Tag Archives: Culture Wars

Uncategorized

Common Sense in 2012!

Sen. DeMint: “We don’t have shared goals with the Democrats”

Simple and to the point!

Here’s Sen. Jim DeMint talking with bloggers after opening CPAC. During his speech he said cautioned Republicans in Congress on compromising with Democrats.

“Compromise works well in this world when you have shared goals,” he said. “We don’t have shared goals with the Democrats.”

“Elementary my dear Watson!”

Uncategorized

Misc. Events and a Late Holiday Note

Things have been hectic lately…what with trying to organize a new pole building on the outpost, along with the necessity to remove fallen trees from the recent wind storm (yep, we are close enough to Flandreau to have caught that!), and getting the electricity, internet, (wireless–antenna was knocked out of operation) restored, facing s 30′ spruce down in a small rural cemetery that I serve as sexton….and a few more fun items to boot…phew! Enough already!

The following are some thoughts and comments I have had recently, inspired by Ronaldus Magnus, the Gipper himself, which fit the season when we commemorate the independence of our Republic. Agree or not…this is where I come from:

When the politics (“the art of the possible”) is distilled away, Reagan really did have a core of personal belief that was so deeply ingrained and taken for granted by him that it was and is unrecognizable to “players at the game of Washington”, whether they be pols, press (incl. other media), or bureaucrats. They have notebooks, in his own writing, full of stuff that R.R. wrote over a period of years, refining and developing his political philosophy, and how this interacted with various issues. Reagan’s expressions of American exceptionalism, etc. are expressions of this.

CALL IT MYSTICISM IF YOU WILL, I HAVE ALWAYS BELIEVED THERE WAS SOME DIVINE PROVIDENCE THAT PLACED THIS GREAT LAND HERE BETWEEN TWO GREAT OCEANS, TO BE FOUND BY A SPECIAL KIND OF PEOPLE FROM MANY CORNERS OF THE WORLD, WHO HAD A SPECIAL LOVE FOR FREEDOM AND A SPECIAL COURAGE THAT ENABLED THEM TO LEAVE THEIR OWN LAND, LEAVE THEIR FRIENDS AND COUNTRYMEN, AND COME TO THE NEW AND STRANGE LAND TO BUILD A NEW WORLD OF PEACE AND FREEDOM AND HOPE. Ronald Reagan, 4 July 1986

Hear, hear!

When more conventional denizens of the political scene were exposed to this, it was so far beyond their consciousness, they never could figure him out…and in many cases they still haven’t. I have had some small degree of association with political and media types from both (? maybe more!) parts of the spectrum, and all too often the level of calculation, (dare one say cynicism?)…is such that a genuine, heart-felt expression of belief is greeted with skepticism if not actual derision. It sort of hearkens back to the old progressive attitude that people can only be trusted with democracy if they FIRST are trained to have the “proper attitude”.

People who have a personal core belief that the whole American idea is a good and qualitatively different attitude, found that reflected in Reagan, who shared this faith in the American experiment. IMHO, that was, and is the source of Reagan’s appeal. I think I’m on safe ground to say that no post-Reagan president has had the sort of solid core beliefs that Reagan did. People are still looking for that (hoping for that?) in their leaders…so maybe in that sense at least there is still a Reagan era…although he was ultimately expressing what is ultimately an old theme in the American experience…hearkening all the way back to “the shining city on the hill” noted by old New England.

Uncategorized

MO Assassination Attempt in the News…or not!

You no doubt saw all the lead stories on this assassination attempt last year, but somehow the Chief missed it. Must be that the perp didn’t come in the “right” category to attract the attention of the “responsible” media…apparently at any level outside of the immediate local area.

Left wing climate of hate and assassination

Successful propaganda is composed of equal parts deception and suppression, and the apparatchiks in the mainstream media are much better at the latter.

They may have erred in pushing the Arizona assassination attempt beyond its ideological limits last week, but they succeeded brilliantly a few months earlier in suppressing news of a nearly lethal attempt by a genuine leftist.

The attempt was directed at the Governor of Missouri:

In September 2010 Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon was scheduled to speak at Penn Valley Community College in Kansas City.

At some point, wearing black clothes and a bullet-proof vest, 22 year-old Casey Brezik bolted out of a classroom, knife in hand, and slashed the throat of a dean. As he would later admit, he confused the dean with Nixon.

At least this chucklehead was clearly operating with dead sparkplugs in his mental engine…to the extent that he was too impaired to figure out how to operate a knife.

Hmmmm….he used a knife. that’s probably at least part reason why there was no coverage…no gun involved to use to flog the gun control dead horse yet again, but to make it even less interesting to the alleged journalists, the perp was a self-demonstrated anarcho-lefty radical, demonstrated by both his words and actions.

…Brezik seems to have inhaled just about every noxious vapor in the left-wing miasma: environmental extremism, radical Islam, anti-capitalism, anti-Zionism and Christophobia, among others.

In his “About Me” box on Facebook, Brezik listed as his favorite quotation one from progressive poster boy, Che Guevara. The quote begins “Our every action is a battle cry against imperialism” and gets more belligerent from there.

On his wall postings, Brezik ranted, “How are we the radical(s) (left) to confront the NEW RIGHT, if we avoid confrontation all together?”

As good as his word, Brezik’s marched on Toronto in June 2010 to protest the G20 Summit, where he was arrested, charged, and deported. “MISSION ACCOMPLISHED,” he boasted.

Not exactly a tea-party conservative, and hence not worth journalistic notice: nothing to see here folks…move along and go back home…American Idol is about to come on again anyway.

Uncategorized

Sense and Non-sense

A step to artificial life: Manmade DNA powers cell
Well…not exactly, as noted by Ken Blanchard posting over at SD Politics.

Ms. Neergaard is lucky that bad science writing isn’t a crime; otherwise she would be in shackles by now. The word “enduring” in the first sentence is puerile puffery. The much worse sin against scientific literacy is that DNA doesn’t “power” living cells, nor does it “take over and drive” them. DNA is the fundamental repository of information for most of its operations and for the essential business of reproduction. DNA is a very powerful map, but the cell itself does the driving.

These distortions have clearly been encouraged by Venter, who is both a scientist and an entrepreneur. This is how he sells his science:

“This is the first self-replicating species we’ve had on the planet whose parent is a computer,” Venter told reporters.

Well, not yet. Venter’s team built the genome of one kind of bacteria from scratch, using fragments of DNA. In doing so, I gather they were plagiarizing the Lord’s work by precisely copying the DNA of the cattle germ. Then they transplanted the artificial genome into a different kind of cell (a goat germ). The new cell was able to function and I gather it has reproduced. But the parent of the new cell is clearly the recipient cell, not the computer.

Go read the rest of KB’s post…it’s well worth it.

By the way, the Chief heartily concurs with KB on this…and you can put 4 quarters with that and get a can of pop!

Uncategorized

Ayn Man? You decide

Men of iron and steel

The release of “Iron Man 2” this weekend kicks off the summer blockbuster season. It’s an interesting cultural moment for conservatives. The movie version of Iron Man is one of the most unambiguously libertarian figures in popular culture, a billionaire industrialist playboy who spends much of the new movie telling the government to get bent when it tries to claim his amazing suit of high-tech armor. He’s patriotic, loves the military, and views the bad actors of the world from a Reaganite position of moral confidence. In the original movie, he did what Hollywood has been painfully reluctant to do, ever since September 11: he flew over to the Middle East and took out the trash. This Atlas doesn’t shrug… he busts out repulsor beams and micro-missiles.

H/T for the above from People’s Cube, where SuperKomissar Maxim presented the following graphic offering:

Constitution Watch, Culture Wars

FDA Food Nazis at Work?

Here’s everybody’s favorite big government showing some of its true colors again.

Raw milk battle reveals FDA abandonment of basic human right to choose your food

The Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund (FTCLDF), an organization whose mission includes “defending the rights and broadening the freedoms of family farms and protecting consumer access to raw milk and nutrient dense foods”, recently filed a lawsuit against the FDA for its ban on interstate sales of raw milk. The suit alleges that such a restriction is a direct violation of the United States Constitution. Nevertheless, the suit led to a surprisingly cold response from the FDA about its views on food freedom (and freedoms in general).

In a dismissal notice issued to the Iowa District Court where the suit was filed, the FDA officially made public its views on health and food freedom.

Some of the statements in the FDA’s filing are absolutely amazing. Can you say “food NAZI”?

The FDA essentially believes that nobody has the right to choose what to eat or drink. You are only “allowed” to eat or drink what the FDA gives you permission to. There is no inherent right or God-given right to consume any foods from nature without the FDA’s consent.

This is no exaggeration. It’s exactly what the FDA said in its own words.

Don’t take MY word for it, or even the words from the posting about this. Consider the following statements taken from the FDA’s court filing:

“There is no ‘deeply rooted’ historical tradition of unfettered access to foods of all kinds.” [p. 26]“Plaintiffs’ assertion of a ‘fundamental right to their own bodily and physical health, which includes what foods they do and do not choose to consume for themselves and their families’ is similarly unavailing because plaintiffs do not have a fundamental right to obtain any food they wish.” [p.26]

There’s a lot more in the document, which primarily addresses the raw milk issue, but these statements alone clearly reveal how the FDA views the concept of health freedom. Essentially, the FDA does not believe in health freedom at all. It believes that it is the only entity granted the authority to decide for you what you are able to eat and drink.

The State, in other words, may override your food decisions and deny you free access to the foods and beverages you wish to consume. And the State may do this for completely unscientific reasons — even just political reasons — all at their whim…

This has all emerged from the debate over whether raw milk sales should be legal. But the commonsense answer seems obvious: Of course raw milk should be legal! Since when did the government have any right to criminalize a farmer milking his cow and selling the raw, unpasteurized milk to his neighbor at a mutually-agreeable price?

NOTE:  The principles apply whether or not one chooses to partake of raw milk, any particular food product.

But why is the FDA hell-bent on stopping raw milk from being sold in the first place? Think about it: What is it about this particular whole food that has regulators working overtime to make sure you don’t drink it?

Follow the money…(surprise, surprise, surprise!)

The real reason why the FDA opposes raw milk is because Big Dairy opposes raw milk. Just like Big Pharma, Big Dairy has worked very hard behind the scenes to steer FDA policy in its favor. And according to some recent reports, Big Dairy is one of the primary forces trying to eliminate raw milk because it threatens the commercial milk business.

What’s next? Will all farmer’s markets be outlawed because the veggies haven’t all been irradiated or pasteurized?

As usual, it’s all about the money, and as you follow the money trail all the way up to the federal level, you find the same thing happening everywhere: At the FDA, USDA, FTC and so on. U.S. government regulators have become monopoly market enforcers for Big Business, and they won’t let anything get in their way… not even personal health freedoms or just basic access to food.

There is a lot more detailed argument in the posting; you get the picture…but wait! As a finale the FDA outdoes itself again:
On page 27 of the dismissal, the FDA also states that Americans do not have a fundamental right to enter into private contractual agreements with one another, either.
HUH?

Buying clubs, cooperatives and community supported agriculture programs (CSAs) all rely on private contractual agreements in order to operate. People contract with each other to obtain clean, healthy food from the sources of their choice without government intrusion. But now the FDA is saying that people don’t actually have this right. To enter into such a private contract to purchase food, milk or even water is a violation of federal law, the FDA now claims.

You are just a subject of the King, you see, and you have no rights. You must eat and drink what you are told. You must behave in a way that is allowed by your King. You have no rights, no protections and no freedoms….
The “substantive due process” clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, however, assures people of this right when it states that no person shall “be deprived of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.” And being able to make personal food choices without having to obtain permission from Big Brother is definitely included under this clause.

But the FDA — aw, heck, all of Washington for that matter — doesn’t honor the U.S. Constitution in any way, shape or form. The document is little more than a tattered piece of American history according to the Nazi nut jobs running federal agencies today. They are no more likely to respect the Constitution as they are to leap from their desk job chairs and magically transform into flying elephants.

The hits just keeps on coming! (Or are the letters of the second word in the previous sentence in the wrong order? Whatever!)

Uncategorized

Tempest in a Teabag: from B.O. to the Shores of Lake Herman

President Obama: GOP Opposition to Stimulus ‘Helped to Create the Tea-Baggers’

Three days after he decried the lack of civility in American politics, President Obama is quoted in a new book about his presidency referring to the Tea Party movement using a derogatory term with sexual connotations.

In Jonathan Alter’s “The Promise: President Obama, Year One,” President Obama is quoted in an November 30, 2009, interview saying that the unanimous vote of House Republicans vote against the stimulus bills “set the tenor for the whole year … That helped to create the tea-baggers and empowered that whole wing of the Republican Party to where it now controls the agenda for the Republicans.”

Tea Party activists loathe the term “tea baggers,” which has emerged in liberal media outlets and elsewhere as a method of mocking the activists and their concerns.

On Saturday, the president delivered a commencement address at the University of Michigan where he said one way “to keep our democracy healthy is to maintain a basic level of civility in our public debate … But we can’t expect to solve our problems if all we do is tear each other down.”

So much for any pretense of consistency…but what’s the backstory on this? Read on:

“President ‘Tea Bagger’ Owes Grandma an Apology

Just so we understand the ground rules here: 1) calling a Progressive Democrat a Socialist is bad; 2) Calling “Tea Party” protesters “Tea Baggers” is A-OKAY.

We seem to remember when the Left went apoplectic over imaginary suggestions that they were unpatriotic for being “against the war” during the Bush administration. We seem to recall President Obama very recently complaining about being called a Socialist (why do Democrats find Socialist to be such a dirty word? What is it about being a Socialist that they should universally shrink away from the title?).

You couldn’t ask for a more textbook definition of hypocrisy.

It is perversely amusing, though, watching Media Matters defend President “Tea-Bagger” for referring to average Americans, whose only crime is to reject Socialism, with a sexually offensive slur.

For a reminder, here are some shots of some U.S. citizens, who, in the Media Matters universe, should be referred to by the President of the United States as people who take testicles into their mouths.

So, how does this get to Lake Herman? Oh yes…via our own C.A.H. who has apparently figured that if it’s good enough for B.O. it’s good enough for him:

Teabaggers Rejoice: No Bailout for Flooded SD Homes

I won’t even address the content of this snarky and illogical post itself…that’s another whole discussion.

The descriptive terminology of the header strives for and achieves a new low, even from Madville.

Hey, Cory, do you have any daughters? Or a grandmother? Would you like them to be referred to by elected officials, or allegedly serious bloggers, as people who put testicles into their mouths? Do you really think it’s appropriate for ANY elected official or anyone who pretends to be a serious commentator on events to refer to anyone that way?

Maybe so. Too bad.

Constitution Watch, Culture Wars

Lessons Unlearned

Those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them. – Santayana

Kansas-Nebraska Act 1854, Redux

We are now beginning to enter the Kansas-Nebraska Act stage of the socialist crisis of the Republic.

To get the significance of this, some history is in order:

At our constitutional founding, the evil of slavery had been crudely evaded. In 1820, the Missouri Compromise was enacted that prohibited the abomination north of 36/30 degrees latitude [southern boundary of Missouri, except for it’s SE “boot-heel”].

But with the western push of the frontier, a new compromise was needed. So the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 decreed that the “popular sovereignty” of each territory should decide whether they would be slave or free states. But then, adherents of both the abomination and freedom migrated to Kansas to struggle — with their bodily presence — for their respective causes. First there was politics. Then the political rhetoric turned violent. Then real violence ensued. Kansas became known as Bleeding Kansas. John Brown, most famously, applied unjustified, murderous violence for his righteous cause of ending slavery and was hanged, but the Civil War ensued…

NOT a pretty scene!

Now we enter our History’s second stage in the struggle against the abomination of socialism. Just as slavery had been contained in the South, so entitlement socialism has, until this week, been more or less contained in service to only the poor and the elderly — and even in those programs (for the elderly) on the principle of beneficiaries paying monthly premiums for the benefits they will later get (Medicare/ Social Security). Only the poor under Medicaid received benefit without premium payment.

But now, just as the Kansas-Nebraska Act of 1854 broke through the slave state limitation to the South, the Democratic Party’s 2010 health care law has broken socialism’s boundary of being so limited. Now, the chains of socialism are to be clamped on to the able-bodied middle class — not merely the already presumed helpless poor and old who have paid their insurance premiums.

An exaggeration you say? Not so fast, according to that (understatement alert!) not exactly right wing New York Times.

Even the New York Times — after the vote — admits what the bigger goal has been all along. In Wednesday’s edition (“In Health Care Bill, Obama Attacks Wealth Inequality” by David Leonhardt), they point out: ” Beyond the health reform’s effect on the medical system, it is the centerpiece of his deliberate effort to end what historians have called the age of Reagan. … Speaking to an ebullient audience of Democratic legislators and White House aides at the bill-signing ceremony on Tuesday, Mr. Obama claimed that health reform would ‘mark a new season in America.’…. Above all, the central question that both the Reagan and Obama administrations have tried to answer — what is the proper balance between the market and the government? — remains unresolved. But the bill signed on Tuesday certainly shifts our place on that spectrum.”

I thank The New York Times for that honest statement of historic fact.

After citing some of the obnoxious aspects of what Congress and B.O. hath wrought, the piece goes on:
And just as the free states could not tolerate the spread of slavery into their midst, so, too, free middle-class America — if it still has its historic character — will not tolerate the yoke of socialism put upon our necks.

First, the unambiguous will of the majority has been defied by the vote of Congress last Sunday. Come November, we shall see whether the system can still turn the popular will into the constitutionally permissible legislative will of the majority. If it can, all will be well and the crisis will end. Rallying the vote between now and November is roughly equivalent to the early stage of the Kansas-Nebraska Act period — people started migrating to Kansas to support their convictions.

But come November, if the majority still opposes the socializing of health care delivery and the other central government intrusions, and yet the corrupt bargains and constitutional distortions of Washington deny that will its just expression — then, for the second time in our history, we enter that dangerous period where the House resolves its temporary division. Let us devoutly pray –and commit to ourselves — that this time freedom shall be reacquired … peaceably.

…and then there’s THIS one to go along with the above:

Will America break up?
Abortion threatens to split the nation like slavery

President Obama is splintering America. The passage of Obamacare was a historic victory for liberal governance. Yet, its true cost may be that it triggers the eventual breakup of the country.

Mr. Obama has achieved what his liberal predecessor…could only dream of: nationalized health care. Obamacare signifies the government take-over of one-sixth of the U.S. economy. It has dealt a mortal blow to traditional America. We are now a European-style socialist welfare state. The inevitable permanent tax hikes, massive public bureaucracy and liberal ruling elites will stifle competition and initiative.

Republicans vow to repeal Obamacare. Their past record, however, leaves many conservatives rightly skeptical….The Republican Party has been unable to roll back the tide of statism. In fact, under Richard Nixon and both George Bushes, Great Society Republicans have been complicit in erecting a nanny state.

Socialism is the road to economic ruin and fiscal bankruptcy. It subverts democracy, threatening the very future of our constitutional republic. Socialist states degenerate into some form of autocracy or technocratic neo-feudalism, whereby the productive class is taxed and exploited to sustain a growing dependent class. Factions are pitted against each other; groups vie for handouts at the expense of their fellow citizens. The bonds of economic union and national solidarity slowly dissolve.

“The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not,” warned Thomas Jefferson.

Jefferson was right: Redistributionist welfare policies are undermining our democracy. The resentments in America are growing. Tea Partiers believe that their government no longer represents their interests or values. The heartland is becoming dangerously alienated from the political class, whom it feels has betrayed them.

Obamacare may be the last straw. It strips away fundamental economic liberties, empowering the federal government to de facto nationalize everyone’s body by controlling our health. Americans are compelled – upon pain of penalty and eventual imprisonment – to purchase insurance.

Moreover, the law codifies the federal funding of abortion. Taxpayer dollars will be used to subsidize the murder of innocent life. Hence, Mr. Obama has violated the social compact: He has abrogated the conscience of pro-lifers, making them tacitly complicit in the slaughter of the unborn. Obamacare is a radical assault upon fundamental religious freedoms.

The Obama revolution threatens to tear America apart. This has happened before. Slavery eventually triggered the Civil War between the industrial North and the agrarian South. Abortion is the slavery of our time – the denying of basic human rights to an entire category of people.

You may well not like this. I don’t get a warm fuzzy from it myself…but I’m not at all sure it isn’t happening anyway.

…we are going the way our Founding Fathers warned us against: increasing balkanization and sectionalism. A constitutional republic – unlike an empire – is only as strong as its national cohesion. It is based not on imperial coercion but civic consent. Mr. Obama is recklessly pulling at the strings of unity, further polarizing us.

In confronting Obamacare, state sovereignty, states’ rights and state nullification of federal laws are being asserted. This is what happened in the 1830s and 1840s. They are the signs of growing political anarchy and social frustration – people can only be pushed so far. Mr. Obama’s drive for a socialist super-state threatens America’s very existence. As Jefferson warned about slavery, it is time we start ringing the “fire bell in the night.”

“Things fall apart; the center cannot hold,” wrote William Butler Yeats. “Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world.”

Conservatives will not be passive in this onslaught on all our core values. Mr. Obama’s true legacy may be that he divides us deeper than ever before – unless he abandons his revolutionary project.

Once again, that most usable Warren Zevon lyric: “It ain’t that pretty at all!”

Culture Wars

Signers: Conservative manifesto is call to action

Leaders of major conservative groups on Wednesday signed a manifesto vowing to push the country to return to constitutional principles, saying they’ve grown tired of having to accept government expansion at the hands of liberals.

“It’s our turn. We’ve had about enough of you. We’re going to take you on, and it’s time to defeat you,” said Mark Levin, a talk-radio host and president of the Landmark Legal Foundation.

Hoo-rah!

…the manifesto – labeled “the Mount Vernon Statement” because it was signed near the first president’s home – is designed to update a 1960 declaration issued by conservatives that heralded the rise of 1964 Republican presidential nominee Barry Goldwater and, eventually, President Reagan.

The new statement, signed by dozens of leaders of conservative lobby groups, is more a declaration of battle than a list of ideas. It says the ideas of the Founding Fathers are under attack and must be defended, and says calls for change are “an empty promise or even a dangerous deception.”

For the full text of the statement itself, go here.

DISCLOSURE: The Chief has already signed on via the web site.

It is the first major statement of conservatives’ goals since 1960, when conservative intellectuals gathered in Sharon, Conn., at the home of William F. Buckley Jr. to write down the principles that became the founding document of Young Americans for Freedom. That effort provided the seed that led to the conservative movements twin peaks of political success: the Barry Goldwater factions overthrow of the liberal Republican establishment in the early 1960s and Ronald Reagans political triumphs of the 1980s.

Sen. Jim DeMint, South Carolina Republican, said he would sign the statement and said politicians who can’t agree to the basic precepts “are part of the problem and should be replaced.”

One would presume that fellow-Carolinian Lindsey Grahamnesty and the rest of the McCainiac wing of the GOP is not exactly enthused by this. Oh well.

Culture Wars

Counter-intuitive Copy Policies

Doing business The Grateful Dead way

The Grateful Dead was famous for letting their fans tape their live shows….

The Dead recognized that allowing fans to record for free widened their audience and the band became one of the most profitable groups in history. The band’s lyricist, John Perry Barlow, went on to become an Internet guru.

Barlow wrote in Wired in 1994 that in the information economy, “the best way to raise demand for your product is to give it away.” He explained to Joshua Green of the Atlantic: “What people today are beginning to realize is what became obvious to us back then–the important correlation is the one between familiarity and value, not scarcity and value. Adam Smith taught that the scarcer you make something, the more valuable it becomes. In the physical world, that works beautifully. But we couldn’t regulate [taping at] our shows, and you can’t online. The Internet doesn’t behave that way. But here’s the thing: if I give my song away to 20 people, and they give it to 20 people, pretty soon everybody knows me, and my value as a creator is dramatically enhanced. That was the value proposition with the Dead.”

The Chief has always liked the Grateful Dead from the time of his first acquaintance with them at the time he first entered active Naval service at the (then) Treasure Island Naval Station in the middle of the ‘Frisco-Oakland Bay Bridge in 1967. This is one more reason to appreciate how they operated.

SciFi publishing house Baen Books has gone in the same direction, with a “free library” on many titles available for free download in Mobipocket and other handy e-book formats, with no DRM or restriction on free distribution. On their site they explain their reasoning which runs much the same as Barlows. They also noted that after they put books by an author into the free download library, there was inevitably an distinct increase in sales for that author. They also have very reasonable prices on titles for paid download ($5-$6 typical), especially compared to other sources of e-titles. The Chief uses them on his PDA…who needs a Kindle?

Culture Wars

“We Have Met the Enemy and He is Us”

That old observation from the Pogo comic strip comes to mind.

Slobs and the American Civilization

Had George Washington joined me outside a Chili’s at Chicago’s O’Hare Airport recently, he would have shuddered at the sight. There, a nation of slobs paraded through the crossroads of America. Frayed denim hems swept the filthy floor. Cleavage poured out of T-shirts bearing vulgar messages. Big bellies flowed over the waists of jeans. Mature women waddled in stained sweat suits. Some passersby stuffed their mouths with pizza as they walked.

Another quote from a Warren Zevon lyric also fits quite well: “It ain’t that pretty at all!”

Washington was a stickler for good manners, and that included dignified dress. As a youth, he hand-copied a text called “Rules of Civility&Decent Behavior in Company and Conversation.” They included: “Wear not your Cloths, foul … or Dusty but See they be Brush’d once every day at least and take heed that you approach not to any Uncleaness.”

At the cost of betraying age, the Chief recalls when he flew on airlines for the first time…in the mid 60’s. Wearing a “coat and tie” was considered de rigueur.

Some observers suspect that a collapse in grooming and attention to dress has contributed to the decline in civility on our streets and in our politics. People don’t care what they look like in public because they don’t care about the public. They have little notion of, or interest in, playing a supportive role in their civilization.

Attire, like anything else that humans do, can become an abusive obsession…whether carried to excess, or it’s opposite. But this certainly goes along with the premise that “The barbarians are through the gates.”

We must concede that this is a big country with different expectations for proper attire. One person’s ostentation may be another’s good manners. But a modicum of care in dress and grooming would seem a basic minimum just about everywhere — or it used to be. Cowboys might get muddy on the job, but they were clean and pressed for the Saturday night dance.

Culture Wars

B.O. Tree: Ho-ho-ho’s indeed!

White House Christmas Decor Featuring Mao Zedong Comes Under Fire

BO Tree

The nation isn’t going to fall because of this. That being said…it DOES give a clear indication of the Obamaniacal state of mind, which in spite of Michelle’s vaporings has little connection to vast majority

Mao Zedong is in the White House, hanging out with the drag queen. Not far away, Barack Obama is making a play to have his head etched in stone.

BO Rushmore ornament

Mao Ornament

Hedda ornament

Critics of President Obama are setting their sights this week on the official White House Christmas tree, which features controversial ornaments including an orb depicting the late Chinese dictator, another that shows drag queen Hedda Lettuce, and yet another that shows a picture of Mount Rushmore — with Obama’s head pasted to the side of Washington, Lincoln, Jefferson and Roosevelt’s.

“Jesus wept.”

Culture Wars

“Mickey” Mao’s Club at B.O.’s White House

White House Official’s Praise for Mao–Whose Policies Led to Death of 65 Million–Was ‘Pathetic,’ Says China Expert

White House Communications Director Anita Dunn told high school students in May 2009 that one of her favorite political philosophers was Mao Tse Tung, the Communist dictator responsible for the death of millions of people, and she explained why his philosophy was important for achieving personal and political goals.

When questioned last week after a video of her speech surfaced, however, Dunn said she was using “irony” in reference to Mao. A leading expert on China told CNSNews.com that Dunn’s remarks were “pathetic,” given the human rights atrocities committed under Mao’s reign.

Yeah – Mao is cool.  Never mind about those 65,000,000 dead people…they were only Chinese, anyway.

According to the MSM this is nothing worth commenting on.  Could you imagine their outcry if a Republican said something like this about Hitler?

These people in the White House are truly bereft of reason.

Culture Wars

Do the Crime, Do the Time!

Polanski case sparks noisy culture debate

“The arrest of Roman Polanski in a neutral country, where he assumed he could travel without hindrance, … opens the way for actions of which no one can know the effects,” the petition said.

Outspoken celebrities have been caught up in their own skirmishes as the Polanski case has escalated. Comedian and actress Whoopi Goldberg – who remarked on ABC’s “The View” that the incident was not ” ‘rape’ rape” – now has her own critics.

“Just for the record, rape is rape. This is one Hollywood star who does not celebrate or defend Roman Polanski. His art did not rape her,” countered actress Kirstie Alley in a Twitter message to her fans.

Who or rather what is this thing that asserts that an individual who drugs a 13-year-old girl, and then “has sex” with her should take a pass and escape from the consequences of his act, just because he has managed to evade capture for so long?

There is (or at least was…we haven’t found out which yet) a principle of equal justice. If some poor schlub had done this, he would have been in jail doin’ the time. Just because someone is in the Hollywood glitterati, the Chief doesn’t know of any legal exemption from the laws and consequences that the rest of us are subject to.

A growing number of critics do not appear ready to forgive Polanski.

Carol Jenkins, president of the Womens Media Center, an activist group originally founded by Gloria Steinem and Jane Fonda, called on the media “to focus their coverage of Roman Polanskis recent arrest where it belongs: on the crime he committed, the rape of a child.”

“Too often, the media is complicit in misrepresenting or silencing the victims of sexual assault,” she said.

“The rape of a child is at the heart of the case,” Ms. Jenkins added. “That is not disputed, and should not be represented as subjective.”

Dang! Must be pretty cold today down in hell…the Chief agrees with Ms. Steinem’s group?

Even the Frogs have figured this one out:

The French government, which initially expressed outrage over the arrest, has since adopted a more neutral line. “Roman Polanski is neither above nor beneath the law,” government spokesman Luc Chatel said at a press conference on Wednesday.

Prison cell, perv H’wood director:  some assembly required.

Constitution Watch, Culture Wars, Obamunism

Towards a State-Controlled Media

Obama open to newspaper bailout bill

The president said he is “happy to look at” bills before Congress that would give struggling news organizations tax breaks if they were to restructure as nonprofit businesses.

Oh joy! Not only would we be subjected to the prevailing MSM tilt to the left, they would add injury to the insult by forcing us to pay for media crap that we don’t want!

They would LOVE the chance to be able to continue to indulge their political whims independent of the market pressure that is currently going through the process of rejecting their unashamedly biased stance as indicated my massive losses in advertising and subscription income.

“I haven’t seen detailed proposals yet, but I’ll be happy to look at them,” Obama told the editors of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and Toledo Blade in an interview.

Sure he would – for the same reasons.

Obama said that good journalism is “critical to the health of our democracy,” but expressed concern toward growing tends in reporting — especially on political blogs, from which a groundswell of support for his campaign emerged during the presidential election.

Right – good journalism IS critical…but to assert that the MSM is good journalism is laughably surreal.

“I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding,” he said.

Fact checking? Hmmmm. Like CBS & Dan Rather CONTINUING to insist that a blatantly forged document provides valid information about President Bush? Or like maybe NBC using incendiary devices to set vehicles on fire in an “investigative report” on auto engineering safety?  Or how about most recently…with virtually ALL of the so-called “mainstream media” ignoring the exposure of widespread promotion of criminality by B.O.’s favorite ACORN, until the stench got so great that they were literally FORCED to take notice?

THIS is “fact checking”? This is supposed to be journalism worthy of being supported by tax dollars?

There IS a part of the Constitution that addresses free press…but it does NOT contain a clause that GUARANTEES that just because you print a newspaper that anyone will bother to read it…or, for that matter, that one is guaranteed the right to make a living at writing and publishing crap that is inaccurate, incomplete, and often offensive and directly opposed to the values and interests of the POTENTIAL readership or audience.

Let ’em join the fate of the buggy-whip manufacturers if they can’t make it on their own!

The alternative is to turn the media icons of the liberal establishment into the American equivalent of the old Soviet Isvestia and Pravda, or the Nazi Volkishcher Beobachter – dedicated solely to the service of the state.

Culture Wars

A timely letter…

The Chief received the following from an e-mail correspondent, and felt impressed to pass it along for your possible edification.

Hello Friends and Happy Labor Day!

Our wonderful country seems to stand on the edge of a knife. If we lean one way we could wind up free falling into a terrible predicament. If we lean the other we can save the country and all that it was founded for, namely freedom and liberty. Far too many of us have become motivated by greed. The poor want the rich to pay their way. The middle class are clawing to keep up with the Joneses using debt to get what they want. And the rich want more, more, more and are willing to use unseemly means to get it. This has left us all vulnerable to forces darker and more real then many of us know.

Remember how you felt in the days and weeks after the tragic events of September 11, 2001? There was universal love toward all mankind. We flew our flags as a symbol of unity and patriotism. We put up signs stating “united we stand”. In the words of a country song writer, we collectively “turned off those violent old movies we were watching and turned on ‘I Love Lucy’ reruns”. I don’t recall feeling much anger toward the evil doers but rather a peaceful harmony and love toward my fellow Americans. We wanted to serve and help. There was an underlying feeling of the greatness of America that had perhaps occurred only a few times in the past century such as after the bombing of Pearl Harbor or after the assignation of John F. Kennedy.

Now is the time for those who believe in liberty and freedom to stand up for what is right. We need to oppose the seen and unseen forces that would drag us down and enslave us. We should think deeply about every decision before us. We still have the right to speak out. We still have the right to vote for those we believe represent truth and good. We should not cower in fear worrying that standing tall for that which is right might offend one group or another or bring down wrath or scorn upon our heads. Rather we should turn to our God and stand for what we know He would have us do.

Those who stand for good are stronger then those who are sneakily looking for ways to take away our freedom and liberty. Our voices are the voices of truth and they cannot be stifled if we will use them. In all we do we must be kind, but we must be resolute and firm for truth and right.

 We may stand on the edge of a knife, but I believe we will choose the right and save this country for our children and grandchildren. Let’s put our personal greed aside and think of others as we did after 9-11. We are AMERICANS, the greatest nation on the earth. Others are counting on us. If we fail, the world fails. But we WILL NOT fail!

Couldn’t have said it better myself!

Culture Wars

B.O. “Czar” Anti-family Dogma

Obama’s Science Czar: Traditional family is obsolete, punish large families

President Obama’s Science Czar, John Holdren, took a controversial and amoral approach to the science of population by recommending mass compulsory sterilization and even forced abortion (and/or forced marriages) under certain circumstances.[emphasis added] His 1977 tome, Ecoscience, which he co-authored with Paul and Anne Ehrlich, also displays a revealing disregard for the institution of the traditional human family….

Holdren, with a blithe “of course,” encourages government to wage an effective war on the family in America. It begins with the abolition of “pronatalist” policies and continues with their complete reversal:

As United States taxpayers know, income tax laws have long implicitly encouraged marriage and childbearing…Such a pronatalist bias of course is no longer appropriate. In countries that are affluent enough for the majority of citizens to pay taxes, tax laws could be adjusted to favor (instead of penalize) single people, working wives, and small families. Other tax measures might also include high marriage fees, taxes on luxury baby goods and toys, and removal of family allowances where they exist. Other possibilities include the limitation of maternal or educational benefits to two children per family.

Intrusive enough?

Some Americans might cite the Founding Fathers and argue that a government whose policy is to make war on the family in the name of science has clearly overstepped its mandate. That was not the opinion expressed by John Holdren, the man President Obama has put in charge in the nation’s science policy.

Can you read T-O-T-A-L-I-T-A-R-I-A-N? Any other questions?

Culture Wars, SD Politics

South Dakota: Free Indeed!

Are things perfect here? No – not by a long shot…but then again, compared to some other places…not too shabby at all!

Freedom in the 50 States: Index of Personal and Economic Freedom

index-of-freedom-header1.jpg

This paper presents the first-ever comprehensive ranking of the American states on their public policies affecting individual freedoms in the economic, social, and personal spheres. We develop and justify our ratings and aggregation procedure on explicitly normative criteria, defining individual freedom as the ability to dispose of one’s own life, liberty, and justly acquired property however one sees fit, so long as one does not coercively infringe on other individuals’ ability to do the same.

This study improves on prior attempts to score economic freedom for American states in three primary ways: 1) it includes measures of social and personal freedoms such as peaceable citizens’ rights to educate their own children, own and carry firearms, and be free from unreasonable search and seizure; 2) it includes far more variables, even on economic policies alone, than prior studies, and there are no missing data on any variable; 3) we adopt new, more accurate measurements of key variables, particularly state fiscal policies.

We find that the freest states in the country are New Hampshire, Colorado, and South Dakota, which together achieve a virtual tie for first place. All three states feature low taxes and government spending and middling levels of regulation and paternalism. New York is the least free by a considerable margin, followed by New Jersey, Rhode Island, California and Maryland. (Emphases added)

The Chief knew there were a number of reasons why he liked living in South Dakota. Many of them relate to the topics covered in this analysis. Check it out.

If you’re a South Dakota liberal, let not your heart be troubled…Minnesota is right next door and Eastbound I-90 will take you there easily.  Don’t let the door hit you in the — on the way out!

Culture Wars

Investing in the Future

1 Comment

A couple of interesting reactions to the onslaught of the Abomination Obamanation:

Obama Driving Surge in Gun Sales, Firearms Groups Say

President-elect Barack Obama’s election has spurred a surge in gun sales, firearms retailers and enthusiasts say, as gun owners brace for what they believe will be a new era of gun control in Washington.

An electronic news service that covers outdoor news has even named Obama its “Gun Salesman of the Year.”

Firearms associations began to suspect that political considerations were driving gun sales late last year as the number of background checks increased. But end-of-year figures showed a big spike in background checks for the last three months of 2008, and in November, the month Obama was elected, the number of background checks was 42 percent greater than in November 2007.

“It’s not a hard tea leaf to read,” said Jim Shepherd, publisher of the news service Outdoor Wire, which claims Obama’s election has “frightened consumers into action.”

’nuff said. Go read the article.

Sales of “Atlas Shrugged” Soar in the Face of Economic Crisis

Sales of Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged” have almost tripled over the first seven weeks of this year compared with sales for the same period in 2008. This continues a strong trend after bookstore sales reached an all-time annual high in 2008 of about 200,000 copies sold.

“Americans are flocking to buy and read ‘Atlas Shrugged’ because there are uncanny similarities between the plot-line of the book and the events of our day” said Yaron Brook, Executive Director at the Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights. “Americans are rightfully concerned about the economic crisis and government’s increasing intervention and attempts to control the economy. Ayn Rand understood and identified the deeper causes of the crisis we’re facing, and she offered, in ‘Atlas Shrugged,’ a principled and practical solution consistent with American values.”

Although the Chief is not a totally 100% “Randian”, this book is well worth the read…if you read it and REALLY think about it…it will change your understanding of where we are, and where we seem to be going.

Constitution Watch, Culture Wars

Obamacracy: ANYTHING GOES?

3 Comments

‘Anything possible,’ Obama tells joyous crowd

Two days from the White House, President-elect Barack Obama joined a vast throng Sunday at a joyous pre-inauguration celebration staged among marble monuments to past heroes. “Anything is possible in America,” declared the man who will confront economic crisis and two wars when he takes office.

So, what’s wrong with this? Sounds nice? Lots of possibilities? Right?

Er…what ever happened to Constitutional government? According to that ANYTHING is NOT possible…there are some definite limitations as to what any American government is allowed to do, even with a President Obama.

Unfortunately, the crop of politically ascendant LibDonks (admittedly the outgoing Bushites also) seem to have no cognizance if any restraint on their near-orgasmic response to the prospect of untrammeled government.

Culture Wars

Why McCain/Palin?…and the Culture Wars

THE UNDEFENDED CITY

The Chief has noted that his favorite contemporary essayist, Bill Whittle, is now a regular at NRO, with a weekly piece there. This takes cognizance of  this offering as a possible introduction.   Bill’s stuff puts him rather easily in the category of a leading 21st century candidate for assuming the mantle of Thomas Paine.

His stuff is so pithy, and spot on, that it’s almost scary.

I live a few miles from Santa Monica High School, in California. There, young men and women are taught that America is “a terrorist nation,” “one of the worst regimes in history,” that it’s twice-elected leader is “the son of the devil,” and dictator of this “fascist” country. Further, “patriotism” is taught by dragging an American flag across the classroom floor, because the nation’s truest patriots, as we should know by now, are those who are most able to despise it.

This is only high school, remember: in college things get much, much worse.

Two generations, now, are being raised on this poison, and the reason for that is this: the enemies of this city cannot come out and simply say, “Do not defend the city.” Even the smartest among us can see that is simple treason. But they can say, “The City is not worth defending.” So they say that, and they say that all the time and in as many different ways as they are able.

If you step far enough back to look at the whole of human history, you will begin to see a very plain rhythm: a heartbeat of civilization. Steep climbs out of disease and ignorance into the light of medicine and learning — and then a sudden collapse back into darkness. And it is in that darkness that most humans have lived their lives: poor, nasty, brutish, and short.

The pattern is always the same: at the height of a civilization’s powers something catastrophic seems to occur — a loss of will, a failure of nerve, and above all an unwillingness to identify with the values and customs that have produced such wonders.

Whittle goes on and describes with some specificity how this process is happening to us:

And how is this done, this “throwing open of the gates?” How are defenders taken off the walls?

Well, most of what I learned about Vietnam I learned from men like Oliver Stone. This self-loathing narcissist has repeatedly tried to inculcate in me a sense of despair and outrage at my own government, my own culture, my own people and ultimately myself…. that the real threat to the nation comes from the generals that defend it, or from the businessmen that provide the prosperity we take for granted.

I sit with others in darkened rooms, watching films like Redacted, Stop-Loss, and In the Valley of Elah, and see our brave young soldiers depicted as murderers, rapists, broken psychotics or ignorant dupes –visions foisted upon me by bitter and isolated millionaires such as Brian de Palma and Paul Haggis and all the rest.

I’ve been told this story in some form or another, every day of every week of the past 30 years of my life. It wasn’t always so.

So where does this leave us now? The picture we see when we look at ourselves, in the words of a song, “ain’t that pretty at all”, but still gives some basis for hope, along with, what for the Chief is a deep-seated, deeply felt concern for the possible course of events.

And standing against all this hypnotic power — the power of the mythmakers in Hollywood, the power of the information peddlers in the media, the corrosive power of America-hating professors on every campus in America… against all that we find an old warrior — a paladin if ever there was one — an old, beat-up warhorse standing up in defense of his city one last time. And beside him: a wonder. A common person… just a regular mom who goes to work, does a difficult job with intelligence and energy and grace and every-day competence and then puts it away to go home and have dinner with the family.

Against all of that stand these two.

No wonder they must be destroyed. Because — Sarah Palin especially — presents a mortal threat to these people who have determined over cocktails who the next President should be and who now clearly mean to grind into metal shards the transaxle of their credibility in order to get the result they must have. Truly, they are before our eyes destroying the machine they have built in order to get their victory. What the hell is so threatening to be worth that?

Only this: the living proof that they are not needed. Not needed to govern, not needed to influence and guide, not needed to lecture us on our intellectual and moral failings which are visible only from the heights of Manhattan skyscrapers or the palaces up on Mulholland Drive. Not needed. We can do it — and do it better — without all of them.

YES! Bingo!

Whittle concludes:

It is the small-town virtues of self-reliance, hard work, personal responsibility, and common-sense ingenuity — and not those of the preening cosmopolitans that gape at them in mixed contempt and bafflement — that have made us the inheritors of the most magnificent, noble, decent and free society ever to appear on this earth. This Western Civilization… this American City… has earned the right to greet each sunrise with a blast of silver trumpets that can bring down mountains.

And what, really, is a Legion of Narcissists and a Confederacy of Despair against that?

The Chief fully concurs.

Culture Wars

B.O. & Not so Fresh Ayres

What the Ayers Association Says About Obama

Ken over at South Dakota Politics has about as good a summary of the William Ayres / B.O. association and its ramifications, as the Chief has seen anywhere.

Barack Obama spent twenty years at the feet of a preacher who thinks that the United States is responsible for the Second World War, and that we invented the AIDS virus to kill African Americans. Obama worked closely with “education expert” Bill Ayers. Ayers is frequently described, even by his critics, as a “former terrorist.” This is not accurate. A “former terrorist” is someone who once advocated or committed terrorist acts, but now renounces them. In the late 60’s and early 70’s, Bill Ayers conspired with other “Weathermen” to plant bombs in the Pentagon and elsewhere, and apparently took part in the action. From the New York Times:

”I don’t regret setting bombs,” Bill Ayers said. ”I feel we didn’t do enough… So, would Mr. Ayers do it all again, he is asked? ”I don’t want to discount the possibility,” he said.

That’s not a former terrorist, that’s a right now terrorist.

There’s more there…and it’s worth the look.

Culture Wars, SD Politics

McCain Loses It, Big Time.

1 Comment

Treasury Could Begin Spending $1 Trillion on Bailout Without Congressional Approval, McCain Says

What’s the point anymore? If there isn’t any difference between the Republocratic and Demmican candidates, then what’s
the advantage of electing one party over the other?

Sen. John McCain, the Republican presidential candidate, indicated on Tuesday that the Bush administration could simply bypass Congress, if necessary, to begin dealing with the nation’s financial crisis. “The Treasury has at its disposal about a trillion dollars that they could begin, without congressional authority, buying up some of these terrible mortgages and help stabilize the situation,” Sen. John McCain told Fox & Friends.

In other words, “Hey, we HAVE the money (or at least the printing press!), so who’s going to stop us from spending it? Screw teh will of Congress, who has the gall to actually listen to their constituents on this. What do THOSE bozos know anyway?”

At this point, as far as the Chief is concerned the ONLY two things that John McCainiac has going for him are
(a) National security issues, and
(b) Sarah Palin. (She would be an improvement if he were to die…she’s more conservative than he is by a long shot.)
IT’s not a

Culture Wars, Defense Matters!

Recollections and Reality

Taken from an e-mail correspondence of the Chief…and when I completed my answer to it, I thought there might be some things here that were (a) worth sharing, and (b) IMHO actually relevant to some of our current circumstances as a nation. Personal references have been redacted in the interest of privacy.

Yeah you radio guys had it easy. 1st Div had to be on deck hours before the refueling laying out those lines for you. ha  I had it easy. I was the Visual Signalman on the forward station. Mr. —- was the OIC.  The CO treated him like crap. He seemed to want to mentally destroy the kid. After one refueling the oiler screwed up and when we disconnected the couplings gallons of black fuel went across the deck. The AO had failed to give us the blow-down or the back-suction.

It was the little torpedo deck right under the bridge. We were on our hands and knees wiping up oil and the CO was right above us. We kept looking up to see if he was looking down. He never noticed. After we finished Mr. —- asked me, “Do you think he saw?”  I shook my head and told him, “No sir. He didn’t see it.” I had my differences with Mr. —- but I wasn’t going to make him feel worse than he already did.

Interesting to think back… when I had radio messenger watch, I had a lot of contact with Officer’s Country and its denizens.  Mr. —- wasn’t the only one in that position, but some, like LTjg —-, the — officer were, to be generous, marginally competent at best, and often made their own troubles.  On the other hand, a good leader could/should buck up the weak links in his command… and should be able to get better performance without dragging people through the mud. (Sort of like working with marginal, but capable students in a classroom.)

I remember a lot of stuff like that in CPO Leadership Indoc training after I was selected for RMC, and I have to say that on a lot of this (admittedly much later than our time on USS Sellers) the Navy has its ducks in a row, and the leadership principles and application they taught were on a higher, and more useful level than most of what passes for educational management, etc that I have been exposed to as an educator over the years in interminable (and all too often irrelevant) “In-service” sessions from school(s). Ha ha!

I think the Navy started paying a lot more attention to stuff like that after the 70’s Zumwalt Navy which was warm and fuzzy, but had real problems with really lousy discipline, common drug use, etc.   Some of the Chiefs and senior PO’s I can recall from Sellers days would have been (justifiably) busted out of the Navy by the standards of the mid to late 80’s or later.  Others were really good at their jobs, and did their best to look out for their subordinates, under what were difficult conditions at best, given the difficult command climate at the time.

I remember from radio message traffic that the Atlantic/Med ships seemed to always be “sucking from the hind teat” when it came to personnel, parts, supplies, etc., since we weren’t directly involved in the war of the day, and our alleged betters in Washington were determined to try to fight on the cheap so as to not make anyone in the states feel any economic inconvenience from the effort.  (Hmmmm.  Sound familiar?) Anyway, that attitude possibly (probably?) filtered down from the Pentagon through the Lant/Med Fleets, and it HAD to be tough on the ship drivers to be accountable for performance, while getting semi-adequate logistical support.

People like Eisenhower, and Colin Powell have the right idea… as did others, like WW-II Wehrmacht Generaloberst Heinz Guderian who phrased it “Kick ’em, don’t piss on ’em!” – meaning that if it’s important enough to go to war… half-measures don’t make it.  Apply full force, as fast and hard as possible, so as to minimize the ultimate materiel and personnel costs to the country, and its people.

The alternative, war as practiced by McNamara, LBJ, Nixon, and more recently the Clintonoid generals and admirals under SECDEF Rumsfeld, just drives me crazy.  IMHO it’s fundamentally immoral to ask/expect men to lay their lives on the line in order to score some sort of (domestic or international) political point without coming to a clearly decisive result in the national interest.

Unfortunately, once Rummy et al slapped the Iraqi tar-baby, we were stuck for sure, and a quick withdrawal would have been worse that not having done anything in the first place…so the cut-and-run policy pushed by the left-Dems these days, shows such a poor situational awareness that it supports a case for a form of insanity. (…like one of radio talker Michael Savage’s books: Liberalism is a Mental Disorder)

So, where does that leave us now?  Fortunately, some people like Petraeus, and USMC Commandant Conway (who I knew in H.S. in St Louis – I have his signature in a yearbook!) seem to have a good grasp on reality…so we might get saved from ourselves over there yet.  (From what I have read about Adm Mullen, I wouldn’t give a bucket of spit for his attitude…he apparently doesn’t want to fight hard due to the administrative difficulty of maintaining recruiting and retention if there was a “hard” war!  (Is here ever any other kind of war? NOT! Refer again to the Guderian quote above.)

Oh well… all too many of us these days are so enervated (by – what?  Cultural corrosion? Too much emphasis on our modern “bread and circuses”?) that we don’t want to make the commitments NOW that can avoid a disaster LATER… sort of like the Brits (except Churchill) and Frogs in the 30’s.

Sheesh!  All that from a simple recollection of days of  “haze grey and underway” from 40 years ago.  What a trip!

Constitution Watch, Culture Wars

Religious Test Applied to Palin?

Palin’s Church Questioned

This blogsite was apparently set up by someone specifically to go after Gov. Palin & her association with the pentecostal Assembly of God church, and was sent to me by an e-mail correspondent.  It stimulated this response, and in addition to sending this as the reply to the original e-mail, it seemed worthy of being posted in its own right.

http://juxtapostle.blogspot.com/2008/09/pentecostalism-palin-doctrine.html#Revelations

Well, while I admit that the A.G. & other pentecostal churches are not my cup of tea personally… I keep coming back to the one little thing in the Constitution that there is no religious test for office in the United States government.

The blogger who posted this, obviously has his own point of view, and is certainly entitled to it… but IMHO when he strongly infers that Gov. Palin (and others) who believe in this church are somehow psychologically unfit, he’s going down a road that should be avoided at all costs.

It was a long-standing practice in the old Soviet Union to label dissenters, including religious dissenters, as being insane, and thereby worthy of forcible “re-education treatments” including electric shock, drugs, and other “treatment” more akin to torture than to anything we would accept as any form of psychological medical treatment.  Things like this still happen in the (fortunately) few remaining Communist states, including the ChiComs.

Another consideration in this type of approach is that one man’s church, is another man’s cult (or worse).  This sword can cut in any direction.

At one stage in the U.S., similar attitudes led to widespread persecution and officially organized military attacks against the Mormons, which is the reason they went out to Salt Lake (which at the time they left was still part of Mexico) to escape U.S. persecution.  If you doubt it was that bad, in 1838 Governor Boggs of Missouri issued an official order to all Mormons to leave the state or be exterminated…and mobilized the state militia to do the job… pre-dating the similar activities of the Einsatzgruppen of the S.S. by over a hundred years.

Think it couldn’t happen again?  Remember Waco a few years back and the way that was handled with respect and moderation by Janet Reno et al?  At that time, as a Mormon, I was told to my face (by a fellow-sailor in the Naval Reserve!) that something like that would be entirely appropriate for “any cult”, including the “Mormon cult”.  Again…one opinion, but still reflective of an attitude willing to totally condemn AND ELIMINATE anyone with beliefs contrary to a point of view outside of the accepted “orthodoxy”.

Finally, to return to the topic of Governor Palin… we HAVE had experience with Assembly of God members in government before… and guess what?  We survived it!

Missouri elected Assembly of God member John Ashcroft to the Senate at least a couple times before he was appointed United States Attorney General.  Admittedly the liberals hated him too… and the same reaction drives the current wave of horror with which Palin is regarded on the part of the liberals and the so-called “mainstream” media.

Personally I alternate between laughing at their hysteria, and wanting to retch at the depths they are willing to go to to besmirch this woman and her family, in order to gain a political objective.

When Donk Veep Candidate seriously discusses the possibility of starting criminal actions against the current administration when they are out of office (because of their policy differences with the Donk party leftists), coupled with the M. Obama proposed setting up of government training centers to indoctrinate a political action force to promote “progressive” policies… a more immediate source of concern, at least ot those of us who don’t care for (at best) a form of Euro-socialism or (at worst) a smiley-face version of an American Soviet system.

Phew…this is getting long, so I’ll pull the plug for now.

Personally, I LIKE Palin.  Hey, she hunts her own meat!  What’s not to like!

As far as the libs’ hysterical opposition is concerned;  —- ’em if they can’t take a joke!

Constitution Watch, Culture Wars

SD Abortion Debate on National Review Site

Ramesh Ponnaru posting on NRO’s THE CORNER site has given a Slate article a blast for, as he tags it:

SNEERING at SOUTH DAKOTA

I’ve long admired William Saletan’s work, and so I was taken aback by his post on South Dakota’s new informed-consent law on abortion, which has a much higher snark-to-substance ratio than I have come to expect from him. The law requires abortionists to tell women seeking their services that abortion “will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being.” According to Saletan, the South Dakota legislators are “lying to women about their bodies.”

The post goes on to logically dismantle Saletan’s attempt at argument:

It’s actually a little hard to tease out Saletan’s argument. As far as I can make out, he has two objections to the word “separate” in the required message. First, he does not consider the embryo “separate” because, for example, it is implanted in and nourished by a mother’s womb. But obviously the word “separate” has multiple meanings; there is no contradiction or even tension in saying that an embryo is a being separate (=distinct) from the mother while also being within her. An infant is nourished by others without calling into question its separateness in the relevant sense.

Argument 1(b) is that the embryo isn’t separate because maternal RNA directs its growth. Saletan has made a big deal out of this point in the past. But his argument still makes no sense. Yes, the embryo’s RNA is derived from the mother and crucial to its development. So is half the embryo’s DNA. The other half is from the father, but the embryo is a being distinct from the father. So too is it distinct from the mother. Saletan’s argument is a bit like taking someone literally when he says that a baby has “his father’s eyes.”

Second, I think Saletan is trying to say that if the embryo is a separate being from the mother, then there can be no objection to removing it from the womb (and thus causing its death). The pro-life position collapses into logical incoherence. If the embryo is already separate, that is, what can be wrong with separating it from the mother? I hesitate to ascribe this position to Saletan because it seems so pathetic. Again, he is trading on the different meanings of the word “separate” as though ignorant of the way language operates. Rephrase the argument: “If the embryo is distinct from the mother, what can be wrong with physically removing it from the mother?” You can see that the argument has no force. In addition, abortion is not typically a mere removal of an embryo or fetus from the mother with the unfortunate side-effect of killing it. Killing it is almost always both the goal and the method of the procedure.

It’s always nice to see deft verbal rapier work, and the final conclusion is best of all:

In short, the rubes of South Dakota are right and the sophisticated sneerer is wrong.

Amen!

H/T to e-mail correspondent for this one.

Culture Wars, SD Politics

Gov. Continues to Push for SD Pre-school

Witness skeptical about preschool

Gov. Mike Rounds continues to push for preschool standards in South Dakota, but a Stanford educator says studies so far don’t support a “full-scale” program.

Erik Hanushek, a Stanford professor who is among expert witnesses for the state in a school-aid lawsuit, seems lukewarm about the value of preschool, which he admits is “complicated.” “There are some good but very small-scale studies showing positive effects of preschool,” Hanushek said in an e-mail exchange. “Most of the positive effects, however, are not educational improvements but reductions in crime and incarceration. These might well be good investments for society, but they do not solve the education problem.”

Rounds, in an address to school superintendents in Pierre on Tuesday, said, “Preschool is something that is very, very important.”

EuroSocialists, Lenin, Hitler, and Plato would all be in agreement with the Governor on this one. How so?

Mrs. Chief recently received some correspondence from Norwegian cousins who related that their first child was starting the (government mandated) kindergarten – at one-year of age!!

Plato’s Republic advocated that the training of children was too important to leave to the parents, and that to obtain good citizens of the polis, systematic removal from parents for training was the ideal to be implemented.

The above noted 20th-century devotees of the superior wisdom and knowledge of their respective states (of totalitarianism) also advocated, and implemented programs to reduce the influence of parents in the early childhood education of children, again, in the interest of getting more reliable citizens of their versions of a “new world order”.

While Governor Rounds obviously is NOT in the category of these stark practitioners of the superiority of the state in all that matters, his trend on this issue is clearly in the same direction: that the early education of children is too important to leave to parents…this proposition being a (possibly unintended) keystone in the development of more TOTALitarian (get it? TOTAL – as in state control of all aspects of life, including for example, child-rearing) relationships between the state and the people.

This path is NOT a good direction to start down.