http://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2012/02/22/medethics-2011-100411.abstract
In my lifetime, I have been witness to the normalization of promiscuous sex, throw-away children, abortion, partial birth abortion, euthanasia, and now, the open rationalization of infanticide should parents change their mind about a living baby. This is the end game of secular humanism, where there is nothing more transcendent about human beings than simple utilitarian sacks of meat. It was observed by G.K. Chesterton that when cultures (or cults) begin to kill their weakest members, their old and their children, such cultures are in the final stage of collapse.
I came to my Christianity relatively late in life. My faith in my faith is absolute. The existence and/or nature of a force for evil in the world, however, has been a more difficult concept to grasp, as there are so many other ways to rationalize evil behavior – e.g., bad upbringing, mean parents, schoolyard bullying, chemical imbalances, mental illness, hubris, etc. Now, though, I am coming to the conclusion that evil is a palpably real force in the world. Either that, or a violently real, contagious, psychic virus!
Ann Coulter’s most recent book, “Demonic”, relates the proclivity of the secular Left (Democrats) for mob violence and bloodshed, tracing its bloody trail from the French Revolution through the Nazi and Communist abominations of the 20th Century, to the social-justice proclaiming Liberal/Left movements of today (oh, heck, let’s throw in the Marxist Jim Jones Cult for good measure). The violence that our society increasingly wreaks on our weakest members is all part of the same disease and I fear that it is going to get much, much worse.
For me, it’s simple: babies are for loving, not killing — I know, I know…others disagree! The publication of such an article under the guise of “medical ethics” tells me that something truly wicked this way comes. Today, the secular Left may feign indignation at the thought that their revolution will ultimately involve killing those that do not fit their Utopian ideals, but we can see how easily they are getting comfortable with the concept over time. It will be what it will be. I hope that I don’t live to see it. But, as the New Age of Molock establishes itself, I certainly will resist it to the end. I know that you will, too.
*** UPDATE
And, now, in support of the Secular Humanist view of human kind as utilitarian pieces of meat, HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius shares her policy perspective that abortion and contraception means fewer babies, ergo fewer government expenditures. Human reproduction becomes a simple government-mandated budget line item.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/sebelius-decrease-human-beings-will-cover-cost-contraception-mandate
One would have to be a total fool not to recognize that this is Government asserting its sovereignty over reproductive rights and life and death decisions.
Here’s a good example of American imperialism, whereby rich and greedy American billionaires fund the sabotage of democratic institutions in foreign countries to further their own ideological and economic interests.
Via: smalldeadanimals.com.
“If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.” – President Barack Hussein Obama
I posted this as a comment to Book’s previous post, but have now posted it independently as a challenge to all of us Bookworm salon aficionados.
Here’s the premise: virtually all the political violence that has happened in America as come from people associated with the Democrat and/or the Left.
Here’s my list thus far (continuous updating):
DEMOCRAT /LEFT – LINKED VIOLENCE
REPUBLICAN, CONSERVATIVE – LINKED VIOLENCE
xxxxxxxxxxx
Please delete, amend or add-to the list as you see fit.
Or, let’s have even more fun: how about a comparable list of CONSERVATIVE acts of political violence?
We shall then be able to offer two lists for posterity.
Comments and contributions? Please make them as specific as possible.
UPDATE***
I have broken these out into two lists and will make additions as they come in.
UPDATE***
OK…I’m convinced. I’ve taken the Tuscon, Ariz. shooting off of the “Left” column.
Update – It seems that the article I wrote on September 9th (below after the jump) was a precursor to the latest Obama administration scandal. Jim Hoft and the Washington Times picked up where I left off. Never let it be said that we didn’t warn you!
Barack Obama’s “safe school’s czar” Kevin Jennings hid pedophilia from authorities.
Safe Schools Czar Kevin Jennings was a huge Obama supporter.
Warren Throckmorton has this and more on the latest case of pedophilia that Obama’s Safe Schools Czar hid from officials.
In an op-ed dated today but available online over the weekend, the Washington Times assails Obama safe-schools appointee, Kevin Jennings for his handling of a 15-year old student’s sexual revelations when Jennings was a young teacher.
According to Mr. Jennings’ own description in a new audiotape discovered by Fox News, the 15-year-old boy met the “older man” in a “bus station bathroom” and was taken to the older man’s home that night.
FOX News has also reported on this and pointed to that recording. That audiotape was recorded by someone who attended a speech Jennings gave in Iowa in 2000 and then given to me. The relevant clip is here. You can read more about Brewster and the controversy in the article, Remembering Brewster and in this prior post on the topic.
Original Article Below