Saturday, December 31, 2011
Very Insightful Take on the "Bush Hatred / Obama Love" Issue...
"... They face (at least) two options:"
"Barack Obama is a sellout, “just Bush with a tan,” subservient to the same malevolent political and economic forces that Bush was.
OR the Bush administration was actually pretty reasonable to adopt these policies in the first place, and the Obama administration has been reasonable enough to recognize the fact.
Both options require the liberal to admit a mistake: either he was wrong about Obama, or he was wrong about Bush. But the first option requires the liberal to sacrifice his love for Obama, while the second option requires him to sacrifice his hatred of Bush. Either Obama was dishonest in the campaign or overwhelmed by baleful influences once he came to the Oval Office — or Obama, once he came to the White House and had the same information and responsibility that Bush had, came to more or less the same conclusions as Bush had."
"Unsurprisingly, Option #1 comes out the huge winner here. So powerful is the partisan mindset that I haven’t seen a single prominent liberal writer take Option #2. They puzzle through the “mystery” of “George W. Obama” and conclude that the contradictions between Obama’s ideals and actions compose “a subtle disaster for all those whose hopes once rested with him.” They would rather abandon their love of Obama than their hatred of Bush. To put it more sharply: they are so deeply committed to the nefariousness and malfeasance of the Bush administration that they would rather believe Barack Obama a failure, a liar or a dupe than believe that George W. Bush took reasonable actions in light of the circumstances...."
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
The Conservative Worldview...in 4-D
This speech by Mark Steyn is not only an excellent synopsis of his current book, "After America: Get Ready for Armageddon" but is also the best current testament of conservative values and views in our unique era of encroaching socialist, world authority, fanatic appeasing...nonsense.
Very witty, insightful and cogent.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
...in my humble opinion...
Saturday, December 17, 2011
Two Excellent Articles
What Does It Mean to Be an ‘Intellectual,’ Anyway?
"...Yes, there are non-leftists who are sometimes described, perhaps grudgingly, as intellectuals. But when that label’s affixed to them, the people doing the affixing almost invariably feel a need to prefix “intellectual” with some word like “conservative” or “right-wing” – even if the person in question is somebody you or I might consider pretty middle-of-the-road. Meanwhile a left-wing intellectual is typically prefix-free: a left-wing intellectual is just an intellectual, period."
"To be sure, many people on the left dismiss the idea that anyone not on the left could be legitimately described as an intellectual. For them, intellectualism consists essentially of reiterating and fiercely defending their own lockstep ideology. Google “right-wing intellectual” and the very first hit you’ll get is a snarky post at the Democratic Underground website asking “Is there such a thing as a right-wing intellectual?” Google “conservative intellectual” and the top hits include items about “conservative intellectual collapse” and “conservative intellectual bankruptcy.”"
"The difference between the U.S. and continental Europe (Britain leans more our way) is that America has a vibrant network of non-left intellectual institutions – think tanks, magazines, websites like this one – and electronic media that are receptive to their ideas. In Europe non-left intellectuals are more on their own. And they are almost never, ever referred to by anybody as intellectuals."
"And why is this? Because being an “intellectual,” at least in the European sense, isn’t about being intelligent. It’s about belonging to a class of high priests whose role is to preserve and pass on its own sacred dogma. It’s not about contributing to a free exchange of ideas in the expectation that the best ideas will rise to the top, but about trying to demonize and intimidate opponents and stifle dissent. It’s about “speaking truth to power” – and the “power” is always democratic capitalism, and the “truth” always comes in various shades of red."
Inequality: The Eternal Wellspring of Collective Power
"So, to repeat the question defenders of economic liberty have been asking socialists for over a century: what percentage of tax paid by the Evil Rich would be “fair?” It’s obviously not a tax burden equivalent to their share of income, because they’re paying two or three times that much now. Why don’t we isolate that number, according to some logical formula, and put it on the table for consideration?"
"The answer, of course, is that “inequality” is the eternal wellspring of collectivist power. It is the dragon that can never be slain, the Grail that can never be seized. It will always dance just out of reach… and there will always be socialists leaning over our shoulders and whispering that we must hand over more control of our lives, so they can get us just a little bit closer. They’ll never tell us exactly what “fairness” would be, because then we would know if we had achieved it. Blindness is an important tool of control."
Saturday, December 03, 2011
Amnesty International and What's Left of It
I can't believe that I used to give money to these clowns. They were actually a bit more sincere in their mission back than. The treatment described in the linked article is often dished out to former defense secretary Rumsfeld as well. To folks like me, this stuff is just plain weird, but not entirely unexpected. The left in general has been feeling quite confident in the last decade or two, evermore “empowered” in feeling they can push the most bizarre schemes and knowing that many will back them completely.
It's a world where acceptance of the totalitarian worldview is in resurgence everywhere – whether two bit pseudo-dictators in Latin America, Muslim extremists spouting anti-Semitic rants at the U.N., or just garden variety classrooms with teachers inculcating their students with their own hatred for the democratic hand that's been feeding them.
Amnesty International, like a host of other NGOs, is obsessed with America and Israel. I don't think it's too far-fetched to imagine them existing in the early 40's and devoting most of their passions to the “crimes” of the allies while turning a virtual blind eye to Hitler and Japanese militarists.
Soooo typical leftism, 'sad to see Saddam Hussein gone and Starbucks so widespread.
Mark Steyn covers nonsense like this with superb precision and wit in, "After America..." – a book I'll, again, strongly recommend.
We've actually reached a point in our pathetic non-development where beheadings and mass genocide are either brushed aside or seen as mere equivalents to the non-lethal interrogation (water-boarding causes no physical harm of any kind) of the man who planned 9/11.
Another typical expression of the Jacobin spirit of our time; ...despicable. They have no honor.
(I realize that some will note that the linked article was posted by Fox News and will therefore see it as somehow irrelevant but...too bad).