Deep Thoughts 5

Liberals think “The Rocky Horror Picture Show” was a documentary.

Sad, But True #3

God is female. And she’s cramping.

The Gospel According to Heinlein

There is a story that circulates about an incident while the original Star Trek series was in production. In that story a certain Muslim man observes that the in the futuristic Star Trek universe just about every kind of human and even non-human is represented, except Muslims, and takes offense. When he gets an opportunity to challenge this shortcoming with someone involved in the production of the series he asks why there are no Muslims in the show. The answer? “Because it’s about the future.”

I’ve been trying to track the source of this down for ages because even if it isn’t true, it ought to be. (If you know, drop me a line.)I’ve always been very future-minded and as such a voracious consumer of science fiction (as well as fantasy), which some insist on euphemistically calling speculative fiction. An occupational hazard of being a SF fan is that people are constantly coming up to you excited to the point of incontinence about the latest new thing you had forgotten about years ago. It’s a longer term version of what happens to those of us who get our news on the Internet. You know what I’m talking about, you walked by the newspaper machine on Monday morning, look at the headline, and said, “They’re still talking about that?”

One of the most telling moments in my life was back when the Republican’s Contract with America was big news. Back then Newt Gingrich and that other guy (?) were the masterminds behind it. I’m listening to the news and I hear that they were inspired by a book. I’m cool with that. I’ve been inspired by many books. But, when asked which book it was they come back with an answer that causes the coffee I had been sipping to come shooting out of my nose like a couple of horizontal geysers. It was “The Third Wave” by Alvin Toffler. Folks, I can count on my fingers the number of books that I’ve started and never finished, “The Third Wave” is one of them. It was that lame. As an old SF fan reading that book I could only think something like, “They’re still talking about that?” That was when the book was new, when the Contract people were talking about it, it was 14 years old. Yikes.

So, to me, it comes as no surprise really that just about everything that pops up in the news, Robert Heinlein has written a story about it, or a story similar to it. I don’t recall any stories he wrote about friction with the Islamic world, he may have, but he did write at length about conflict with the communist world. However, since by adding Allah to communism you pretty much get Islam, the lessons can be applied.

First lesson: It’s time for the present members of the “Nuclear Club” to consider the fact that it may be time to stop disassembling nuclear weapons and start reassembling them. If the Islamic world goes nuclear, we won’t be able to depend on Mutually Assured Destruction to stop them. It only worked against the communists because, whatever their faults, they weren’t suicidal. Folks like Lenin and Stalin wanted to live in the world after they conquered it.

Second Lesson: In his writings, Heinlein pointed out that in a conflict against the Asian “hordes” there would be no way that American mothers could produce enough boy babies fast enough to save us. In effect, we needed an equalizer. Now, if we look at the population of the Muslim world in comparison to our own you can still see the “Saracen hordes” that so terrified our ancestors. Now, imagine those superior numbers with the proverbial big stick and crazy enough to use them.

Third Lesson: Even if we weren’t conquered or blackmailed into some kind dhimmitude, we still would have to change our way of life. Whatever our current leadership’s good qualities, the position that “if we change our way of life, then the terrorists win” just won’t cut it. In an age of suitcase nukes we would have to expend considerable energy just to keep from being a good target. In one of Heinlein’s stories, if memory serves me, there was a scenario where the entire nation was being de-urbanized for just that purpose. The cities were being emptied and spread out evenly across the land so that no one place would be better than another for killing people and destroying infrastructure.

Fourth Lesson: We’ve all seen the 20/20 hindsight historian weeping, moaning, and wringing their hands in grief over how blind our ancestors were. How could they have not foreseen the horrific carnage of the Second World War? Didn’t Hitler give us fair warning in his book Mein Kampf? Couldn’t anybody have taken the time to translate his speeches and the abundant Nazi literature into English and spread the word? Weren’t his minions screaming their bloody intentions into every microphone they could find? Why yes, they were, and you’re going to feel really silly trying to explain to your wife’s daughter by the local imam why you weren’t able to apply the lessons of history to blood-smeared fanatics standing in front of burning buildings and cars and holding signs in English that read something like, “Islam will destroy you all”, or “Submit to Allah or die, Infidel!”

The Liberal Lexicon: “B” Words and Phrases

The Definitions

1. B—grade given by professors to classroom goons who are not on any sports team in order to prove that grade-inflation is a myth.
2. Bible, The—Lies! Lies! All lies I tell you.
3. Bigot—Anyone winning an argument with a liberal. (Not original, but still true.)
4. Bipartisanship—when Republicans abandon their principles faster than a horde of Frenchmen running from a bar of soap.
5. Birth Control Pills—medication that should be sold in vending machines at your daughter’s middle school.
6. Border—a usually imaginary line dividing one country from another. Borders are inviolable symbols of sovereignty with the sole exception of the United States.
7. Border Patrol— American Gestapo
8. Boy—future bastard.
9. Bush, George H. W.— son of Satan.
10. Bush, George W.— grandson of Satan

Legalize Crime!

Memorandum

From: Memo Writer
Topic: Eliminating Crime with Amnesty Programs

Abstract: The Illegal Immigration advocate have finally convinced management of the wisdom of blanket amnesties. We must admit that we can’t understand why we never saw the wisdom of getting rid of 12 to 20 million law breakers, just by waving a magic wand and saying, “abracadabra, you’re legal,” and giving the former lawbreakers a spiffy new name. After due reflection management thinks we can apply this principle to all crime and eliminate it everywhere, forever. To this end, management submits the following suggestion:

Item 1:
Old Name: Murderer
New Name: Afterlife Facilitator

Item 2:
Old Name: Rapist
New Name: Rough Sex Specialist

Item 3:
Old Name: Pedophile
New Name: Nomadic Sex Instructor

Item 4:
Old Name: Carjacker
New Name:Vehicle Performance Spotchecker

Item5:
Old Name: Drug Dealer
New Name: Freelance Pharmacist

Item 6:
Old Name: Tax Evader
New Name: Tax Evader (There’s got to be limits!)

Item 7:
Old Name: Traitor
New Name: Multiple-loyalty Citizen

Item 8:
Old Name: Embezzler
New Name: Alternative Finance Technician

Item 9:
Old Name: Kidnapper
New Name: High-initiative Travel Agent

Item 10:
Old Name: Fugitive
New Name: Jurisdiction Connoisseur

Top 10 Reasons Liberal Democrats Fear Social Security Reform

Top 10 Reasons Liberal Democrats Fear Social Security Reform

The Savior of All Working Men and Women
Bow down and worship me Republican dogs.

1. If Social Security dies they’ll have to admit that nothing good came out of the New Deal.
2. The ghost of Eleanor Roosevelt told Hillary it was a bad idea.
3. Concern that the elderly can still swing a bat.
4. They’ll lose their best means of disguising tax increases.
5. It’s fun to watch retirees grovel for help.
6. If things get better it will be even harder to convince the voters that they can’t live without the Democratic Party.
7. Reagan thought it was a good idea.
8. Osama bin Laden sent an e-mail saying that Allah thinks it’s a bad idea.
9. The fervent belief that transfer payments are good for the economy.
10. Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s ghost told them if they would save it he would run for another term.

Are The Muslims 10 Feet Tall?

I don’t know about you, but I’ve noticed a disturbing trend among some of my fellow citizens. It reminds me a great deal of the way some people viewed the Soviets back before their collapse. To judge by what was in the popular media back then we were doomed. Our only real option was to put off the inevitable as long as possible. The inevitable outcome of being swallowed up by the vastly more moral, if not superior Communist/Socialist juggernaut.

Back during the 1980s I came across a rather refreshing article titled something like “Are The Russians Ten Feet Tall?”. The article argued that far from being the invincible supermen that Americans feared (or in some cases adored). The Soviets were in serious trouble. Sadly, I don’t remember many particulars of the story. Mostly I just remember feeling relief at some sign that I might not wind up working on a collective farm somewhere after all.

Now I hear from time to time the same sort of thing being said about the Muslims: They can’t be contained or defeated. There are too many of them. They are too fanatical. They are more dedicated and so forth. While we Westerners are too fat, lazy, stupid, ignorant, agnostic, ambivalent, etc. to preserve ourselves. I’ve even heard a co-worker once state that we deserved to be conquered and oppressed as punishment for what we have “done” to the rest of the world. I don’t know about you, but I’m sure that the statute of limitations has run out on colonialism, Indian wars, slavery, etc.

Like most of you I’m sure, I’ve been continually researching Islam and the Muslim world and I find a lot of chinks in their armor that could be exploited, if only we lived in a society that exploits its advantages. One of these is Muslim (or at least Arab) disdain for physical labor. It’s my understanding that starting at the bottom and working your way up is an unfathomable concept to most. I’ve read that its not uncommon for an otherwise able-bodied man to sit around unemployed for 10 years, smoking and quaffing coffee at the local coffee shop while waiting for “suitable” employment (e.g. management).

Another I’ve heard and read about is their penchant for physical cowardice. Naturally, some will raise the specter of suicide attacks as proof that they are very brave indeed. I believe that is false on a numbers of counts: first, although there are obviously far too many people willing to be suicide bombers, the numbers pales in comparison to the number of Muslims available take the job (plus I consider suicide bombing to be evolution in progress); second, we must bear in mind that the numb nut actually believes he is on his way to have exclusive sexual access with 72 women for all eternity, I suspect that instead of brave he may simply be horny; third, if you’ll recall the first Gulf War, you’ll remember the droves of enemy soldiers scratching and clawing at each other in order to be first to surrender, sometimes to unmanned reconnaissance drones. The Gulf War presented an opportunity for every supply clerk and mess cook to be a Sergeant York.

There is another area that could be exploited, though I’m sure it will be denounced as cynical and mercenary. That is playing on the fault lines that run through the Muslim world. Sunnis and Shiites despise each other almost as much as they hate us. It seems like the only thing they can agree on is Kurdish genocide. The Wahabbis are nuttier than squirrel excrement and the world tends to forget that the Iranians are not Arabs, but rather Persians and have long considered the Arabs to be little more than hairless monkeys. We could play on that. I know it probably makes me a “bad” person, but I’m not so sure that civil war in Iraq is such a bad thing. Muslims killing Muslims is the epitome of the win-win situation.

Modular Culture

I read a post on monoculturalism once upon a time. Naturally I forgot to mark it and can’t remember where I found it, so I’m cheating someone out of a link. I found it an intriguing term since I had never heard it before. The link referred to an increasing rejection of multiculturalism, something that all good Americans hate. It reminded me of a concept of mine that I’ve intended to post about for a long time, modular culture.I not sure we’ve ever had a true monoculture, and if we ever did we definitely don’t have one now, and it’s unlikely to ever return. I have for years believed that American Culture is not one monolithic whole, that in fact it is compartmentalized into a hierarchy of “modules”. I DO believe that there is a core culture that every American needs to understand and be able to function in. Past that, however, there are so many different flavors of American life that one could never know them all.

If I had been motivated enough I might have made this my life’s work and published brilliant research papers on the topic, but I’ve had bigger fish to fry. The gist of my theory is that past the core culture there can be any number of sub-modules attached to it, and others attached to those. As long as those subordinate modules conform to the values outlined in the higher order modules we’ll all be OK. For instance, your Satanic Cult module won’t fly if you do human sacrifices. That would be a gross violation of American core culture. An extreme example, no doubt, but it does make my point.

If a certain module isn’t for you, another will be. The “vampire chic” and team sports modules absolutely baffle me. My renaissance faire and old muscle car modules might baffle you. The important thing is that these harm no one and can co-exist. Certain groups that have been getting a lot of attention lately believe that shouldn’t be allowed to drink, eat bacon, or let women wear bikinis (by itself proof of their insanity). However, they are allowed to kill all the people they want. Another gross violation of American core culture. If you can’t wrap your head around the idea of not killing people who disagree with you then you shouldn’t be allowed to come here. If you’re already here, get the hell out. Have a nice day.

Sad, But True #2

A short skirt makes a persuasive argument.

Remember the Melting Pot?

I heard somebody on the radio, I think it was Gary McNamara,say something brilliant and succinct, two things that don’t always go together. Paraphrasing: Don’t feel pride because of what you are. Feel pride because of what you accomplish.Think about it, if the source of your pride is race or ethnicity then your crowning achievement is the mere fact of your birth. If that is so, then after your umbilical cord was snipped your life has been all down hill.

Hispano-Fascism

The Hispano-Fascist Flag

Things have been slow here in the blogosphere, so I took the time to do some reading up on all things immigration. I spent hours on it in fact. I checked out the American Patrol Report and spent some time cruising MEChA’s web site. My reading took me from one extreme to the other, from laughter at the lunacy of their positions to gut-wrenching concern that so many people believe the tripe they’re spewing.

My calling them Hispano-Fascists isn’t just a ploy to annoy them or make them angry. They generate plenty of those emotions on their own. No, I call them that because the hatred and bile that spews out of their mouths reminds me ever so much of the words of other fascists from the past. I’m certain of one thing if nothing else. If it walks like a fascist, talks like a fascist, thinks like a fascist, and acts like a fascist, then it’s a damn fascist!

I’ve always subscribed to the theory that as soon as someone in a debate compares his opponent to Hitler or the Nazis, he or she just lost the debate. Very rarely is the comparison legitimate. Usually, it’s just a rhetorical technique to inflame someone else’s passion. But in the case of the deluded Reconquistas and certifiable psycho MEChA sociopaths, the comparison is dead-on.

The blather about the bronze race and the people of the sun invading and occupying my little piece of the country in order to fill out their inevitable destiny. That sounds an awful lot like invading Poland to get a little “living room” for the “master race” on the way to creating the world-encompassing German order. I say if the swastika fits, they should wear it.

I think that the invaders are getting a little bit too cocky for their own good. Just because our government doesn’t see any need to protect us and keep us sovereign, it doesn’t mean that we’ll just stand by while it happens. I fear the pussies in our government will let this continue until the rank and file citizens have no choice but to act on their own. I don’t know about you folks, but there is no way in hell I’m going to live as a second-class citizen in my own country. Nor will I stand idly by while people who have no clue as to what makes the country work reduce it to third-world nation status.

Remember, Mexico isn’t poor because of lack of resources, lack of labor, or any intrinsic genetic flaws. They are poor because they run things like Mexicans. And no, I’m not saying they don’t have the right to live however they want. What I am saying is that the way you live carries certain consequences with it. If you choose a self-destructive path, then you have no one to blame but yourself. And if you choose not to see the connection between your condition and your actions, that’s your problem too. However, your choices in no way obligate me to let you come to my country and impose those choices on me.

If things suck down there, that’s not my problem. Even more so, It’s not our problem. I would suggest that you stop electing kleptocrats for a nice beginning.

The Liberal Lexicon: “A” Words and Phrases

The Fine Art of Liberal to English Translation

Contrary to popular belief, Liberals do speak a form of English. Their dialect, though strange, is quite similar to American English. In fact, the vocabulary, grammar, syntax, and even the accents are identical. So what accounts for all the heartache and confusion that plagues Libero-American relations? The answer is semantics, the linguistic field of word meanings. The concepts identified by the same words are often quite different between Liberal and American English. As a token of my desire to bridge this gap I  submit these translations. Starting with “A” of course.

 

The Definitions

1. A—grade automatically given by humanities professors to goons who harass the token conservative student in the classroom.
2. ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union, aka Three Lies in Four Words— Don’t worry. We’ll get offended for you. No! Really! It’s no trouble at all.
3. Actor/Actress—unimportant person who makes a living pretending to be an important person.
4. Art—various forms of creative self-expression that in its highest form involves graphic displays of and references to body functions.
5. Asian: A sell-out ethnic minority guilty of making other ethnic minorities look bad by outperforming caucasians.
6. Ass—the ironically appropriate symbol of the Democratic party ; also: in debates, describes an opponent who raised a point for which you had not rehearsed an answer.

Hillary Unmasked

 

 The Hildebeast without her makeup.

Hillary Unspun

Memorandum

From: The Memo Writer
Topic: Hillary Clinton vs. Women (and Decency)

The sustained slamming of Hillary Clinton in the previous post felt so good—almost orgasmicly good—management has decided it deserves some pure self-indulgence.

Item One: Hillary is the worst enemy a woman could ever have, or at least she and people like her. Women have legitimate grievances, none of which Hillary gives a damn about. On the issue of Women’s Rights, or the more accurate term of Women’s Well-being, Hillary couldn’t care less. She is an generic exploiter, not even extraordinary at that endeavor. She finds a legitimate issue or cause and latches onto it like a lamprey latches on to some hapless fish. Her motivation is not the cause, but pure naked self-interest.

Item Two: Despite mocking homemakers and mothers, and deriding Tammy Wynette’s devotion to her husband, Hillary has taken the most basic of the cynical gold digger’s roads to success. She hitched her wagon to a man’s rising star. Then she subordinated her ambitions to his in anticipation of a big and easier pay off later.

Item Three: Hillary is an enabler of staggering magnitude. Bill Clinton has subjected her to a lifetime of disrespect and countless humiliations with his myriad (and none too skillfully concealed) infidelities. She is known to have reacted with anger at the Fornicator in Chief, but when the time comes for action she lashes out viciously, not at him, but at the women. Even those who weren’t willing. Strangely, especially those who weren’t willing.

Item Four: She has to be the crappiest mother that ever existed. With the examples she has set for her daughter I suspect that Chelsea employs a full-time staff of counselors.

Item Five: Hillary and others of her ilk use their seething misandry to pump life into the moribund feminist movement. They then use that movement to gain favor with bubble-bound university types, inside-the-beltway refugees from reality, and frothing-at-the-mouth lesbians. The end result is girls who grow up unable to respect their fathers, brothers, husbands, or even their own male children. A situation guaranteed to perpetuate female misery.

Item Six: Hillary is a woman who is known to scream and curse at and demean her own staff, as well as those who are there to keep her alive. This is a woman who felt justified in vandalism and taking national heirlooms as souvenirs when they left the White House. Be honest with yourself; how do you really think she feels about the single mother working at a below-the-poverty-level job and living in a single-wide because she can’t afford anything else. The truth is worse than you can imagine. She doesn’t think or feel anything about it. Those people are of an entirely different species and beneath her notice—unless mom doesn’t pay her taxes.

Exploring Two of Hillary Clinton’s Multitudinous Faces

Memorandum

From: The Memo Writer
Topic: Hillary Clinton’s Sudden Concern for High Fuel Prices

Abstract: News reports today indicate that Hillary Clinton has issued a recommendation that the government release fuel from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve for ease rising prices. Management has noticed that, as usual, this cynical gesture has generated an epidemic of warm fuzzy feelings and a plague of giddy “aws” from staff with short memories. Staff members with longer memories but suffering from Chronic Political Gullibility Syndrome are experiencing anxious feelings they can’t identify. To alleviate these problems, management requires all USA staff to read the following:

Item 1: Hillary’s suggestion is pure political posturing. Hillary, and others like her, have always maintained that Americans pay too little for fuel.

Item 2: Liberal Democrats are notorious for waxing poetic about the “$5 to $7 per gallon” that Europeans pay during price run-ups.

Item 3: Any Liberals objection to the present run-up is because none of the run-up is the result of the heavy additional taxation they recommend during period of low fuel prices.

Item 4: The Strategic Petroleum Reserve, born in a fit of crisis-induced political posturing, is for emergencies. Emergencies are understood to be disruptions in fuel supply that would immobilize the military and law enforcement, disrupt shipments of food or medicine, or that shut off the heat and lights in January. Your vacation to Maui will never qualify as an emergency no matter how big of a fit you throw.

Item 5: The reserve isn’t as big as you think. As of November 8, 2007, the SPR has 694.7 million barrels of crude oil stored. Management knows that number sounds big, but if withdrawn at the maximum possible rate, the reserve would be exhausted in 57 days. Just in case you’re a registered Democrat, that’s less than two months.

Item Six: Presently, the United States imports about 12 million barrels of oil per day—that’s per day! The SPR only has the capacity to withdraw 4.4 million barrels per day. A total disruption of our imported supply would result in a fuel deficit of approximately 8 million barrels a day—per day! For those of you who weren’t alive in the 1970s, or were too young to remember, let the voice of experience tell you that a smaller deficit sucked more than you can possibly imagine.

Item Seven: A politically motivated release of fuel from the SPR will do nothing to make the situation better, it will only make you feel better, just like all previous politically motivated releases.

Item Eight: By now you’ve probably asked: If all of this is true, then why does Hillary want to do it? The reason is that most of you think short term while Hillary, for all of her other faults, thinks long term. Hillary wants to be president. Why? Because it is the ultimate position in the world for engaging in social engineering, which has always been Hillary’s goal in life. To be president, she has to get elected, at least for now. She doesn’t want to face an election with a populace paying $5 or more per gallon for gasoline. Especially not against an opponent on record as advocating increasing domestic fuel supplies and refining capacity.

Item Nine: Hillary, just like Bill, doesn’t give a damn about you and never will. After she is safely ensconced in office, she will be perfectly content to let all of you, even you loyal Democrats in the Rust Belt, freeze to death in the dark. It will be a small price to pay to realize Hillary’s Utopian vision for the world.

Item Ten: Most of the crude oil held in the SPR is highly polluting “sour” crude. So, at least for a little while, you’ll have to choose between cleaner air and luxuries like electricity and transportation.

Item Eleven: As long as the Champagne is chilled and the engines on Air Force One are singing happily, you will only matter for one day in November every four years.

Management recommends you study and remember these items as there will be a test given on November 4, 2008.

Actors and Actresses as Pundits

I’ve never really understood why being on television gives someone instant credibility. It was bad enough when there were only 3 channels, but these days with 500+ channels, some of them public access, just about everybody and his Laotian brother-in-law are on TV. A year or so ago, my wife and I went to see the Robin Williams flick “Man of the Year”. It was cute but not as funny as I had hoped. The saddest and funniest moment came as we were leaving and one of the men sitting behind me told the other, “That’s the kind of candidate we need in real life.” Some people are like clay mentally, and yet their vote counts as much as mine. I have always wondered how the hell we got to this situation. In my studies of history I’ve learned that in centuries past acting was considered a scummy profession. Low enough on the social food chain that in some cases women of any social class weren’t permitted to act. Apparently it was too demeaning, for even hookers, so men dressed in drag played the female roles. My how times have changed.

I’ve heard so much stupidity spew from the mouths of actors and actresses that I now just assume they’re morons until they’re proven otherwise. One would think they would take Laura Ingraham’s advice and Shut Up and Sing, but they don’t. Instead they engage is such egregious blather that it becomes impossible to enjoy any show or movie they are in. It took living in a world with 500+ channels for me to realize that three was probably too many. Hurray for Hollyweird.

Unexceptional Americans

Who are the Unexceptional Americans. Unexceptional Americans are those pseudo-Americans who strive to place the brass ring of mediocrity within reach of every fellow citizen.

I’ve been reading up some on the concept of American Exceptionality. It’s probably easier to explain than define as shown by this quote from Wikipedia:

American exceptionalism is the idea that the United States and the American people hold a special place in the world, by offering opportunity and hope for humanity, derived from a unique balance of public and private interests governed by constitutional ideals that are focused on personal and economic freedom. Political science defines it as a presence of unique traits in the United States, such as high levels of religiosity and the failure of socialist parties, that do not correlate with national characteristics in other industrialized and democratic countries.

Or, in a nutshell, we’re a unique people doing things in our own unique way, and it works for us so well that we think that we should serve as a role model for the world. If you’re a Leftist, this is a bad thing. Even if they aren’t aware of it, I believe most Americans operate under some form of this philosophy. Unfortunately, few of them own networks or newspaper conglomerates—or have tenure for that matter.

As a nation, we’re pretty much the closest thing the world has ever seen to a meritocracy, though we fall far too short, far too often. If you’re a Leftist, this is a bad thing. The idea that things should be distributed to people on the basis of merit boggles many a Liberal mind. Just like the concept of a person who works twice as much getting paid twice as much.

Why would the United States be unique among nations? Because it is the Enlightenment’s only child. I found this best stated while reading some Objectivist material (Rand, Peikoff, and the like). It was said that the United States was “the last dying gasp of the Enlightenment”. Soon after that the intelligentsia would be thumbing their collective noses at Enlightenment ideals and the world would be hearing about the proletariat, class struggles, bourgeoisie, noble savages, etc.

The problem is that the Left, for all their education and worldliness, never really picked up on the fact that the institutions of the United States, with the possible exception of religion, are the new kids on the block. Throughout history, the Left, or their equivalents in other times, keep “repainting” and “renaming” the same old crap and then convincing themselves it’s “new and improved”. In the Leftist Nirvana, some people exist for the sake and convenience of other people and are coerced to due their duty in that regard, usually those cursed with intelligence and ability.

In our nation of course we have (at least partially) capitalism, property rights, universal suffrage, democratically elected representative republicanism, checks and balances, a civilian controlled military, limits on police power, and too much more to mention. These are the new ideas historically speaking. No matter how hard the Left tries to convinces us otherwise.

This is all a good thing. I like the idea of living in a country where I can make my own mistakes and make my own way and even start all over again if need be. I have never understood why most people want to blend into the herd, seem to crave the anonymity in fact. I don’t know. Maybe being a Liberal in the United States is like being a Muslim in the 21st Century. It’s hard to hang onto your most basic values and beliefs when everything around you proves that it’s a lie. What do you think?

A Gold Watch for Hitler

I think it has been pretty firmly established that Hitler was a pretty rotten guy. After all, we’ve been badmouthing him since the 1930s, the 1920s for some of our older folks. As a matter of a fact, he’s been dead for 60 years and we just can’t shut up talking about him, even though his government has been defunct and unable to implement policy for all that time.

I once read some sage who stated that a problem of modern society is that old Adolf was evil made flesh and that with his death Hitlerian evil was effectively banished from the Earth. That’s not true. Adolf wasn’t the first “Hitler” and he wasn’t the last. Compared to gems like Pol Pot, Hitler’s percentage of his own population wiped out makes him look like a piker.

I, for one, am getting sick of Hitler references when there is so much fresh evil in the world. How refreshing would it be if the next time someone who couldn’t refute one of your arguments called you a “damn mullah” instead of a “damn Nazi”. I’ve even heard on some Internet forums they have a Hitler Rule that says whenever someone compares someone else to Hitler or calls him a Nazi, the discussion thread is considered officially dead.

So, I say we give Adolf and his Scary Men a metaphorical gold watch and move on to current and fresher hells. A wonderfully descriptive term has been coined for our most worrisome enemies: Islamofascists. Never has a new term captured its target concept so well. Naturally, the Left (big fans of the Hitler/Nazi analogy) objects to the term. I think it’s illustrative to review what Fascism is. My dictionary defines it as:

A political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

If one substitutes the term religion for the phrase nation and often race, you will find a description that sounds creepily familiar. I have read of Islamic clerics who state explicitly that the American idea of separating church and state is incomprehensibly ludicrous, because (paraphrasing) “Church IS the State.” This is a political philosophy, movement, or regime that has been known to execute women for wearing make up.

Political Correctness be damned. It isn’t a sin to know who the Boogeyman is.

It’s Not Racism—It’s a Software Problem

It’s a pity that we don’t teach rhetoric in school anymore. Not too long ago it was considered one of the 7 constituents of a good classical education. These days not much is left of that curriculum and what is left has been bled dry of substance by pseudo-enlightened teaching methods.

I’ve taken a course on rhetoric, which was helpful, but I’ve learned the most about it by countless hours of pondering mind-bendingly inane pronouncements trumpeted by people who should have known better, and the enthusiastic and unbelievably uncritical acceptance by all the nodding heads in attendance.

The best working definition of rhetoric that I’ve come across is as follows: The art and science of persuasion. Note that word: persuasion. This has nothing to do with logic or logical argument whereby, if properly done, one arrives at a correct conclusion. Rhetoric is convincing someone that some conclusion is the correct one whether it is or not. Considerable rhetoric has been expended talking teenage girls out of their virginity in the backseats of cars. Just about any abandoned single mother struggling to get her life back on track will tell you that going along wasn’t the correct conclusion.

It’s been a long road for me, but I’ve figured out our adversaries well enough that I can spot the flaws in the reasoning and their rhetorical legerdemain fairly easily. However, I see many good folks around me struggling with the Left’s tricky arguments, then shrugging their shoulders and going on, leaving the asinine pronouncements unchallenged. For all our good qualities, American’s lack of ambition toward intellectual rigor is a serious national flaw. One that scares me more than a little.

Leaving the jargon aside for the time being, I’ve noticed two things that people on the Right/Conservative/Libertarian side need to watch out for. First are false dichotomies, or taking something that has to be considered as a whole and splitting it into parts that can’t stand on their own so as to knock them down more easily. Second is the flip-side of the first. Taking separate elements and deliberately conflating them so as to use valid (maybe) criticisms of one to drag down the other. All of which brings me to my point. Racism, culturalism, nationalism, and any other number of –isms are frequently entirely separate issues that need to be considered, debated, and accepted or rejected as separate entities.

Conflating racism and culturalism is one of the biggest problems today and a current favorite rhetorical tap dance of the Left. The Left insists on treating these as two sides of the same coin making it impossible to condemn one without condemning the other. This, of course is insane in general, and never more insane than when it is applied to the United States.

Racism against Hispanics? Hispanics are not a race. The word itself has traditionally meant Spanish-speaking, thereby referring to a linguistic group as opposed to a genetically similar group of people. A conveniently forgotten fact is that Spain, the source of Spanish, is a Western European country, further west than England, the source of the “Gringo” language. Spaniards are Caucasians.

What about Latinos, as in Latin America? Well, what about it” In Latin America ethnicities range from pure Caucasian (who are the elites that run the show and own just about everything), through pure Amerindians, through Mestizos (mixed race people) to black folks. Besides, I’m not so sure we should call it “Latin” America. After all, for the Amerindians, they didn’t pursue anything Latin, it came and conquered them.

What about Islam? The same principal applies. Racially, Muslims range from the whitest of Caucasians in Eastern Europe, a relic of Islamic imperial conquest, to the darkest of Africans on that continent. Islam is not a race; it is a fascist ideology masquerading as a religion.

When I try to explain the difference to someone, I usually use a computer analogy. Culture is to race as software is to hardware. Despite what poverty pimps and professional grievance-mongers may tell you, racism is all but beaten and progress is still made everyday. If the Republican Party is the Party of hate and the status quo, why are so many of them begging a black woman to be their presidential candidate in 2008? Why did Walter Williams, a famous and distinguished black economist, go on the radio and announce to white liberals, “You’re forgiven, you can stop acting stupid now”?

You would have to have been living under a rock to avoid people of minority persuasions that have long since disproved the “hardware” theory of racism. I have met people of all races who are significantly smarter than I am, and I dwell on the lonely fringes of the right side of the bell curve.

So what is the crucial difference? Software. Or as it applies to human beings—culture. Millions of people want to immigrate to the United States to partake in its freedoms, material wealth, and opportunities. Sadly, many of these folks no longer want to assimilate. In fact, they consider it an outrage that they would be expected to do so. Rather the existing culture is expected to change to accommodate their presence. In essence they expect this country to load their cultural “software” over our own. All this reminds me very much of my experience teaching in a rural school. Frequently, parents would move there hoping to get their children away from the bad big city influences. More often than not, those children were the big city influences. I recall one girl in particular who lasted only 4 days before being arrested for dealing cocaine.

So, what does this all mean? I suppose somebody has to have the guts to say it, so I will. Mexicans, your hardware is fine, just as good as anybody else. Your software, on the other hand, sucks. When you come here, legally of course, check your cultural baggage at the door.

There’s an old saying that says something like, “If the people knew what it was that they wanted, they wouldn’t want it.” The same applies here. If American culture is swamped and displaced by Mexican culture, or just about any other for that matter, in 10 years this country will be a “has-been” like France. In 20 years it would be a Third World nation. Then who would the rest of the world “borrow” money from then?

Paul Tibbetts: May God Give You Fair Winds and Following Seas

I was pondering what to post on today and not having much luck. Then I stumbled upon a site where a standard issue Lefty psychobitch pronounced Paul Tibbetts, the recently departed pilot of the Enola Gay, a coward who died a coward. I would give you the link but I don’t want to send the skank any traffic.

If you don’t know, and if you don’t you just indicted the American education system, the Enola Gay was the name of the bomber that dropped the first atomic bomb on Hiroshima. Tibbetts never expressed remorse at what had been done. He famously said that he had never lost a minute’s sleep over the mission. The Left in general and peaceniks in particular hounded the man his whole life, positive that it would only be a matter of time before he relented and begged someone, presumably the Japanese, for forgiveness. He never did and he shouldn’t have.

Why shouldn’t he? It’s simple. The Japanese of 1945 had it coming. It doesn’t matter how nice the Japanese of 1890 were, nor does it matter what good allies the Japanese of 2007 are. The Japanese of 1945 had it coming, big time. As a nation, we deserve world accolades for being forgiving enough to stop at two. To paraphrase the common man of the era: There was a war on buddy.

The mental midget who denounced Tibbetts is representative of the kind of attitude that will results in untold thousands of unnecessary deaths in our current war. I’m talking about the deaths of us, and our allies, of course. The deaths of the enemy don’t matter. Why? Because the bastards have it coming. Real Americans have no obligation to die for the fantasy world ethics of the Left.

General Tibbetts, I know that you were an Army Air Corps and Air Force veteran, but as a former Navy man, I wish you fair winds and following seas as you pass into the beyond.