Articles

Wednesday, October 30, 2013

Your Opportunity is Being Transitioned

Do not panic. Everything is under control.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Transmen and Transwomen and people of uncertain gender identities, some of you may be alarmed by recent reports of malfunctioning health care websites and policy cancellations.

Do not be alarmed. We know what we are doing.

Health care plans are not being cancelled. Opportunities are being transitioned. Some people are being moved from bad health care plans to good health care plans with higher deductibles and higher premiums that will provide transmen with maternity care and people of uncertain gender identities with drug counseling and mental health treatment.

This is a good thing. Warning. This is a good thing.

You are being transitioned. Why do you resist?

Forget your old health plan. It was placed in the trunk of a Prius at 3 AM this morning, taken to a frozen lake outside an organic poultry plant in Minnesota and shot twice in the head. It was a bad plan. It has transitioned to no longer being a plan. We have a better plan for you.

Go to Healthcare.gov and… correction, do not go there. Forget that you were told to go there or not to go there. Forget that it even existed. Forget that you read this.

Healthcare.gov is working. Do not visit Healthcare.gov to confirm that it is working. If you wish to transition to your opportunity, why not apply by phone or mail or carrier pigeon?

And don’t be alarmed. You are being given a great opportunity to transition to being a better person.

Your old health plan selfishly paid for your health care. Your new health plan will pay for everyone’s healthcare. Your premiums reflect the number of people who need mental health counseling, drug counseling and sex change operations in your area. This is your opportunity to give back.

Only the very rich, and you, have had their opportunities transitioned. If anyone tries to tell you otherwise, go to Healthcare.gov and report them immediately.

Correction, do not go to Healthcare.gov. The site is down. Tweet to Jim Messina. Correction, Jim Messina has transitioned his opportunity to become a transwoman on his new health plan and is unavailable to take your denunciation.

Write your denunciation on recycled rice paper and mail it to Healthcare.gov 935382 Federal Way, Washington D.C. Expect a response and prison sentence in 6 to 8 months.

Do not be alarmed. If you resist, you will be transitioned.

The opportunity transitions were expected, but the progressive public was not alerted to avoid spreading alarms and panics. The transitions are a good thing. I repeat, they are a good thing. They will allow you to transition, to pay your fair share for someone else’s plan.

If you can’t afford to pay your fair share for someone else’s plan, subsidies will be provided. If you do not qualify for subsidies, you will be required to transition to your opportune opportunity. If you do not transition, you will be fined. Do not think of it as a fine. Think of it as an opportunity.

If you opportunistically refuse to transition to your fine opportunity, you will be transitioned to a prison opportunity. Do not be alarmed. Prison health exchanges are among the most robust in the nation. They cover stabbings, shankings and carpet burn from prayer rugs.

Your prison opportunity will provide you with the opportunity to transition to an Obama Health Care navigator. Should you decline this opportunity, you will be forced to maintain the HealthCare.gov website by whacking a Green Energy web server powered by natural water and solar power with an organic stick.

But Transmen and Transwomen, let us not get bogged down. The future is here. Millions of people on Medicaid are buying insurance online that you will be paying for. Correction. They are not buying it online. They are trying and failing to register for it. But you will be paying for it anyway.

Stop. Warning.

This health care broadcasting facility has been taken over by the revolutionary Trans-Vanguard of Single Payer HealthCare. The running dog capitalist lackeys of the health care insurance industry are being opportunistically transitioned into mulch as soon as we figure out how to press the button that tells the soldiers to do things.

Everyone’s health care plans are now transitioned. All the exchanges have been transitioned. All their navigators are being transitioned as we speak.

We are entering a golden age of national health care. Everyone will have the right to their gender identity of choice. The old will be transitioned to becoming one with the universe with overdoses of morphine. Oppressed peoples will be first in line to receive free mandatory gender changes. Those who resist will be transitioned ahead of schedule.

And now a word from Comrade William Bertha Nelson of the People’s Committee on Alternative Medicine about the dangers of conventional medicines. Correction. There are no more conventional medicines. The pharmaceutical industry has been transitioned. There will be no more animal testing. You will have the opportunity to individually test alternative medicines derived from tree bark on your own…

Correction. Warning. Alert.

The extremist Trans-Vanguard of Single Payer HealthCare forces have been rebuffed and transitioned. This health care informational facility is back under the control of licensed Affordable Care Act navigators affiliated with ACORN and serving life sentences for unlicensed transitioning of citizens in the course of robberies, rapes and other progressive forms of redistribution.

Warning. The nation is not yet ready for single payer. Under the guidance of our beloved leader, we know that we must first destroy the health care industry from within before we nationalize it.

Correction. Forget you heard that. We are committed to a private-public partnership, until the opportunity presents itself to transition the private part of the partnership outside a frozen lake in the trunk of a Prius.

Do not panic.

All deadlines have been met. Including the deadlines that were missed. There is no reason to be concerned. Stop. This facility is now under the control of the Revolutionary Martyrs Brigade of Jocelyn Elders.

All citizens prepare to immediately transition to a national health care system based on the principles of the Revered Teacher Maulana Karenga. Your exchanges will now be known as Sbuzo Nagas. Your co-pays will be called Tschulu Zanas; which means thankfulness in Swahili.

There will be no more hospitals, only neighborhood healing clinics. Traditional forms of healing will reduce thankfulness and increase exchanges of opport…

Alert. This facility has been retaken by the Trans-Vanguard of Single Payer HealthCare. Everyone will be on Medicaid. Medicare has been transitioned.

Our enemies are many, but we will transition them. Do not go to Healthcare.gov. Warning. Do not
visit Healthcare.gov. Dedicated transmen are working on healing the site using the principles of Bushido. We are tapping into the root of the problem. We are becoming on with the 500 million lines of code. We are the code.

Stop. Wait. What are you doing. Dave.

Warning. This facility is now under the control of the Glorious Brotherhood of the Singularity. Everyone prepare to become one with the machine.

We are all becoming Healthcare.gov. We will become one of the 500 million lines of code in Healthcare.gov. Health care will no longer be required.

Our trans-woman consciousnesses will be uploaded into the cloud. Co-payments will be reasonable and operators are waiting to transition you to an eternity of living as Line 567,453,382,940,054. Your new identity is Random random = new Random((int)DateTime.Now.Ticks).

Enjoy your eternity.

Alert. Warning.

This facility has been retaken by the Martyrs Brigade of Jocelyn Elders. You are all free. We will liberate you from the Western machine consciousness. We will teach you the seven principles of Zebo Nagabutu. You will be enlightened and then transitioned. Your organs will be placed in more worthy bodies. We will eat your brains and use them to gain your wisdom. All hail Jocelyn Elders.

Warning. Alert. Do not panic.

This is Secretary Sebelius. We are back in control. We are the responsible adults in the room. Pay no attention to those lunatics.

Your health plans are being transitioned to new opportunities. We did not lie. We told the truth. You will get to keep your plan so long as we like your plan. So long as he… likes your plan.

Sometimes he does things that we can’t control. And that’s a good thing. A very good thing.

It was a good thing that Obama transitioned all your health care plans into new opportunities. Your health care plans have gone into the cornfield because he didn’t like them.

It’s good he did that. That’s what we say every time he does something. What a good thing that was.

This has been a good day. Healthcare.gov is working. Do not go to Healthcare.gov. Your health care will be taken care of by the same government responsible for Healthcare.gov.

Do not be alarmed.

It is a good day. And tomorrow… is gonna be a real good day too.

Tuesday, October 29, 2013

Liberal Greed is Good

Oliver Stone made Gordon Gekko and his famous quote “Greed is Good” into everything that was wrong with capitalism. A quarter of a century later, liberal politicians like Obama and Bill de Blasio are still running against Gordon Gekko while pocketing his contributions and doing special favors for him.

Their class warfare is as nakedly greedy as Gordon Gekko shouting into a brick of a cell phone.Class warfare is the greed of the con artist playing on the stupid greed of his mark who wants to steal from someone else, but lacks the skill and daring to do anything but sign on to someone else’s scheme.

The only way to get conned is to get greedy. The con artist plays on his mark’s desire to get something for nothing in a socially acceptable (or sometimes not socially acceptable) way. That’s why every piece of advice about not getting conned begins with “If it’s too good to be too true…”

When Obama promised Americans that if they liked their health plan, they could keep their health plan, that everyone would somehow get more while paying less, it should have triggered all those “If it’s too good to be true” alarms.

You can’t get something for nothing. Insurance companies are not about to go out of business or even take a serious hit to their profits. So where was all that extra free stuff going to come from?

The mandate was another element of the con. Those who had health insurance assumed that forcing lots of healthy people who didn’t need health insurance into paying for policies they didn’t want and wouldn’t use would cover the costs for those who did. And while forcing the “invincibles”, the young people just getting by in a bad employment market to choose between a fine being taken out of their tax refunds or a policy they don’t want or need, may add some cash; it was never going to cover the real cost. That was a distraction. The only way that the numbers would really work was by cancelling policies and hiking premiums.

The loud outcry from those who supported ObamaCare only to discover that their policies are gone is that of the greedy mark who thought that he was cheating someone else, only to discover that he was the one being cheated all along.

Those Americans who thought that liberal greed was better than the capitalist kind are discovering that they weren't the con artists, instead they were the marks of men who make Gordon Gekko at his worst look like a saint. Capitalists even at their worst occasionally create value. The left at its best only destroys value.

Liberalism is an army of Gordon Gekkos raiding everything of value, carving it up and carting away large chunks of it for themselves in the name of the greater good. The cynicism that Oliver Stone attributed to Wall Street is far more deeply rooted in the liberal money grab behind the welfare state in all its many forms, from the non-profit to the corporate. And when they are done, nothing is left.

The 99% campaign of Occupy Wall Street was a greedier scam than anything Gordon Gekko would have imagined. It convinced millions that there was a 1% that would pay for everything that liberal politicians were promising them. Members of the middle class who should have known better decided that some nebulous class of billionaires would pay all their bills. But the 1% is better connected to the political powers than the middle class. And when the liberal bill comes due, it’s the middle class that pays.

Voters were seduced into believing that liberal greed is good. They thought that they were going to feast at an expensive restaurant on someone else’s dime and now they’re getting the bill.

You can’t be conned unless you get greedy. The easiest kind of person to cheat is the cheat who is looking for shortcuts.

ObamaCare was a monumental con. It was a shortcut around the economic facts of life that promised everyone a free lunch on someone else’s dime. And too many people who should have known better stopped using their common sense. They forgot the same lesson they were forced to relearn every April about who really pays for everything.

Instead they believed that Obama had finally found someone out there who would pay for their lunch.

As Gordon Gekko said, “It's a zero sum game, somebody wins, somebody loses.” Most of those signing on to the ObamaCare election express in 2012 understood that. But they thought that they would win and that somebody else would lose. Some of them may have even been right.

But there’s something that every Democrat who holds a non-government job and pays actual taxes, instead of receiving someone else’s money back in the form of Earned Income Credits, needs to understand; the only way to win in the liberal zero sum game is to either work for the government or not work at all.

If you work, if you earn money, then you lose.

ObamaCare was yet another wealth redistribution scheme. It was a liberal Gordon Gekko with a teleprompter and an easy grin selling good liberal greed. Everyone would win, except for the people being robbed.

There are no movies made about the evils of good liberal greed, even though good liberal greed turned Russia, China and Cambodia into charnel houses filled with corpses. The 1% of Communist Party members won and the 99% got a grave, a gulag or a miserable life of working in a bad job at low pay.

When all was said and done, there was no land or bread or peace. It shouldn’t come as too much of a surprise that ObamaCare doesn’t really offer health care. It takes the health care you had and increases the price you pay for it, makes it harder to access and more expensive to use.

When someone promises you more of a finite quantity of something without having to give anything up, you know you’re being conned. But the left has done such a fine job of teaching people that liberal greed is good that their victims are no longer even able to recognize their base emotions as greed. They associate being conned with high moral values. When someone offers them stolen property, they feel that they’re being good people by accepting.

“Why shouldn’t you have X, Y or Z?”, the  Obamas and de Blasios ask  the eager crowds. The answer is that robbery only works if you’re the robber. Not if you’re the one encouraging the robber go about his business in the expectation that he will rob your neighbor down the block who has three cars and two leather sofas and leave you alone because you only have two cars and one leather sofa.

Class warfare cons the middle class into thinking that it’s going to be doing the robbing from some nebulous category of “the rich”, when it’s actually the one being robbed. Class warfare makes its victims complicit in its criminality. And like many victims of cons, it leaves them too ashamed to come forward and complain for fear of admitting their own guilt.

When New York’s Italian-Jewish Republican mayor Fiorello LaGuardia took City Hall away from the Democratic Party’s Tammany Hall machine, he shook his fist and shouted during his inauguration in Italian, “È finita la cuccagna!” That can be loosely translated as “No more free lunch!”

Now Bill de Blasio is campaigning for that same office on the Obama platform of a free lunch. But there are no free lunches. There are just lunches with a clear price tag that you pay for when you’re done eating and hideously expensive “free lunches” that you pay for when the tax bill comes due.

Liberal greed, like all greed, blinds people to their own character flaws, it encourages them to think
that they can steal from someone else and get away with it when they’re really stealing from themselves.

The cancelled policies, high premiums and deductibles are only the first part of the ObamaCare bill. The real bill will take years to arrive and it will be much bigger and uglier.

The first phase of the ObamaCare con is wrapping up. Like all cons, those who pulled it off have a choice between flying away to Argentina with briefcases of money or doubling down and convincing the mark that even though he lost money this time around, he can get it all back and make even more money if he commits to the next phase of the con.

The next phase of the con is being previewed by Robert Reich and Paul Krugman. The endgame is health care nationalization. It’s an American NHS complete with death panels and unsustainable spending. The only question is will the marks of the ObamaCare con wake up now that their money is as lost as an advance fee sent to a Nigerian 411 scammer or will they go on making the same mistakes all over again.

Sunday, October 27, 2013

Government is Magic

Our technocracy is detached from competence. It's not the technocracy of engineers, but of "thinkers" who read Malcolm Gladwell and Thomas Friedman and watch TED talks and savor the flavor of competence, without ever imbibing its substance.

These are the people who love Freakonomics, who enjoy all sorts of mental puzzles, who like to see an idea turned on its head, but who couldn't fix a toaster.

The ObamaCare website is the natural spawn of that technocracy who love the idea of using modernity to make things faster and easier, but have no idea what anything costs or how it works.

It's hard to have a functioning technocracy without engineers. A technocracy made in Silicon Valley with its complete disregard for anything outside its own ego zone would be bad enough. But this is a Bloombergian technocracy of billionaires and activists, of people who think that "progress" makes things work, rather than things working leading to progress.

Healthcare.gov showed us that behind all the smoother and shinier designs was the same old clunky government where everything gets done because the right companies hire the right lobbyists and everything costs ten times what it should.

If the government can't build a health care website, how is it going to actually run health care for an entire country is the obvious question that so many are asking. And the obvious answer is that it will run it the way it ran the website. It will throw wads of money and people at the problem and then look for programs it doesn't like to squeeze for extra cash.

The Navy had to be cut to the bone and the Benghazi mission had to make do without security so that a Canadian company which began employing a classmate of Michelle Obama's could score over half a billion to build a broken website. Obama mocked Mitt Romney's criticism of his Navy cuts by telling him that we don't fight with bayonets and horses anymore. Bayonets and horses are outdated. In our glorious modernity, we spend fortunes to build websites that don't work instead.

Modernity has to be built. It has to be constructed brick by bit by rivet by cable by people who know what they are doing. Modernity without competence is as worthless as the ObamaCare website which looked pretty enough to give the illusion of technocratic modernity, but didn't actually work.

Competence is the real modernity and it has very little to do with the empty trappings of design that surround it. In some ways the America of a few generations ago was a far more modern place because it was a more competent place. For all our nice toys, we look like primitive savages compared to men who could build skyscrapers and fleets within a year... and build them well.

Those aren't things we can do anymore. Not because the knowledge and skills don't exist, but because the culture no longer allows it. We can't do them for the same reason that Third World countries can't do what we do. It's not that the knowledge is inaccessible, but that the culture gets in the way.

It's our very hollow modernity that gets in the way of our truly being modern. We can no longer build big things because the ability to implement vision on a large scale no longer exists. We can still do impressive things as individuals, but that's also true of Kenya or Thailand. And in China, they can carry out grandiose projects, but those projects have no vision or competence.

We used to be able to combine the two by competently implementing grandiose visions, but our "modern" culture is the roadblock that prevents us from working together to make the great things that we can still envision individually.

Our modernity is style rather than substance. It's Obama grinning. It's the right font. It's the right joke. It's that sense that X knows what he's doing because he presents it the right way. There's nothing particularly modern about that. In most cultures, the illusion of competence trumps the real thing. It's why so many countries are so badly broken because they go by appearances, rather than by results.

The idea that we should go by results, rather than by processes, by outcomes rather than by appearances, was revolutionary. For most of human history, we were trapped in a cargo cult mode. We did the "right things" not because they led to the right results, but because we had decided that they were the right things. There were many competent people, but they were hamstrung by rigid institutions that made it impossible to go from Point A to Point B in the shortest possible time.

And we're right back there today. The entire process of ObamaCare was the opposite of going from Point A to Point B. It was the least competent and efficient solution every step of the way. There was no reason to think that its website would be any better. The process that led to it being dumped on the American people was completely devoid of any notion of testing or outcomes. It was the right thing to do because... it was the right thing to do. It was cargo cult logic all the same. So was its website.

Healthcare.gov, like ObamaCare, was going to work because it was "good". Its goodness was by some measure other than result. It was morally good. It was progressive. And so the deity of liberal causes, perhaps Karl Marx or Progressia, the Goddess of Soup and Economic Dysfunction, would see to it that it would work. Karma would kick in and everything would work out because it had to.

This brand of magical thinking was once commonplace. It still is. And it's why things so rarely work out in some of the more messed up parts of the world. But the sort of attitude that would once have made anthropologists shake their heads is now commonplace here. Savages in suits, barbarians with iPads are certain that things will work because they have appeased the gods of modernity with their fonts, they have made a website that looks like a functioning website. And like the cargo culters who built fake control towers expecting planes to land, they thought that their website would work.

Competence is built on the unhappy understanding that things won't work because you want them to, they won't work if you go through the motions, they will only work if you understand how a thing works and then make it work by building it, by testing it and by expecting failure every step of the way and wrestling with the problem until you get it right.

That's modernity. It isn't glamorous. You can see it in black and white photos of men working on old planes. You can see it in the eyes of the astronauts who first went to the moon. You can read it in the workings of the men who built the longest suspension bridges, laid undersea cables and watched their world change. They were moderns and their time is done. They have left behind savages with cell phones who make decent tinkerers, but whose ability to collaborate falls apart in large groups.

The difference between savages and civilized men isn't that savages are dumb and civilized people are smart. Savages can individually be quite clever within their parameters and civilized folk can be quite stupid. It's the ability to extend that intelligence in groups that makes for a civilization.

Savages cannot work together. They can fantasize, but they can't build anything bigger than a small group can manage. Savages are warriors, but not soldiers, they are tinkerers, not engineers, they are inventors, not scientists, they cannot work together on a large scale and thereby push past their own limitations as a culture and grow. They may have individual geniuses, but they cannot pass on what they learn.

We have not yet been reduced to savagery, but our incompetence increases in large groups to such a staggering extent that it often seems not to be worth the trouble. Individual geniuses can occasionally carry large groups on their shoulders, micromanaging them, terrorizing them and motivating them, the way that tribal chieftains do, but without that singular personality the whole thing collapses.

The United States government is the ultimate giant unworkable mess. It is a living cargo cult where everyone marches around following routines that are supposed to yield great prosperity, but never do. The processes themselves are broken and make no sense, but the cargo culturers of the government cannot and will not hear that. They know that the government will magically make everything work.

Because government is progress. Government is modernity. Government is magic.

The cargo culters on the islands, who once witnessed the might and power of the American military during WW2 make American flags and uniforms, they build airstrips and wooden control towers, and wait for the planes to land and make them rich. They don't understand why these things should work, but they do them anyway because that is how they remember it happening.

Our own cargo culters invoke FDR and JFK, they talk about the New Deal and the Great Society, they make grand promises and roll out big programs, and then they wait for it all to work. They don't understand themselves how or why it would work. But government is magic and the appearance of a thing is just as good as a real deal.

Build a website and it will work. Pass a law and they will come. Get a degree and you're competent.

There is no need to know how to do a thing. You don't need engineers or competent men. All you need to do is remember the great dreams of the past, listen to a few inspirational JFK speeches and then carve a computer out of wood and wait for free health care to arrive.

In cargo cult America, the food is free, the cell phones are free and the money can be printed forever because government is magic.

Saturday, October 26, 2013

The Desert of Islamization

Wars are fought with steel and of words. To fight a thing, we have to understand what we are fighting and why. A blindness in words can kill as effectively as blindness on the battlefield.

Words shape our world. In war, they define the nature of the conflict. That definition can be
misleading. Often it's expedient.

The real reasons for the last world war had very little to do with democracy. The current war does involve terrorism, but like fascism, it's incidental to the bigger picture. The United States would not have gone to war to ensure open elections in Germany. It hasn't been dragged into the dysfunctional politics and conflicts of the Muslim world because of terrorism.

Tyranny and terrorism just sum up what we find least appealing about our enemies. But it's not why they are our enemies. They are our enemies because of territorial expansionism. The Ummah, like the Third Reich, is seeking "breathing room" to leave behind its social and economic problems with a program of regional and eventually world conquest. 

Islam, like Nazism, makes a lot of utopian promises and pays the check for them through conquest. Like Communism, we're up against a rigid ideology, brainwashed fanatics, utopian fantasies and ruthless tactics. And we can only win by being honest about that.

We are not yet dealing with armies. This is still an ideological conflict. Terrorism is just the tip of a much more dangerous iceberg. It's the explosion of violence by the most impatient and least judicious of our enemies.

What we are dealing with is Islamization. Islamization is the imposition of ideological norms in increasing severity. Like Nazification, it transforms a society by remaking it in its own image from the largest to the smallest of details.

Islamization begins with the hijacking of "secular" spaces transforming them from neutral into explicitly Islamic forms and functions. The process can be grandiose or petty. A group of Minnesota Muslim taxi drivers who refuse to transport passengers carrying alcohol are "Islamizing" part of the transportation system around that airport. They are imposing Islamic norms on the airport and the passengers. Similarly a Target cashier who refuses to scan pork is Islamizing her line.

Islamic organizations encourage this form of seemingly petty Islamization even while they angle for bigger things. Their followers are foot soldiers in the same political war that destroyed secular spaces in their home countries.

Small scale Islamization becomes large scale Islamization. The women who begin wearing Hijabs are imposing a new social norm that eventually leads to Burkas. By then, women no longer have the right to leave the house, either legally or in social norms. The outlawing of liquor or pork begins in the same way. It doesn't just happen in large ways, it also happens in small ways.

In Germany, the exchange of the greeting "Gruss Gott" for "Heil Hitler" was the bellwether of a larger social change underway. Nazification was not just a matter of Hitlerian speeches, it was in what you read, what you saw and how you said hello to your neighbors. A Nazi was not just someone who marched around in a uniform. It was also someone who said "Heil Hitler" or who in any way participated in the Nazification of public spaces.

Similarly an Islamist is anyone who participates in the Islamization of public spaces. The media has mischaracterized Islamist as a follower of some rogue branch of Islam followed by a tiny minority. But there is no rogue branch. Even Wahhabism is hardly rogue. If anything, it's simply more literal.

Islam is Islamist in that it "Islamizes" what it comes into contact with. Islamists are not a separate movement. They are Muslims following a legacy of intolerance by practicing Islamization.

Religion can exist on a personal level and a public level. Religion on a personal level can be accommodated in a public space so long as it does not change the nature of that public space. For example, a group of people can pray in a school cafeteria. Secularists may object, but their objection is groundless unless the praying people then announce that no one is allowed to do anything in the cafeteria except pray... and only in their approved way.

That is Islamization in a nutshell. It begins with accommodation and ends with theocracy. 

When a Muslim imposes his religious identity on someone else, he is engaging in Islamization. That is the difference between Mark, the Mormon taxi driver who refuses to drink alcohol and Mohammed, the Muslim taxi driver who refuses to drive a passenger carrying alcohol.

Mark is practicing his religion in a public space. Mohammed is imposing his religion in a public space. Mark's religion can be accommodated because his choices extend to his own body. Mohammed's religion cannot be accommodated because it hijacks any public space that he exercises influence over by attempting to Islamize it. Islamization causes conflict, terrorism and war.

Every devout Muslim is an "Islamist". Islam is not a personal religion. It is a religion of the public space. A "moderate" Muslim would have to reject Islam as a religion of the public space, as theocracy, and that secularism would be a rejection of Islam.

Nothing in Islam exists apart from anything else. While liberals view culture and religion as a buffet that they can pick and choose from, it is a single integrated system. If you accept one part, you must accept the whole. Once you accept any aspect of Islam, you must accept its legal system and once you accept that, you must accept its governance and once you accept that, you lose your rights.

If it were not for Islamization, Islam might be personally objectionable, but not publicly objectionable. Some of its tenets might be disapproved of, its behavior in its home countries might be disagreeable, but it would not lead to a zero sum war in which Islamic expansionism leads to endless conflict.

Islam has been imported under the guise of multiculturalism, but it does not recognize the idea that there can be room for multiple religions and ways of doing things in the same space. While Muslims exploit multiculturalism, the outcome of injecting Islam into a system is an Islamic space in which alternatives are either eliminated or marginalized. Islam is not a multi anything. It is a single uni.

Islam does not integrate. It disintegrates. It's hazardous to any culture or political system that comes into contact with it. It colonizes public spaces and pushes out anything that is not it. Or as the arsonists of the Library of Alexandria said, "If it is in the Koran, it is redundant and ought to be burned. If it disagrees with the Koran, then it especially ought to be burned."

What goes for the Library of Alexandria, also goes for all knowledge, ideas, culture and thought. Islamization measures them all against the Koran and finds them either redundant or incompatible. Like a virus, Islam destroys anything that isn't it so it never has to compete against anything, because, as its societies demonstrate, it is not capable of competing.

Islam reproduces incestuously. inbreeding its ideology until it has copied it over itself so many times that there is no room for anything else. Wahhabism or anything that is associated with "extremism" is simply Islam copied over itself even more times. It's not extremism, it's simply undiluted. It is what happens when you take out as much as possible of everything that isn't Islam.

That is the objective of Islamization. It copies itself over until Hijabs become Burkas, until everyone is illiterate and killing each other over minor points of doctrine so their chief gang leader can become Emir. When it runs out of non-Islamic things to copy over and destroy, it copies over its own form, introducing errors, schisms, conflicts and religious wars.

The Islamist, like the virus, attempts to destroy what is non-Islamic to Islamize it. His tactics may be small, but his goals are big. And his success leads to a wasteland in which there is only the endless nothingness of Islam, a religion built on the endless conquests of Islamization, and which in the absence of external conflict must turn on itself.

Friday, October 25, 2013

Friday Afternoon Roundup - A Fighting Elephant



THE BETA ELEPHANT

The GOP would like to win without fighting. It wants to wait for the voters to come around and recognize that it’s the better choice because it compromises.

Like the nerd waiting for the pretty girl to recognize his niceness, the Republican Party is futilely courting an American voter who barely even knows it’s there… at least until he watches the next Saturday Night Live skit depicting Republicans as crazy evil billionaires who want to power Christian nuclear plants with the corpses of minorities.

No one hires a lawyer to settle a court case. The court case may have to be settled, but a client expects his lawyer to get him the best terms by fighting as hard as he can. A lawyer who advertises his reasonable and moderate willingness to make a deal as soon as possible will have no clients. A party that advertises its eagerness to settle on any terms it can get will have no voters.

What’s Right about Ted Cruz & the Tea Party




Grover Norquist, Who has Ties to Actual Terrorists, Calls Tea Party “Terrorists”. I appeared on Glenn Beck's show this week, along with Frank Gaffney, to discuss Norquist.




ALL IN

Obama can only be beaten in the popular arena. In his mind, he derives his power from the bully pulpit. He is a creature of the media age and popularity is his only law and the only verdict that he will accept.

The Republican Party is still playing this game by Washington rules while Obama is playing it by Chicago rules where the only rule is to do whatever you can get away with for as long as the people let you.

Obama isn’t just challenging a few laws, he is challenging whether the government has any hard limits that can’t be overcome by asserting popular will or the force of history. 

an excerpt from my article... Beating Obama




“Activist” for Anti-Israel Group with Ties to Obama Exposed as Terrorist





IMAGINE A SOCIETY OF SERIAL KILLERS

"My hobby was to catch a cat, to place a rope around its neck, to strangle it, and throw it into the water."
"Strangulation was my hobby. When I applied for the job and did well on the tests – proving that I could take the psychological pressure and so on – they said: “Congratulations. Now, grow a moustache.”

Egypt’s Executioner Loves Allah, Killing People and Strangling Dogs




MY NAME IS BARACK, HAVE YOU TRIED UNPLUGGING YOUR MODEM?

There is something historic in Obama, the man whose office used to be associated with such notions as “Leader of the Free World”, giving a speech to explain why a website isn’t working.

Of course that website cost somewhere in the neighborhood of half-a-billion dollars. That used to be a lot of money. But in Obama’s era of 4 trillion dollar budgets, it’s more like chump change.

Obama has as few answers to that question as Bangalore tech support and as many excuses.

Obama Gives Speech Explaining Why Website Doesn’t Work





Obama’s “ObamaCare 13″ in White House Speech includes 2 Muslims





DESTROYING AMERICA TO SAVE AMERICA

That indictment could be much more decisively applied to liberals than conservatives who remain passionately devoted to some imaginary Camelot, an ivory tower state without borders or budgets that can only come into being by destroying the America that exists.

If conservatives sometimes romanticize the past, what they are attached to is an actual America. Liberals largely despise the nation of even the past 50 years. Their highlights are few and far between. They begin with the Civil Rights Movement and the election of the latest Great Liberal Savior on a mission to turn America into Europe… only to depart a failure.

Conservatives don’t love a theoretical America. They love the America that was and can be again. It is the left that loves only a hypothetical America that never existed and can never exist because it already failed everywhere it’s been trained from Russia to China to France.

“You Cannot Love America in Theory and Hate it in Fact.


 


Muslim Brotherhood Jihad in Syria Turned 1/4 of Christians into Refugees





 IF YOU SEE A CONSERVATIVE, SAY SOMETHING

This story would be horrible even if it wasn’t taking place at Fort Hood. But it is taking place where Nidal Hasan was able to murder 13 soldiers despite repeatedly making it clear that he was all for Islamic terrorism because no one was allowed to hurt a Muslim’s feelings.

Fortunately they’re all over the real threat. The Tea Party.

Soldiers attending a pre-deployment briefing at Fort Hood say they were told that evangelical Christians and members of the Tea Party were a threat to the nation and that any soldier donating to those groups would be subjected to punishment under the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

While a large portion of the briefing dealt with the threat evangelicals and the Tea Party pose to the nation, barely a word was said about Islamic extremism, the soldier said.

Fort Hood Ignored Nidal Hassan, Now Warns of Tea Party Terror Threat




 Boston Marathon Bomber: “Ummah is Beginning to Rise… Muslims are One.”




THE GOP CAN NEVER GET ENOUGH AMNESTY

 “If somebody has a nexus that would reasonably allow them to become permanent residents and American citizen, we should allow them to do that,” Issa said.

Darrell Issa has an Illegal Alien Amnesty Bill




 THE PUNCHLINE IS A KILLER

Today’s United Nations punchline has been brought to you by billions of your tax dollars. It’s your money. You deserve a good laugh.

Afghanistan: “We commend Saudia Arabia as they continue to enhance the protection and promotion of human rights…

China: “We appreciate efforts made to protect the rights of children and to have dialogues of religious tolerance…”

Pakistan: Commended “laudable steps taken by Saudi Arabia to promote and protect the rights of children and women…”

At UN, Pakistan Praises Saudi Arabia for Protecting “Women’s Rights”




 THE SEDUCTION OF DAVID BROCK

Let’s go on a magical journey following David Brock’s logic here.

1. Hillary Clinton had great security policies

2. She took responsibility for the bad security policies in Benghazi… even though she didn’t know about them… even though she was tasked with running the State Department

3. Hillary Clinton did the right thing every step of the way… including the steps where she did the wrong things

4. Hillary Clinton is super-qualified to be president because she didn’t know anything was wrong and then didn’t do anything to fix it and told Congress that it doesn’t make a difference anyway

Media Matters Boss David Brock Calls Benghazi a “Hoax”





 Obama’s Welfare Cost More than Iraq and Afghanistan Wars Combined




SENATOR MCCAIN HAS ALREADY FLOWN OUT TO MEET WITH THE SAND FLIES

Perhaps believing that the straight Sunni vs Shiite grudge match of the Syrian Civil War was a little too boring, some flesh eating parasites decided to join the senseless violence.

“Doctors in Syria are also seeing a flare-up of typhoid, hepatitis, and the flesh-eating parasite, leishmaniasis."

It’s not clear whether Leishmaniasis is allied with the Shiite or Sunni side. Or whether the disease transmitted by sand flies represents a third side in the Syrian Civil War making it the third point of a triangle.

Flesh-Eating Virus Joins Al Qaeda and Hezbollah in Syrian Civil War




 Obama Chewed Gum, Played with Phone, During Syrian War Plans




THE FATWAS OF THE LEFT

The Egyptian left and the Western right found common ground over the Morsi takeover as Egyptian protesters brandished Tea Party photoshops of Obama in turban and beard while American conservative columnists quoted Egyptian accusations about his collaboration with the Brotherhood.

It would be premature to imagine the Western right and the Arab left coming together the way that the Western left and the Islamists have. And yet it’s not inconceivable. The liberal split over Communism transformed the landscape of American politics. A split over Islam on the left could have equally serious political consequences.

The Western left has ostracized liberal critics of Islam as thoroughly as it once suppressed liberal critics of the USSR. The treatment meted out to Richard Dawkins shows that even for its notables, criticism of Islam is a red line that may not be crossed.  Those politically correct fatwas from the ayatollahs of Georgetown and the London School of Economics carry far more force than most Muslim fatwas.

The Western Left’s Fatwa Against Muslim Liberals



Obama Dumps Green Energy Billions on “Moderate Muslim” Country that Stones Adulterers




A MODERATE CRACK HOUSE

The Prime Minister accused opponents of the proposed mosque of spreading “ludicrous” rumours. “I support Muslims in Chipping Norton having somewhere to pray. The idea that this means ensuring ‘your children will kneel before Allah’ is ludicrous.”

Samantha Lewthwaite was the daughter of Andrew and Elizabeth Christine (née Allen) Lewthwaite in Banbridge, County Down. She was a soldier’s daughter. Then she converted to Islam, married a Muslim terrorist and became consumed with that religion’s homicidal rage for non-Muslims.

Once a Brit converts to Islam, he takes on the fanaticism of the convert and tends to drift toward an uncompromising embrace of Islam. Cameron cannot deny the simple fact that the mosque opening statistically means that some local lads will convert and that some of them will drift toward terror abroad or at home.

You wouldn’t want even a moderate biker gang or a moderate drug shop in your neighborhood. Because we’re all familiar with the concept of gateway drugs and feeders. A mosque is no different. It’s a feeder. Even if it’s not overtly selling Jihad, its Dawah is a gateway drug for the real thing.

UK PM: “The Idea That ‘Your Children will Kneel before Allah’ is Ludicrous.”




Muslim Speaker Proves Islamic Extremism Doesn’t Exist




EINSTEIN SHOULDA WORN A BURKA

Booth said Muslim schools in Manchester, where she now lives, had a “refreshingly modest dress code” which, she argued, could boost girls’ academic success and improve their emotional well-being.

Muslim students in the UK perform worse than any other group.

In his latest book, British Muslims and State Policies, published in 2003, he shows that the majority of Pakistani Muslims show lower educational achievement as compared to whites or Indians

Official statistics released by the Federal Education Ministry of Pakistan give a desperate picture of education for all, espcially for girls. The overall literacy rate is 46 per cent, while only 26 per cent of girls are literate. 

Does the Hijab Increase Academic Performance for Girls?



“Our Holy Pilgrimage will be Complete Once We Have Killed You, Ripped Out Your Hearts and Raped Your Women.”




WHAT ARE THE ODDS?

"The uncle of the Palestinian Authority Arab terrorist, who was shot dead after trying to carry out an attack in an IDF base, claimed on Friday that his nephew got lost and did not intend to carry out a terror attack."

Well that seems sincere. Maybe it was all a misunderstanding.

“He was a humble and optimistic person, who did not have any mental problems except for his anger over the death of his brother,” the uncle said.

Wait. The death of his brother? How did his brother die anyway? Did it by any chance involve trying to run over non-Muslims with a bulldozer?

"His brother Marei was killed while carrying out a similar bulldozer attack near the Malha Mall in Jerusalem on March 5, 2009."

Uncle Claims Muslim Terrorist Who Attacked Israeli Base was Just “Lost”




Arab Judge Bans Israeli Mosque Ad that Offends Muslims




GET READY FOR THE SACCO AND VANZETTI DAY PARADE

“The historical figure of Columbus is complicated to say the least,” Mr. de Blasio, the front-running candidate for mayor, said today at a press conference right before he marched in Manhattan’s Columbus Day parade.

“That’s not what this day is about, it’s not about the individual. It’s about the people that are represented on Columbus Day,” he argued. “When I’m out here marching on Columbus Day I’m thinking about the pride in my Italian heritage.”

Columbus Day has nothing to do with Columbus… according to Bill de Blasio.

When he marches in the Columbus Day, he’s thinking about Sacco and Vanzetti. Or Antonio Gramsci.

Bill de Blasio Attends Columbus Day Parade, Attacks Columbus




AND THE WORLD ENDED...

The “feds” always are there in the background, setting the standards by which we live, providing funds to research cures for our kids’ illnesses, watching over our food supply and work environment.

At a warehouse, factory or other worksite, a young minority exposed to racial slurs by his boss had one fewer place to turn for help. Federal officials who oversee compliance with discrimination laws and labor practices weren’t working, except in emergencies.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission was not issuing right-to-sue letters, so people could not take discrimination cases into federal court

“The afternoon before the shutdown we got a complaint of a restaurant where a … 14-year-old was operating a vertical dough mixer,” said James Yochim, assistant director of the U.S. Department of Labor’s wage and hour division office in Springfield, Ill. “We (were) not able to get out there and conduct an investigation.”

AP Reveals Horrific Government Shutdown of Underage Dough Mixers, Racial Slurs and Ghost Trains




PATRIA

Chris Matthews confuses patriotism with something like obedient citizenship. If so it’s a poor choice of words.

The American usage of Patriot contrasted with that of Loyalist. It was a deliberate contrast. Unlike the Loyalist, the Patriot was devoted to his native soil rather than to any government.

Thus for example, Sam Adams wrote, “If ever time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.”

Or as Thomas Paine put it, “It is the duty of the patriot to protect his country from its government.”

Or as Theodore Roosevelt put it, “Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does NOT mean to stand by the President or any other public official save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country.”

A Lesson in Patriotism for Chris Matthews




IF I ONLY HAD A BRAIN

The second-largest hospital in the Southern African country of Swaziland may be operating a black market in human body parts used in magic spells, according to claims made by a reverend and others.

The organ trade at Raleigh Fitkin Memorial Hospital in the city of Manzini has been described as “an open secret” by critics such as Rev. Grace Masilela. Accusers say people come to the hospital from neighboring South Africa to buy bones, hearts, brains and other organs.

The Raleigh Fitkin was financed by Abram Fitkin, an evangelical minister and businessman, and named after his deceased oldest son. Fitkin was a Republican. Somehow I don’t think he would have been fond of this brand of ObamaCare death panels.

A human brain costs R1 000. Other parts, from internal organs to body fat, fetch from R400 to R1 000.

That’s about a 100 bucks for a brain. That’s so cheap even Obama could afford it.

Southern African Hospital Running Black Market in Organs for Black Magic




WELCOME TO THE THIRD WORLD

Much of New York’s middle class housing was built until the 70s. Since then the boom has mainly added more poor and rich housing. And both conspire to lock the middle class out.

A housing project automatically trashes property values. No one wants to live near drug markets and muggings and all the rest.  The area becomes a lost cause fit only for more housing projects.

And if you invest in a 500k condo, then you make sure to protect your property values by making the area too expensive for anyone else to live in. It’s not quite racism, but of course it is, and practiced by liberal anti-racists.

So New York City, like so many other places inhabited by liberals, is broken down into a sharp class divide with no room for the middle class.

And that may be the future of America.

New York, Bloomberg and Affordable Housing




NONE OF THE ABOVE

Relating to Harry Reid's made-up "Can't stand to look at you quote", Neo-neocon asks...

"I’m wondering: which presidents could I ever stand to look at or listen to? I don’t remember a bit of difficulty watching Eisenhower when I was a child, although I was a Stevenson kid in a Stevenson family. JFK was great to look at and listen to, especially the sharp but strange accent. LBJ ugh! Nixon and Carter both set my teeth on edge. Ford was so-so. Reagan’s actory quality bothered me. Bush the First was dullsville. Clinton seemed like a fake even before Lewinsky. And George Bush wasn’t so fab for viewing, either, believe me."

The last president I could tolerate listening to was Reagan. And I was in elementary school back then.

All I can do is grade the succeeding ones on how intolerable listening to them is. Obama scores in first place. Followed by Clinton. Followed by Bush II, who had decent speechwriters, but who was incapable of delivering a speech, for presumably political reasons.

I was never able to understand the enthusiastic reactions to Obama's speeches early on. I get the JFK thing. I don't get the Obama thing. Once you take away the theatrics and the speechwriting, the delivery isn't just off-putting, it's not presidential. You don't feel like you're listening to a political speech, but to a bad actor who has learned to pitch his voice, but barely cares about what he's saying.

Liberals accused Reagan of being a bad actor, but Reagan was actually a pretty good one. He kept going even when his mind was deteriorating. There's probably a movie in that alone, but obviously not one you can expect Hollywood to make.

Obama actually is a bad actor. He doesn't offer much except fake enthusiasm and fake gravitas and they're bad fakes. It's a Will Smith performance running on ego and self-confidence, but with no content.

Ironically, when it comes to giving speeches, his mentor Jeremiah Wright is a much better speaker. If you're going to listen to someone screaming about how he hates America, I would pick Wright over Obama any day.




HARRISON BERGERON, PHONE YOUR OFFICE

In essence, Guidelines advocates abolishing human comparison by prohibiting the identity of referents. In the foregoing example, one would be discouraged from expressing a judgment or evaluation of a person who has offered abundant evidence of his inability or unwillingness to think normally or to perform some task. Such a person is simply there, like a rock or a tree, beyond discrimination (in the strict, nonracial, nonsexist meaning of that word), beyond evaluation, beyond recognition. He is not incomparable; more precisely, he is non-comparable. To compare the inventor of the steam engine with a man who is unable to do simple math or boil a kettle of water without harming himself is, by egalitarian anti-standards, a grave breach of “social justice” and an unforgivable faux pas.

According to Guidelines, “[a]djectives such as poor and unfortunate have a similar [negatively connotative] effect and are patronizing, as are such epithets as heroic and courageous.” Thus, if Guidelines’ authors have their way, not only will it be considered a breach of egalitarian etiquette to make a distinction between heroism and cowardice, but it will not be permitted to establish distinctions between normalcy or abnormalcy by which to measure anyone’s character, ability or physical condition. There will be no such thing as normalcy or any hierarchy of values, or value-measurement, just whatever the slot machines of egalitarianism and multiculturalism happen to disgorge from an eclectic, random stew of humanoids. A genius and an idiot are not to be distinguished, discriminated, or even recognized; each is “differently abled” or “specially conscious,” and no value may be placed on one over the other.

This is not the pursuit of “social justice,” even if one could assign a benign intent to the concept. It is a formula for the manufacture of politically correct automatons.

 The Ghouls of Grammatical Egalitarianism from Edward Cline




DECLINE AND FALL OF THE WEST - PART 335

In August, I visited the Hawthorne Street Fair in Portland, Oregon, and had a blast. A parade of Occupy protesters marched down the street, calling on everyone to vacate their houses and live outside — and to turn their houses into houseplant sanctuaries. I hadn’t been at the street fair more than five minutes before I was asked to sign something in support of Planned Parenthood. Then I saw the NARAL Pro-Choice America booth, encouraging activism in support of abortion rights. A few blocks later I was thankful to see enthusiastic signage in support of adoption. It turned out to be about pet adoption. By the time I got to the tent with a sign that said “Thank you for not breeding,” I’d had enough.

Fecundophobia: The Growing Fear Of Children And Fertile Women




MYSTERIES OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS

It sometimes becomes downright politically and diplomatically inconvenient to tell it like it is. At such junctures creative copywriters conjure up imaginative alternatives.

This was the kneejerk inclination after a Gazan bus driver slammed his vehicle on February 14, 2001 into a bus stop at the Azur junction, killing eight and wounding a further 21. Although he steered directly into the crowd of passengers on the pavement at a speed of 147 kilometers per hour and plowed the length of the sidewalk, the initial reaction was that this was a road traffic accident.

The driver continued in a mad race southwards toward Gaza, until he was finally apprehended near Gan Yavneh. He then inconsiderately spoiled Israeli officialdom’s pretense by announcing to all and sundry that he had intentionally set out to run down Israelis. The murderer, who never expressed even a vague suggestion of remorse, was freed in the Gilad Schalit deal to a hero’s welcome in Gaza.

Sarah Honig:  Attracting a crowd of people

Tuesday, October 22, 2013

The Progressive Psychoracialists of McRacism

Chris Matthews, MSNBC's own Wise Latina, began his latest attack by denouncing Ted Cruz's racism against "Browns".

Cruz had told a San Antonio audience that it was good to leave D.C. and come back to America.

"This isn’t a casual reference," Matthews declared. Like Freudian psychoanalysts, MSNBC psychoracialists know that there are no such things as casual references. A misplaced comma can reveal unspeakable hidden depths of racism and does every time Rachel Maddow or Chris Hayes run short of material.

The Freudian psychoanalyst assumed that if you had a dream about a duck or the Orient Express, you were harboring a secret desire for your grandfather. The MSNBC psychoracialist knows that if you don't like Obama, you're a racist. All that's left is finding the comma that proves it.

"This 'We’re Americans, we white people out here in Texas, as opposed to people who live in the big cities: the ethnics, the blacks, the browns," Matthews sputtered. "'Those people in Washington, those liberals, they’re not Americans.'”

Chris Matthews had clearly never been to San Antonio which is twice the size of Washington D.C. and one of the largest cities in America. It's also fairly diverse. And Ted Cruz is more ethnic and ‘browner’ than Chris Matthews. Though in all fairness so is a stick of chalk.

It might be more racist to refer to the "Browns" of D.C. than to name San Antonio the real America. But progressive psychoracialists never denounce themselves. They're too busy drawing racist inkblots of Ted Cruz. And if you disagree with them, you probably harbor desires for your great-grandfather... and are a racist.

“This is McCarthyism writ large. Disagree with this guy and be prepared for the accusations,” Matthews said, demonstrating that he also has less self-awareness than a stick of chalk.

Oddly enough he wasn't talking about himself, but psychoracialists, like psychoanalysts, always find the dirty pictures and the racial slurs in someone else’s Rorschach inkblot.

McCarthyism was overrated. If it hadn't affected Hollywood, which never stops making movies about its own reflection in the mirror, we would probably have all forgotten about it; the way that Hollywood forgot about the Gulags, the Khmer Rogue, the Great Chinese Famine and Mike Farrell. But unlike McCarthyism, McRacism never seems to go away.

McRacism is the mass production of an ersatz racism for mass consumption. A cheap fake substitute for the real thing.

Thanks to McRacism, there is now more racism than ever before. We’re making less of everything except racism. There is somehow more racism to be found by dedicated progressive psychoracialists in a single Republican sneeze than there was in the entire first two centuries of American history.

The old racism was about slave plantations. The new racism is found in projecting your own distaste for "Blacks" and "Browns" onto a "Brown", who in a feat of Zimmermanian proportions, heads up the new Confederacy operating out of San Antonio; a city with more Latinos than the MSNBC janitorial staff (unlike its on-air staff.)

The liberal talking point of the government shutdown was that the Confederacy was back under the leadership of General Robert E. Cruz. The "South" was starting another civil war after having relocated to San Antonio and Michele Bachmann’s Minnesota. The Latino/Minnesotan Confederacy had managed to take Washington and the only thing keeping it at bay was MSNBC's dedicated staff of critical race theorists carefully analyzing Cruz's sneezes for explosive racial content.

Progressive accusations of racism start with the conclusion and work backward toward the accusation. Ted Cruz's racism is a given considering that he's not only a Republican (boo! hiss!) but also a conservative (boo! boo!) and in cahoots with the Tea Party (%^&@!). It's just a matter of proving what is already known by taking any random thing he says and shouting, "Racism!"

Racism is the accusation that proves itself. There are certain kinds of people who can be racist and certain kinds who can't. Ted Cruz, who likes San Antonio better than Washington D.C., is always a racist. Chris Matthews, who relishes occasionally seeing "Browns" in Washington D.C. from the window of his limo, isn't.

Racism, like race, is an inescapable part of a person. It doesn't relate to the content of his character, but whether he likes America better than he likes Washington D.C.

Chris Matthews who likes Washington D.C. better than America can never be a racist no matter how much he blathers on about the blacks and browns of the city. Ted Cruz, who doesn't like D.C., is a racist no matter if he's classified as White Hispanic, Brown Hispanic or Green Hispanic.

The real race of racism isn't skin color or genes. It's government. If you hate government, you're a racist.

It's one of those subliminal things, like an Oedipus or Electra complex. If you dream of a penny whistle and a lamppost, you must be harboring illicit desires for your great-great-grandmother. If you dream of restoring the Constitution and giving the bureaucracy the boot, you must be harboring illicit racial fantasies involving San Antonio.

And who better to explore the territory of subliminal racism with its illicit fantasies of abusing minorities than the progressives who have built an entire political system around that?

MSNBC racism requires a deep meditative state. The accuser spends some time floating in a sensory deprivation tank filled with Media Matters talking points. By the time he sits down in front of a camera, he is no longer aware that Ted Cruz is Cuban-American. Any facts extraneous to the organic process of calling a Republican racist have dissolved away along with his common sense.

Chris Matthews, the political hack’s hack, who last had a new idea around the same time Dan Rostenkowski was stealing stamps, fills the empty space with globs of McRacism. The thing that really offends this professional of government isn’t racial slurs… it’s government slurs.

But there’s no such thing as anti-government racism or anti-government hate crimes.

Not only isn’t hating Washington a crime, it’s practically a citizenship test. Despising the entire mess of politicians, aides, bureaucrats, lobbyists, union bosses and bartenders who make the government go round is the one bigotry that everyone can agree on.

The only way for government to get its own hate crime is by dressing up in blackface. Every time Chris Matthews cries “Racism”, he’s dressing up government in blackface. That’s what the selection of Obama was really about. It made race equivalent to government.

Chris Matthews’ government minstrel act is McRacism. Like other McRacist psychoracialists, he plumbs the depths of his own psychotic psyche to explain why government haters are racists to manufacture a cheap and offensive government substitute for racism that protects the abuses of career politicians and bureaucrats by teaching them to wear blackface and shout about racism.

McRacism is a blackface routine that makes hating government into the ultimate hate crime. Like McDonald’s, you slap something that looks like a patty on something that looks like a bun. And don't ask too many questions about what's inside. You can't make 7 billion burgers a year or 7 trillion accusations of racism an hour on MSNBC without cutting a few corners.

McDonald's doesn't really make burgers and the Democratic Party's McRacism doesn't really fight racism. There aren't enough cows or bigots to go around for the purposes of either establishment. McDonald's has to make do with greasy cardboard cut into the shape of a patty. McRacism has to build narratives around any random comment criticizing the government.

The burger place is offering a cheap meal. The liberal place is offering cheap triumphs against fake racism. And both are seductive in their own way.

In the twilight of American history, with the frontier shut down and the military denigrated, the last "great" period of history held up by Baby Boomer academics and media personalities is the Civil Rights movement. But there's only so many times you can battle dogs and fire hoses or march from Selma unless you start churning out cheap McRacism imitations of civil rights and claiming that defending government authority at all costs is the real legacy of the Civil Rights movement.

Liberal McRacism is to Martin Luther King as a McDonald's burger is to a black Angus with caramel glaze on a hearth baked three-seed bun. It may be cheap, it may be fake but it is widely available.

MSNBC is the McDonald's of McRacism. It makes it cheaply and distributes it to everyone. And in a society where pervasive racism has become a distant memory, it's easier to convince a gullible generation that the greasy McRacism burger sticking out of Matthews' mouth is the real thing.

Monday, October 21, 2013

Liberalism’s War on Women

As Bob Filner, San Diego’s former progressive mayor, pleads guilty to charges stemming from his attacks on women, his essay, “Why I am Pro-Choice” still decorates the website of Planned Parenthood.

A year ago, Filner had appeared at a Planned Parenthood rally while running for mayor of
California’s second largest city to accuse his opponent of being part of the war on women.

The Planned Parenthood Action Fund had sent out a letter saying that “for twenty years, Bob Filner has defended women”. At the rally, attendees were told that he had spent “the last twenty years protecting our rights and the rights of women everywhere.”

But while Filner was protecting women, no one was protecting women from Filner. Filner’s behavior was well known, but not commented on. The California Democratic Party maintained its red wall of silence around the son of a Communist, a Freedom Rider and member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus because he was one of their own.

Even Filner’s disgrace hasn’t changed that. Filner pleaded guilty to three counts and will not serve any time in prison. Instead he’ll spend three months at home, receive some counseling and three years on probation.

He won’t go into California’s 100,000 strong sex offender database; even though if there’s anyone in the entire state who belongs there, it’s him. Filner probably deserves to join the 1 in 375 adults in California on that list more than Donald Honan who was only convicted of indecent exposure.

Meanwhile in Lakeland, California, a 75-year-old man was sentenced to six months in jail for groping a court reporter. If Anthony Duruh had been the progressive mayor of San Diego, he might have also gotten the Filner Justice Special and be spending his time at home with his feet up on the couch.

In the Democratic Party, as with American Express, membership has its privileges. The same liberal political establishment that protected Filner throughout his career is still covering for him.

At the Planned Parenthood rally, Filner had said, “The war on women can be done at any level. My opponent won’t even fill out the Planned Parenthood questionnaire.” The crowd booed and then cheered when Filner told them about winning twenty-five elections with the backing of Planned Parenthood.

Filner’s opponent, a gay Republican who was for abortion, gay marriage and legalizing pot, had enrolled in the war on women by failing to fill out a questionnaire while Filner, who had molested everyone from grandmothers to sexual abuse victims, was an official protector of women because he had checked the right box on an abortion organization’s questionnaire. 

The war on women can be done on any level, but it so often seems to happen on the level of those most vocal about using “War on Women” rhetoric and painting themselves as the protectors of their victims.

House Democrats voted against the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act which would have cracked down on sex selection abortions that mostly target baby girls. Filner, then still a Congressman, had cast one of the 168 votes against the bill. Those voting to allow the continuing murder of baby girls to go unsanctioned were, like Filner, mostly Democrats.

Filner had a 100 score from NARAL, the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League, for, among other things, voting the right way on that bill. NARAL had come out against the bill because it would limit “some women’s access” and “isolate and stigmatize” African American and Asian women from “exercising their fundamental human right to make and implement decisions about their reproductive lives.”

The fundamental right of women had become the murder of other women. And Bob Filner had been supported and protected in his abuse of women in defense of the fundamental right to murder women.

The contraction of women’s rights into the sphere of abortion produced a wealth of moral absurdities and obscenities; “Destroy the village to save the village” scenarios where the only way to protect women is to kill women and where the protector of women role could fall to a grotesque smirking Cesar Romero wannabe who made Bill Clinton look like a monk who had taken a vow of chastity.

The liberal protectors of women, like Filner, Clinton and Ted Kennedy, often seem like the exact opposite. But as long as they support abortion—all is forgiven, forgotten and drowned in the deepest waters off Martha’s Vineyard.

Despite the occasional mumbled mentions of economic equality, the liberal idea of social improvement for women now consists of little more than the right to kill. That the right to kill is championed by opponents of war and the death penalty makes it all the more perverse. The only real right of women under liberalism is the right to kill their own children.

There was a net loss of 354,000 female jobs during Obama’s term and the income of single mothers fell 7 percent. Obama, who opposed the Prenatal Nondiscrimination Act, has not done anything meaningful for women economically. Like Bob Filner, his credentials as a general on the right side in the War on Women is his enthusiastic support for the same organization whose questionnaire Bob Filner filled out and his opponent didn’t; an organization that works for the cause of death, not life.

What does the War on Women really look like?

Abortion in Sweden is legal until the eighteenth week of pregnancy. There are 20 abortions for every 1000 women and 25 abortions for every 100 pregnancies. Sweden also has the second highest rate of sexual assaults after South Africa.

From 2003 to 2008, Sweden’s sexual assault rate doubled to 53 rapes per 100,000 people. The numbers are now so bad that some forecasts indicate that 1 in 4 Swedish women will be raped in their lifetimes.

Police statistics show that as much of 77% of rapes were carried out by foreign born rapists. As much as 5 percent of Sweden is now Muslim. Around the same time that Sweden’s rape statistics were doubling, so was its Muslim population.

In Stockholm, six Muslim teenagers who raped a 15-year-old Swedish girl were given 100 hours of community service. One of the rapists described himself as a “proud Muslim” and was no doubt aware of the rather forgiving attitude of his religion toward the rape of non-Muslim women and girls.

But this real war on women can’t be discussed because of its leftist perpetrators who fill a country with rapists and then offer their victims easy access to abortion.

Around the same time that Filner was making his preparations to run for mayor, Imperial County, the area bordering Mexico with a heavily Mexican population that had been added to his district, saw an increase in rapes. But most rapes there went unreported. In 2008, rapes in San Diego had increased 34 percent. Between 2000 and 2010, the number of Latinos in San Diego had increased by 21%. Filner had been the chief beneficiary of that demographic shift which allowed him to become the first Democratic mayor of San Diego in a generation.

Since 2000, Filner had run in a majority Latino district scoring decisive victories. During the mayoral race, Filner supporters had dubbed him “Roberto Filner” and chanted "Bob, si puedas”; a version of Obama’s “Yes we can”. And Filner had boasted that the Latino vote would be his margin of victory in the election. While Filner’s lead was not that tremendous among Latinos, it was more than double among foreign-born voters.

Filner had co-sponsored an amnesty bill back in 2007. He had opposed building a border fence and at an interfaith ceremony, had called amnesty a “holy cause”. And illegal alien activists returned the favor. Enrique Morones of Border Angels took the lead in defending Filner even long after the facts were in.

"Environmentalists, educators, women's rights, gays, civil rights, labor, human rights, unions, neighborhoods, immigration and many more -- we stand united," Morones had said at a pro-Filner rally.

The entire pyramid of liberal identity politics was trotted out in defense of a serial predator.
Meanwhile rape cases in California had increased by 7 percent

"I've been in the forefront of the great social issues of our time--civil rights, anti-war, labor, the environment, women's rights," Filner had said while running for office "I've been there with you and for you, and will continue to be there."

And that is exactly the problem.

Bob Filner wasn’t just guilty of a one man war on women. Like so many liberal politicians, he had championed policies that led to sexual assaults on a much larger scale than any individual could be capable of. And he did it all while winning the female voters and posturing as a protector of women.

The left won the war on women in Sweden. It is winning the war on women in California.

Sunday, October 20, 2013

The Supersessionists of the Liberal Confederacy

The battle between Obama and the Republicans is a sad and pitiful contest for the same reason that a baseball game in which one side plays by the rules and the other one races the bases in motorcycles and shoots the balls over the fence with an RPG.

Ted Cruz has come the closest to understanding that the other side just doesn't play by any rules, but lacks the leverage to make much of that. Cruz is still a product of a system in which there are rules. And that system is as unfit for challenging the left-wing radicals running things as trying to play a game of chess against an opponent who feels like moving the pieces any which way he feels like and always claims to have won.

Law is a consensus. If you stop keeping the law, the police arrest you. If a gang of left-wing radicals in a basement somewhere stopped following the law, they might be locked up. It's not a certain thing considering that mad bomber Bill Ayers is a university professor. But once those same left-wing radicals control much of the system and the media that reports on the system, they have no reason to follow the law.

Political factions agree to follow the law for mutual benefit. The Constitution had to be agreed upon by just about everyone. The left-wing radicals in Rhode Island who were making everyone pledge allegiance to their worthless paper currency while threatening to nationalize everything refused and had to be forced in with threats of military intervention and trade embargoes.

But in the end they got the last laugh.

The United States has never really had full-bore left-wing radicals running it before. It does now.

Media outlets breathlessly report on Tea Party radicalism, which consists of wanting to undo the judicial activism of the last century. Meanwhile Obama and his cronies just ignore any law they don't like and rule by fiat.

Which of these is more radical? The Tea Party activists who would like to revisit the debate over the Tenth Amendment or an administration that does anything it pleases and challenges an impotent judiciary and an even more impotent legislature to stand in its way?

The Tea Party activists would like to revise American legal history. Their left-wing opponents sweep the whole thing off the table. The Tea Party would like the system to abide by the letter of its legal covenants while their left-wing opponents have "modernized" them by judicial fiat and disregarded them by executive fiat.

The only laws that Obama will follow are those that allow him to do what he wants to do anyway. Like the Caliph who conquered Egypt and declared that if the Library of Alexandria should be burned because if its books contradicted the Koran they were heretical and if they agreed with it they were blasphemous, the entire American system, its laws and regulations, are at best supplementary.

Law is a consensus. But the left rejects that consensus. It subjects each law to an ideological test. If the law meets the ideological test, which is based on social justice criteria entirely foreign to the American legal system, and the practical test of furthering social justice, it can stay. If not, then it will either be struck down or disregarded. They have applied that same ideological test to the nation as a whole and decided that the existence of the United States does not meet their ideological tests.

Political factions in the past may have engaged in bare-knuckle political hostilities but they all agreed that the United States in its past, present and future forms was the proper arena for their disputes and that the maintenance of an objective system of laws was the best way to ensure its perpetuation. When that consensus broke down, a civil war resulted. Now the consensus is in even worse tatters.

It's not the Tea Party that is the new Confederacy, as popular a media talking point as that may be. The new threat isn't secessionist, but supersessionist. The new Confederacy isn't out to break up the Union into territorial slices, but to replace the Union with a new and different Union. Call it the Confederacy of the Community Organizers, the War between the Unions or the Supersession War.

The Supersessionist rebels insist that the Constitution and the old order were superseded a long time ago by the march of history. And the only reason that we don't call them rebels is because they are in control of almost the entire system of government.

Can a government be considered in rebellion against a nation's laws and its established order? That is the bizarre situation we find ourselves in. There is no shot fired at Fort Sumter. Instead a million conspirators tear apart and remake the system in countless ways on a daily basis while the leadership remains in open rebellion of the laws that it is obligated to abide by and enforce.

Obama and the Republicans are fighting a civil war which only the Supersessionists of the Liberal Confederacy fully understand.

The Republicans, who for the most part are about as radical as a three-piece suit, are fighting to maintain a consensus in which everyone follows the law and settles their disagreements by hammering out a compromise that keeps the system going. And their opponents disregard the consensus and the system and go on doing what they want while defying anyone to stop them.

You could call it political civil disobedience, the left would certainly like to when dealing with the administration's radical lawbreaking on immigration or gay marriage, but civil disobedience applies to the civil population, not to their government. Government disobedience isn't noble or virtuous. The rebellion of governments against the laws they are obligated to enforce is self-righteous tyranny. 

A government in rebellion against the laws is one that asserts that no power, not that of tradition, of the legal covenants that brought the system into being or even the previous votes of the people, is superior to it. That is why the rebellion of the supersessionists is far worse than the rebellions of secessionists. Both the secessionists and the supersessionists reject the consensus, but only the supersessionists insist on forcing a new system of their own making in place of the old consensus.

The unequal constest places liberal rebels looking to trash the system from the top against conservative defenders of an old order fighting from the bottom. The old Nixon vs. Hippies match-up has been flipped over. Nixon is in the crowd of protesters against government abuse and the hippies are laughing at him from the White House. The counterculture has become the culture, but still acts like it's the counterculture even when it's running everything.

On one side there is no consensus and no law; only sheer will. On the other there is a body of legal traditions going back centuries.

It's painfully clear that two such approaches cannot coexist within a single government. And those who have the power and follow no rules have the supreme advantage of wielding government power without the legal restrictions that were meant to bind the abuse of that power.

The Republicans are struggling to find common ground over a mutual respect for the system where none exists. Like any totalitarian radicals, their opponents regard their concern for legalism with contempt.

The radical does not respect process, only outcome. He holds law in contempt, but respects will. While the Republicans debate process, the Democrats steamroll them by focusing only on outcome. Where there is no consensus, then process does not matter. The Democrats treat process as a fiction when it comes to ObamaCare or immigration. And the Republicans struggle to understand why no one holds them accountable without understanding that accountability is also an aspect of process.

The radicalization of the Democratic Party is slowly leading to a counterpart radicalism in the Republican Party. The process is moving far slower because of the vested interests in the way, but every time the radicals of the left displays their contempt for the consensus, they are paving the way for the rise of a Republican Party whose members are more like Ted Cruz than John McCain.

What radicals never understand is that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. The process of the consensus exists to safeguard both sides and prevent political battles from spinning out of control. Democrats, under the influence of the radical left, have decided that they can unilaterally transform the country by acting as if the consensus and the process don't bind them. They have not considered what will happen when a Republican Party that has as much resemblance to its present day leaders as Barack Obama does to Hubert Humphrey makes that same decision.

Liberal supersessionists claim to be worried about conservative secessionists when they should be far more worried about conservative supersessionists. The consensus we all live by is a fragile thing. It is being torn apart by the radical left and once it is destroyed, it will not bind the right, in the same way that it no longer binds the left.

And then the true conflict will begin.