The moral outrage of the authors of AMERICAblog and Firedoglake, among other assorted morons that are writing about Mark Foley’s resignation from Congress is laughable. Like moths to a flame, some leftists cannot help but be drawn to hypocrisy.

Their stupidity is a given. You can’t be select in claiming the moral high ground.

In 1973, Gerry Studds, the Democrat representative from Massachusetts, engaged in sex with a male Congressional page.

In 1990, Steve Gobie was found to be running a prostitution business from Massachussetts Demiocrat Congressman Barney Franks apartment.

Robert Byrd, former Klan Kleagle (‘The Klan wasn’t so bad, really’), is a revered (if somewhat confused) Democrat and Teddy Kennedy (‘I forgot to call the police but I did remember to call my family, lawyers, the state Democrat machine leaders and  Kennedy PR person) can’t seem to put teh strange death of Mary Jo Kopechne  behind him.

No word from the hypocrites yet- and don’t expect any. They’ve been busted and now they will go away and find some more hypocrisy and deceit to play with.

The hypocrisy is OK- after all, they mean well.

Why so many women are miserable.

The end of the Cold War brought a kind of euphoric, if somewhat undefined expectation that the future held untold promise. The liberation of Eastern Europe was the second time in a century that freedom was to prevail and the bondage and persecution of millions was lifted. We believed that our better selves would somehow find and develop a new kind of universal brotherhood. We wanted so badly for those relieved from the tyranny to create with us, a new frontier of possibilities.

In the same way that the space program served as the genesis for so many new technologies, we wanted the defense technology industries and the entire military industrial complex to reinvent themselves into a mighty mechanism that focused on the betterment of mankind. The fight for miracle cures and miracle drugs were worthy endeavors for scientists from the east and west, finally working together.

Just beyond the horizon was the miracle of real economic growth, so long denied to so many, by 5 year plans and State run inefficiencies and the denial and subjugation of the human desire to excel and achieve. Those Eastern Europeans, deprived by corrupt and inefficient economies had equal economic on equal, if somewhat more rocky, playing fields. After the Cold War, we believed we could better handle the conflicts that we would inevitably face. We were wrong- and we should have seen it coming.

For decades, we focused on liberating entire populations from the iron grip of Communism. It was inevitable that once that was accomplished, we would focus out attention on that other great oppressor, cruel and corrupt Arab regimes. It wasn’t about Islam- it never was. The relations between ourselves and other free societies, with Malaysia and Indonesia, for example, proved that.

As in the former Soviet Union and Communist bloc, the Arab world is well aware of their dysfunctional leaders and their failed governments. Unlike their equally oppressed victims of Communism, these cruel and corrupt regimes have one weapon at their disposal the Communists did not- religion. This is a very important distinction.

The liberation of Eastern Europe meant that generations of people that had no real connection to any kind of religion were now a part of our secular society. Of course in western societies, tolerance and respect for religious affiliations and beliefs are a part of our cultural mosaic. The newly liberated Eastern Europeans were different. They were not bad people of course- they just came from a place where all religious affiliations were frowned upon. Theirs was a society that made deliberate religious affiliation a barrier to social acceptance. Out of necessity, whatever religious convictions they may have had, Eastern Europeans removed religion from their exterior lives. To this day (and to their credit, we believe), there are Eastern Europeans that are completely mystified as to what bearing the religious convictions- or lack of religious convictions- of a candidate for public office, has in determining a candidate’s ability to serve in office.

Liberating the Arab world from tyranny is not the same as liberating Eastern Europe from Communism. In the same way that two very ill patients with similar symptoms may need very different courses of treatment, there is no ‘one size fits all’, when it comes to bringing freedom to oppressed peoples.

It is interesting to note that in fact, Pope Benedict is ahead of the curve on this one. Taking a lesson from his predecessor, John Paul II, he is fighting tyranny and oppression on a different front. Whereas the gentle man from Krakow fought the secularists with the ferocity of a lion, this pontiff is fighting on a different front. Benedict is confronting the evil of irrational faith by insisting that faith is not borne of irrationality, but rather, by rational and reasoned thought.

The Polish Pope that saw and lived through evil from the side of the victim, was to enable his successor, the German Pope that saw and lived through evil from the side of the perpetrator. Together and in concert, these two men, so close, were to come to understand the real and all encompassing nature of evil. Each in their own way- and because of each other- were uniquely equipped to address and fight the forces that oppress so many that are created in His image.

One Pope fought tyranny by with words of morality. Another Pope fights tyranny with words of reason. John Paul II andf Benedict XVI were the perfect ‘one two’ punch in the battle for the freedom of man.

Shrinkwrapped too, makes note of the Pope’s efforts. In Reason and Rationality he makes a very nuanced observation:

Few Westerners doubt that the passions of our Islamist enemies are fueled by primitive emotions of envy and rage, derivatives of unreason. Yet the exaltation of reason by Western intellectuals, along with their fanciful belief that the primacy of their reasoning abilities render them free of irrationality, has brought us into great danger.

With a few words, Shrinkwrapped unravels much of the cause of our confusion as we combine two debates- how best to fight the war on terror and on how best to liberate oppressed peoples. These two realities of our time are not related- and these two realities will inevitably conflict with each other. They are two completely separate endavors. Our adversaries want us to confuse and combine the two, because they understand that in doing so, ‘two ends will be fighting the middle.’

Our efforts in fighting the war on terror and this new ‘cold war.’ to liberate the million under the Iron Sandals, will include both moral and religious components. They have to.

In A Tale Of Two Realities, Dr Sanity gently corrects Francis Fukuyama’s assertion that history is ‘evolutionary’ and cannot be stopped. She clearly sees the perils we face:

He did not forsee that the enemies of freedom, as a last-ditch, desperate measure to prevent the “endpoint” from establishing any equilibrium in the world, would resort to the complete abandonment of reason and reality altogether. And, in retrospect, it appears that from a rational and realistic perspective, there was no other course open to them except for complete historical capitulation. In order to stay alive, the enemies of human freedom–in all their various incarnations–had to abandon reason, truth, and reality because they simply could not make their case with those particular human tools.

Western nations have an important lesson to learn. Liberating oppressed peoples is not formulaic- there are no templates or blueprints- and our adversaries this time around have learned their ‘lessons,’ from our victories and from the defeat of our adversaries. We liberated much of a continent that had religion excised from it’s soul, as cruel and souless regimes degraded millions. That effort took 72 years and was by no means a simple matter. The evolution of that outcome was neither direct or clear.

Eventually, we will prevail and free the millions enslaved by cruel and souless tyrants that oppress by redefining a religion, to serve their ends. That end result too, will not come easily or come about as the result of a plan, based on our previous experiences. In fact, Fausta notes the tactics that have been successful in resisting the efforts of those who would defend fredom. She notes in The Article That May Cost A Man His Life And That Of His Family,

As I posted yesterday, Robert Rebeker, a French 52-yr old philosophy professor, wrote an op-ed article in Le Figaro stating that Islam is violent, and denounced the violence in the Koran.

After receiving several death threats in the mail, Prof. Rebeker and his family have had to go into hiding. The police are taking the threats very seriously and are keeping watch of his now vacant home.

Read Fausta’s post here.

The fight to free oppressed peoples is never easy. We must be prepared to keep our resolve in the fight against tyranny, for as long as it takes- not so much for our own sake, but for the sake of those that deserve freedom.

The war against radical Islam and the wars to liberate people from oppression, are much colder than the cold wars previously fought. The Anchoress has a few thoughts on the matter and they are a worthy read. We will address her thought in another post.

Of God, Bells, And Life

September 29, 2006

There some lessons in life that profound in their simplicity.

I will explain faith this way. Faith is not an answer, but it changes the nature of your questions. An answer would stop your growth, but the new questions fuel your growth. Faith turns your focus away from your own pain, frustration, worries, limitations and fears. Faith turns you toward the wider world, where you have the chance to experience the joy that reverberates through each day in our world like the ringing of a great bell.

So says Maxed Out Mama, in her post, The Ringing Of The Bell. The post is her extraordinary story- one of pain and redemption, written with the fresh memory of an exquisite agony and the ongoing dull ache of the healing process.

Religion, or rather, faith, is about illuminating the darkness. In other words, belief in God does not magically sweep away doubt or struggle. Nor does belief in God answer the ‘what is our purpose and meaning. ‘ questions. Belief in God, however, necessitates faith, and it is that faith, with all it’s ensuing struggles, that illuminates our way. In other words, our struggle with life and search for meaning endures. With faith, the path we must follow is illuminated. Without faith, we are left to stumble down that same path.

There is much in life that is confusing and cold. Many more than would care to admit, live lives of ‘quiet desperation.’ We wander about in a world that celebrates materialism and self absorption, all the while seeking meaning and inner peace. Faith alone will not, of course, end that search, but it may make the struggle more meaningful.

There is a by product of the illuminating light of faith. Not only is our own path illuminated, but that light can also illuminate and warm others.

As we search for meaning and purpose in life, we can along the way, illuminate the way for others, or add to their confusion. It is our choice. If we shine the light of faith as a beacon light into someone’s eyes, we will only blind them. If that light is pointed toward the path- in other words, our actions are taken to benefit others- we have helped ourselves. That is the choice each of us face every single day.

How we will be remembered will be to a very large extent, how we were regarded by others. Did we blind them with our own ideologies or hubris, or did we illuminate the path they were on, so that they might avoid the obstacles in their way, and did we point out new paths for them to consider? There is no middle ground. Who we are can be easily defined.

Here is a variation of an exercise, learned from a friend. Each day, find thirty times to do something positive for someone else. Call home for no reason. Encourage a friend. Talk to each of your kids. Say something kind to a co worker. Extend yourself- that is, illuminate the way for another, thirty times a day.

That simple exercise teaches by example. It is true that many exert power by command. Others exert influence by example. The power of the former lasts only as long as they are present, or by fear and intimidation. The power of the latter lasts as long as they continue to inspire. You rise to a higher level on your own, inspired to find your higher self.

So it is with faith. God may be overbearing or he may be loving. How we interpret His influence on our lives- and how influence other lives, says a great deal about who we are.

Read The Ringing Of The Bell- and consider ‘thirty times a day.’ We don’t know for sure but we suspect MOM is already on the program.

This post was originally published on August 17. 2005. Life goes on. Maxed Out Mama continues to teach by example. She takes nothing for granted.

Art cannot be stopped

Post partum party to end all post partum parties! 

Divorce, Chinese style

Forgotten anniversaries a thing of the past

How much did YOU love your Barbie dolls? 

Expect a new UN resolution condemning Israel and more religious violence.

The Iranian and Arab media will be sure to blame ‘Zionist filth.’

It’s inevitable.

Soap operas are addictive.

The Anchoress wrote an interesting post, Our instincts Serve Us Well, in which she discusses and examines the influence of TV on our lives. She notes,

The idea of watching Oprah Winfrey at any time, but most of all while cooking dinner, has always been completely repellent to me, and news and ballgames are not substitutes for suppertime interaction. In our house supper was (and remains) the one time of the day when brakes were applied to everyone’s own busy concerns, and we checked in with each other. How’s school? How’s work? What word did you learn today, can you use it in a sentence? I read such-and-such today, and I thought…What do you think of this-or-that-thing that is happening in the world? Really? How did you reach that conclusion? Tell me more, I am interested in your ideas!

…What is particularly unsettling, these days, is how ubiquitous televisions are – they cannot be avoided. The last time I went shoe shopping with a kid I felt assaulted by the multiple televisions blaring while we looked at sneakers. It was so difficult to talk, to hear each other, and to think. I left the store without making a purchase, moved on to yet another store full of yakking televisions, (then to the haircutter whose set was going full boar) and when I got back to my quiet little house I realized why I hate going out so very much, these days.

Well, not everyone is like The Anchoress- or not many people are as aware as she is of how our lives are influenced by ideologies that are now framed as entertainment.

For a small investment each day, legions of soap fans become an integral part of some imaginary character’s life, rejoicing in made for TV joys and suffering in made for TV tragedies. Many people are drawn into the plots and subplots of each storyline, rooting for their heroes. They are equally as passionate about the characters they loathe, pleading with their beloved characters to ‘wake up!’ or ‘look out!’ for the troubles they see coming.

The plots are predicatable, of course. No one can be happy for too long and no one escapes the evil machinations of characters that every now and then, seem to be on the brink of a transformation to the good side, only to slip back into their evil ways, coercecd by others or by their own nature.

Of course, soap operas come in all kinds of guises- and they are not just the purview of women, as is often thought. In fact, most soap operas addicts are men.

‘Professional’ wrestling is a soap opera, with good guys and bad guys, all putting on a show. There is backhandedness and trickery, and women of questionable repute, never far from the bedroom, or so it seems. The entertainment of that kind of ‘professional’ wrestling lends itself to the subplots and machinations of the heroes or villains of the month. Fans are loyal to one character or another and over time, good becomes evil and evil becomes good. The drama is riveting.

That drama isn’t quite as profound in professional sports- but that too, is a kind of soap opera. Fans, die hard loyalists, share in the glory and the misery of every play on the field and every win or loss. Joy and anger are never far from the fore- all because of what happens with a ball.

Of course, watching sports, in it’s purist form, is about competition and appreciation of excellence. Real sportsmen and athletes understand this. Olympic competitors that help each other out, are recognized as great sportsmen and unselfish. Real sportsmen and athletes want to be challenged by the best competition. They could care less about the brouhaha that is the soap opera designed for the fans. To a real sportsman or athlete, criticism by a couch potato, beer swilling oaf, yelling at his TV set, is meaningless.

Politics too, has become a soap opera, and now, we are all beginning to pay the price.

The soap opera that is politics, is not much different than the soap opera that is ‘professional wrestling.’ There are no rules, and there is no expectation of decency.

Politicians lie- we al know this. Nevertheless, we attach significance to their endeavors as if they were credible.

Bill Clinton goes on national TV and lies- and he is applauded for his efforts. Further, he is celebrated by others in his party, knowing full well he lied. They believe it is alright to propagate those lies because they believe their agenda alone is sacred and that gives them special privileges. People cannot be trusted to think for themselves. The rules of decent and behavior do not apply to them. Bill Clinton cannot escape his ‘born on the wrong side of the tracks’ character, and the political legacy of that past has been passed on to a new generation. For the left, deceit, dirty fighting and bullying are the necessary characteristics of what it means to be a liberal today. They have as much respect for differing and divergent opinions as did Stalin, Poll Pot or Che. Disagree and you become a traitor, no matter how long you have supported their causes. An exaggeration? Ask Joe Lieberman, who has been so disrespected as of late. He was dismissed and openly disregarded by leftists at the Democratic Convention.

George Bush is the most secretive president this country has ever had. In a nation where keeping secrets is not acceptable, that is a bad thing. This administration believes that the nation is best served by keeping almost everything secret- even those things that do not be needed to be hidden away. George Bush, that well packaged and handled Texas ‘everyman,’ is really a privileged heir of the silver spoon, cannot connect fully with the American people. Like their counterparts on the left, they believe people cannot be trusted to think for themselves. Like the left, the administration will not countenance divergent opinions. Voice dissent and you are ‘out of the loop.’

American politics has become a soap opera, with heroes and villains and millions of fans deciding on their loyalties every few years.

The Arab world is a soap opera, too. In the course of a day, Arabs will say they want peace- even as they celebrate the likes of the murderous and racist Hezbollah and Hamas.

Like our political parties (only armed), they exist only to enrich themselves, and keep the Arab masses down, as that serves the needs of the dysfunctional Arab regimes. In a perverted way, who can blame them? Their lives are meaningless and they have no future- and that is exactly how these racist, murderous and dysfunctional regimes want it. They understand very well that frustrated and helpless people dream about anything that appears to empower them and give them any illusion of credibility or greatness- even if that dream is caricature.
In truth, the Palestinian and Arab world want what their leaders will not allow them to have- peace and prosperity. Why? Because peace and prosperity are the result of freedom and democracy- those things the dysfunctional Arab leadership abhor. They are slave owners, no more and no less. They have managed to usurp their faith into being the heartless and cruel slave overseer, dictating what is and isn’t allowed- and the punishments for violating their rules.

Soap operas and ‘professional wrestling’ are easy to understand. There are extremes of good and evil, strong and weak. Many Americans have been sucked into that same dimension of unreality, as if one side or the other were pure goodness or evil incarnate.

In reality, the people that voice that kind of drivel are irrelevant. One of the great hallmarks of any civilization is the willingness to ‘live and let live’ and the willingness to compromise. The vast majority of Americans understand that. We have said before that real world Americans are perfectly capable of getting along and even thriving. living alongside those of differing views and opinions. Of course, that is what scares the extremists on either side- that their views take second place behind what is the great American history of ‘live and let live.’

If you want to understand what an America dominated by extremists would look like, one only has to see the implosion of the Arab world. The only difference is that political ideologies will become a substitute for religion, with the requisite persecutions by various factions.

Soap operas. Just what we need, now.

Yesterday, we posted Why Dogs Bite People. Well, we weren’t quite done.

In order to help celebrate Dr Sanity’s birthday (today is the day- send money and we will be sure she gets some of it- well, just a little, anyway) we have decided to speak from her Id, something she, as a mental health professional, rarely gets to do. We know, deep down and buried inside every mental health professional, is an ‘assault therapist’ just waiting to be set free. It is with that in mind that we further address the relationship between (often dysfunctional) pets and their (often dysfunctional) owners.

We were taken to task about our view on pet blogs by some of our regular readers.

That said, we wanted to reconsider some of our thoughts and expand upon them here, in this forum. We reread our critics, and coupled with our own experiences with pets, decided it was indeed time to to clarify our thoughts on Pet Blogs and pet bloggers, as well as pet owners.

We believe most pet owners are fine people (save their own personal neurosis).

That said, we do stand by our earlier remarks- as they do concern us. There are some pet owners that have sanity in the rear view mirror.

These remarks are addressed to them.

Anyone that leaves a million and half dollars to cat is insane. This observation is further validated when the deceased leaves strict instructions on how to take care of said cat (as in, do not sell the house until after Pussy passes, or Pussy is to have an adequate supply of caviar, of a particular brand, bought in containers of a certain size) after their demise. Leaving instructions that a new red or yellow ribbon be applied daily to a yappy Maltese or Yorkie, with specific instruction on how to apply said ribbon, is reason enough to have the entire will invalidated.

Pets do not send Christmas or Birthday cards, of the regular or email variety. Pets do not know it’s your birthday, and further, they don’t care. If they did really know, they would surprise you by not crapping in the house for a day, not chew on anything of value or they would let you sleep longer, not bark or jump on the furniture- just for that one day.

Pets do not know it’s Christmas, save for the fact that today, master and fecal matter removal slave is letting me play with wrapping paper. Pets are not aware of Christmas stockings, embroidered with their names. Pussy or Spike do not understand when, on Christmas morning, you announce, in an exaggerated voice, “Ohhh! What did Santa bring for YOU?”

Pets do not need to be taken to a pet psychologist. There is no such thing. The quacks that refer to themselves as pet psychologists feel the same way about whack job pet owner that we do- they just want to cash in. In point of fact, every pet psychologist will tell you that Pussy or Spike isn’t happy, and they will diagnosis Pussy or Spike with a human disorder. Pussy ADD, or a particular- and rare- form of canine Multiple Personality Disorder, that affects Labs more than other breeds. You will be told it is somehow your fault for not dealing with or causing the problem. Please pay in advance for continued therapy.

Pet cemetaries are a nice thing. They are called ‘back yards.’ Any other place is called a wallet lightening exercise. Pet embalming, pet grave stones or grave markers, fall into that same category. Eulogizing ones pet, at home, is a lovely way to remember the beloved Pussy or Spike. Eulogizing one’s pet, in a formal setting, after having sent out 300 invitations, is insane. Participating in a pet wake prior to the ‘service’ is even more insane. One does not break out 100 year old scotch as farewell sendoff for a pet.

There is no rational reason to dress your pet up. Putting antlers on Spike for Christmas will not camoflauge the fact that he is a dog, not a reindeer. There are no appropriate Halloween costumes for pets.

Pets live in sin. They do not marry and despite a well planned and large gathering at the wedding ceremony, will not remain monogamous. Further, inter-species pet marriages are disturbing, for a variety of reasons. Having Spike or Pussy wear a tuxedo or wedding dress (complete with veil), is plain crazy, period. Spending a fortune on jewellery for Spike or Pussy, to celebrate the event, is also crazy. Having a photographer immortalize the solemn ocassion (and later sending out that thank you cards, signed with the paw prints of the happy couple) is beyond acceptable normal human behavior.

Asking your pet’s opinion on everything from what to put on pizza to discussing your pet’s politics will not make the extreme pet owner appear any more rational. To imply that you and your pet vote in the same manner, or agree on Iraq, or that bitch neighbor, the bitch’s pet or the bitch’s choice of pet clothing or Christmas/Birthday card/gift, is no testimony to your sanity.

This post was originally published on February 4, 2005. Our opinions have not changed.

Why Dogs Bite People

September 27, 2006

We have already opined on pet blogs, pet owners who blog and pet owners who really believe their pets also blog.

Changing kitty litter or getting your mangy dog to crap outside does not in any way constitute brilliance on your part or brilliance on the part of your pet. It is not the equivalent of teaching your child to look both ways before crossing the street. That’s right, we said it. Your animal is not an equivalent to a child. OK, so we’ve managed to offend a few of you that really do believe an animal-human relationship is the equivalent to a human-human relationship. That said, if you indeed believe that, you’re an idiot.

Writing a blog in a cat/dog/hamster/fish voice is entertaining only to yourself and that small galaxy of morons who feel the need to do the same.

If the rest of us don’t really care about what you have to say in your personal blog (trust us here, we don’t. Having a second blog written by/about a pet is a fair indicator of that), why on earth would you think we care about the imaginary conversations you have with Fluffy or Spot? If we don’t think your child learning to crap into into a porcelain bowl is riveting Pulitzer Prize material, it is a safe bet that reading about your feelings on a certain brand of kitty litter or your pet’s favorite made-in-China toy will not be adapted into a major motion picture screenplay.

If we have the uncontrollable urge to read about skeins of wool, there are knitting blogs aplenty that can calm that jonesing need, without seeing little itty bitty kittens frolicking, entagled in that skein of wool, trapped in paper bag or playing with tinsel. Those activities are not unique to your pet.

Read it all here.

Now, these are the reasons dogs bite their owners;

No more nice talk. Time for a reality smackdown. Think of it as ‘assault therapy,’ where you get reality beaten into you.

The war in Iraq is not the source of new terrorists. Most Iraqis are sick and tired of the ongoing carnage in their country, perpetrated by terrorists coming from other countries that have never had great love for the US and democracy.
In fact, these groups and organizations have been engaging in terror and mayhem long before 9/11 or the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The terror threat has been escalating for years.

These newly minted dysfunctional terror misfits are encouraged to go into Iraq by equally dysfunctional educational and religious authorities that have portrayed the murder of Kafirs as a religious obligation for decades. When these homicidal lunatics make their way into Iraq (usually via Syria, another monument to dysfunctional regimes), they end up mostly killing fellow Muslims, even as they claim to be fighting the hated kafirs.

Let’s be clear- the terror and hate has been escalating for years before 9/11, and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Saudi textbooks were even more vicious and ugly than they now. Arab newspapers were replete with lurid stories of Jews using the blood of Christians to bake Passover food and Purim cakes. Throughout much of the Islamic world, Jews and Christians have referred to as sons of ‘monkeys and pigs,’ with escalating regularity prior 9/11.

Prior to 2001, as it is today, anti Jewish sentiment was as pronounced as ever, with even more explicit calls to ‘Slaughter the Jews!’ broadcast on PA media and from many religious pulpits. The same anti Jewish sentiment and conspiracy theories found in Pakistan today (a country with no Jews) is not different than it was before 9/11.

The war in Iraq had nothing to do with escalating levels of terror and the increasing number of terrorists. The only difference the war on terror and the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have made is to expose the escalating rot and dysfunction that was already there.

What the media won’t discuss is that most Iraqis, like most civilized people, want nothing more than to live in peace in freedom. The media has experience avoiding that kind of reality. They made Che Guevara, the butcher of tens of thousands, a ‘People’s Leader,’ too, a political figure.

If Hillary Clinton is right, and Bill really didn’t know Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden was a real threat to the America homeland and Americans, then he, his administration and the entire Democrat Party owe Oliver North a huge apology. During Ronald Reagan’s tenure in office, North testified under oath that he believed Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda were direct threats to the Americans and the Homeland (CORRECTION: Oliver North actually named Abu Nidal and not Osama bin Laden in his Senate testimony. If anything, the Democrats had even more warning that terror was coming to our shores- and not just from OBL- ed).  North even predicted a terror attack. He was excoriated and dismissed, ridiculed by the Democrats and later by the Clinton Administration. If he weren’t, his warnings that terror was someday going to come to our shores would have been taken seriously.

So much for earnest finger pointing changing reality.

No wonder so many leftists are attracted to a more simple, back to an ‘off the grid’ lifestyle. That would eliminated TV and videotape records. Reality would be whatever Mother Earth and crystals told them in a dream just prior to the Vernal and Autumnal Equinox celebrations. The messages they receive from the ‘spirits’ of the ancestors, as they dance nude around a huge bonfire, are very different from believing in God that has a message for us, yes indeed (mostly because that message is one of responsibility and accountability-ugh!).
The Anchoress has a signature expression she uses, when she exposes the hypocrisy of the media and the left, even as they refuse to acknowledge reality. She likes to say, ‘Facts, Shmacts….’ She last uses that phrase in a blistering reality assault in her post, Clinton Versus Condi… The post is a keeper:

Clinton is not the right president to prove a “liar.” The press wants desperately to bring down a president, but Clinton is not the one. And so, facts-schmacts, the only facts that matter are the ones the master can pull out of thin air.

We linked to her post before, but we do so again because we share similar blogger DNA- The Anchoress can slap them silly with the best of them (that means SC&A).

Lastly, a story in Time Magazine about Israel and the Palestinians drew our ire because of the author’s assertions and falsehoods. As the Anchoress says, ‘facts, shmacts, who needs facts?’

The article states that the west should recognize the Hamas government (openly committed to Israel’s destruction and the elimination of Jews) because it was democratically elected. As we have said many times, Adolph Hitler, too, was elected by a democratic election process.

Simply being voted into office does not confer moral standing to any government. Had the west rebuffed and then confronted Hitler when he was elected, 50 million lives would have been saved.

The only thing the election of Hamas proved was that the proud racist, genocidal and hateful agenda of Hamas, was warmly embraced and received by the Palestinians. LIke the German volk, before them, they have made their choice. In the end, it will be they who will pay the price as they follow Hamas in lockstep into an evil war they will not win.

The article also speaks of Palestinian rejectionism:

…a widely held belief among Palestinians that “Yasser Arafat and the PLO recognized the State of Israel in the Oslo agreement and what did they gain from that? Only suffering and misfortune”….the settler population in the West Bank actually doubled during the Oslo years.

Guess what?

Further, UN Resolution 242 does not require Israel to pull back to pre 1967 borders. The Resolution calls for the establishment of ‘secure and recognized borders.’

In an article in the Beirut Daily Star on June 12, 1974, Lord Caradon and one of the original drafters of 242, said that,

“It would have been wrong to demand Israel return to its positions of 4 June 1967 because those positions were undesirable and artificial. After all, they were just the places the soldiers of each side happened to be the day the fighting stopped in 1948. They were just armistice lines. That’s why we didn’t demand the Israelis return to them and I think we were right not to.”

Ah, pesky reality.

Lastly, the author cites Sandy Tolan as a voice of reason and authority.

We have had our say on Sandy Tolan, one of the great UC-Berkely frauds and hypocrites.

Electric Sanity Squad

September 26, 2006

The latest Sanity Squad podcast is shocking affair. Our latest collective effort offers up sharp and crisp clarity, insight, diagnostic acumen and the profundity of great common sense.

This week, the Sanity Squad podcast made room on the couch for Gagdad Bob, one of the psycho-sphere’s great minds. If you don’t know Gagdad Bob, you’ve been wasting half your Internet connection costs.

This week, Shrinkwrapped, Neo and Dr Sanity all offer up up astute observations and insight into the Chris Wallace interview with Bill Clinton.

You won’t want to miss this week’s Sanity Squad podcast.

In what has to be bad news for the MSM and the hard left, three newsworthy items converge. Bill Clinton’s contrived and crafted phony outrage, ongoing radical Muslim rage at the Pope and the next chapter in the saga of dysfunctional Arab regimes, all contribute in a way that highlights the MSM Emperor’s wardrobe.

Firstly, the radical Islamists are still acting up and ‘demanding’ an apology from the Pope Benedict XVI, for remarks he made inviting Islam to dialogue. Either by design or ignorance, radical Islamists either deliberately misinterpreted the Pope’s remarks or were unable to understand them (though it is difficult to underfstand exactly how anyone can misinterpret the Pope’s remark that

“…only by recognizing the “rationality of faith’’ do people “become capable of that genuine dialogue of cultures and religions so urgently needed today.’’

In any event, there is an ongoing effort by some Muslims to keep the trumped up ‘issue’ alive.

In today’s Toronto Star, there is an article, Benedict Should Come Clean, in which a group of Canadian Muslims.

Pope Benedict XVI has still not apologized for equating Islam with violence in a speech and now seems to be using the ensuing controversy to forge an allegiance with conservative Muslims, Canada’s largest Arab organization says.

“He should come clean,” Khaled Mouammar, president of the Canadian Arab Federation, said yesterday after meeting with the Toronto Star editorial board.

His strong reaction stood in sharp contrast to those of Muslim envoys to the Vatican who met Benedict yesterday to discuss fallout from a speech the Pope gave Sept. 12.

The Star article did not indicate Mr. Mouammar’s response to the Pope’s remarks concerning the lack of religious tolerance in the Islamic world. That is more than a bit troubling. If religious tolerance is unacceptable in much of the Islamic world, why would we believe that religious tolerance would be accepted in the west? Indeed, Canada had to fend off demands that the legal system accept that Sharia Law be adopted as an ‘alternative’ legal system in certain instances. That was opposed by many, including Muslim women, in what was an ugly and often bitter public exchanges, with charges, counter charges and even threats of violence.

As long as there are those who willingly support the regimes of the repressive and dysfunctional regimes of so much of the Islamic world, against the free nations and democracies, we can rightly assume that those dysfunctional, bigoted and hateful ideologies also serve as acceptable ideologies of those in the west that support those regimes. If they were not acceptable ideologies, no one would support the regimes and leaders that espouse them.

The media and the left, so intent on fanning the flames of religious intolerance that might denigrate and undermine the Judeo-Christian foundation of democratic and free states, conveniently neglect to mention the political agenda and deliberate misrepresenation of many of the Pope’s critics.

This week, Bill Clinton went down in flames- nobly, of course. The MSM and the left are all a twitter, because Bill Clinton, beautifully and articulately lied his pants off. It didn’t matter that Mr Clinton wasn’t telling the truth- the proud moment was achieved because he lied with polish, poise and earnestness. The MSM and left are so proud!

Rather than be ashamed of a former President of the United States boldly lying on national television, much of the MSM and the left believe they can finally touch themselves in public, for a change. It matters little to them that a former president has annointed himself with credibility equal to that of Robert Mugabe, Hugo Chavez and Bashar Assad. Clinton lied, with panache and style and so, he’s a hero to many.

Of course, Mr Clinton is a very smart man. Mr Clinton knew his record would be examined and he also knew that record would not bear him out- and it is precisely because of that, he felt compelled to lie.

Mr Clinton will not leave the legacy he so desperately wants to leave. His image will not be chiseled onto Mount Rushmore, awarded that lofty status by a national groundswell of love and admiration.

In lieu of that, Mr Clinton has chosen to be victim- the perfect victim. He wants to be seen as hounded by the right and Fox News, and denied his destiny by the evil of his persecutors. It doesn’t matter that he lied, to the nation, a Grand Jury, or Chris Wallace. Mr Clinton meant well, and that is enough. We do not need an honest president- we just need one who means well, defined as anyone that adopts an agenda of the left and articulates any disagreement as persecution.

The MSM and left are perfectly happy with those arrangements.

Finally, Australian Prime Minister John Howard noted in a speech, a few simple realities:

“There must be unconditional acceptance throughout the entire Arab world, without exception, of Israel’s right to exist in peace and security behind recognised borders,” he said.

“The entire Arab world – including Syria, Hizbollah and Hamas and in addition Iran – must give up forever the idea that the Israelis can be driven into the sea.”

In another example of the left and the MSM have redefined reality, Mr Howard says the obvious- and that becomes front page news.

What is particularly amusing is the context in which the Arab world rejection of Israel is presented- as if diplomatic recognition of Israel was being witheld as a kind of ‘punishment.’

Israel does not need diplomatic recognition by some of the world’s most backward and repressive regimes in the world. Israel does not need to maintain relations with nations that have cultivated a society that embraces hate, bigotry and racism. Israel does not need relations with regimes that can offer her nothing.

On the other hand, Israel maintains relations with most of the nations of the civiized world- and even ‘quiet’ relations with nations that for one reason or another, cannot publicly acknowledge those relations.

Those nations that maintain ties with Israel, have benefitted from those strong economic, cultural and world class educational ties. Most nations in the Arab world can best be described as economic, cultural and educational failures. They are third world backwaters.

It is not Israel that has suffered from lack of diplomatic relations with the Arab world.

When Michaelangelo was commissioned to paint the painting the celing of theSistine Chapel in 1508, Pope Julius II had no idea the job would take 4 years. Nor did anyone know that Michaelangelo would need 30 years to paint the entire Sistine Chapel. For a very long time, Pope and their successors would ask, ‘When will you be finished, Michaelangelo?” His response was something to the effect of ‘I am Michaleangelo. It will be done when I am finished.’

The MSM and the left are asking when the right will be done ‘persecuting’ them and rejecting their tired worn out and rejected ideologies. The MSM and the left it seems, refuse to abandon an environment where deceit and repression are cultivated.

In fact, it is the right that are modern day Michaelangelo’s, filled with creativity, ideas and beliefs that empower the individual and his potential. Like great art, ideas too, mirror reflections of the truth.

Americans and those who celebrate freedom and democracy, will not back down until the deceit stops- no matter how long that takes.


The Anchoress proves once more that quiet truth outdoes bluster every time. She clearly exposes the obsessions of left and MSM. As far as they are concerned,

…Clinton is not the right president to prove a “liar.” The press wants desperately to bring down a president, but Clinton is not the one. And so, facts-schmacts, the only facts that matter are the ones the master can pull out of thin air.

And if that doesn’t demonstrate, more than anything, that we are living in an age of diabolical disorientation, where up is down (the excellent economic news is bad) and right is wrong (men who served with John Kerry know nothing about him) and truths are lies, (US policy from 1998 on was regime change in Iraq, but only until we did it) I don’t know what can.

I feel no great thrill here to see Clinton in a purple rage, nor to see how brilliantly some parts of the blogosphere responded, because in the end our limited audience will always been trumped by the vast and attention-span-challenged audience of the MSM, who click on, absorb a thirty second “Clinton good, others bad” sound bite and click out.

The Anchoress is clear and concise, qualities abhored by many on the left and the media, because those qualities are rooted and clear and not easily subject to obfuscation. That is more than a bit ironic- after all, it is journalists that are supposedly dedicated to telling us the truth.

Cross posted at The Sanity Squad.

Every time Bill Clinton leans forward and points his finger, he lies.

When he leaned forward, looked into the camera and said, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman,” he was lying. As it turns out, Monica, not Bill, was telling the truth.

He leaned forward and vehemently denied having an affair with Gennifer Flowers, too. Later, in a deposition, he admitted to the affair.

Now, Mr Clinton was a very good liar-Bob Kerrey (former Governor of Nebraska) said so himself.

“Clinton’s an unusually good liar. Unusually good. Do you realize that?”

Of course, behavior patterns rarely change. In Mr Clinton’s case, with his long and distinguished career of deceit (political, personal and every other iteration). leaning forward and pointing his finger (deliberate behaviors meant to emphasize sincerity and believability) are the kind of body language that are dead give aways to even the most mediocre and ill informed students of psychology. That’s right- you would be aware of that truth even if you graduated at the bottom of the night school at Addis Ababa Technical Community College.

In the case of Mr Clinton, the best lie detectors are his sincerity and self proclaimed victim status. Here are a few examples. On June 8, 1996, Bill Clinton publicly- and painfully said, said,

I have vivid and painful memories of black churches being burned in my own state when I was a child.

There is no record of a Black church burning in Arkansas when Bill Clinton was a child.

On February 21, 1996, Bill Clinton, with the greatest sincerity said,

“Since I was a little boy, I’ve heard about the Iowa caucuses. That’s why I would really like to do well in them.”

In fact, the Iowa caucuses began in 1972, when Mr Clinton was in Oxford.

The list is long, but there is no point in repeating what everyone already knows.

Bill Clinton was not responsible for 9/11, any more than was George Bush. We noted Mr Clinton’s remarks in We Went To War Because Bill Clinton Told The Truth that

So we will pursue a long-term strategy to contain Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction and work toward the day when Iraq has a government worthy of its people.

First, we must be prepared to use force again if Saddam takes threatening actions, such as trying to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction or their delivery systems, threatening his neighbors, challenging allied aircraft over Iraq or moving against his own Kurdish citizens…

The hard fact is that so long as Saddam remains in power, he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of his region, the security of the world.

Here’s the deal. The war on terror isn’t about Bill Clinton or how wonderful he thinks he is. The war on terror isn’t about Fox News, or how much he would like to make Fox News an issue. Mr Clinton did some smart things in fighting terror and he did some stupid things in fighting terror- and nothing he says can change that reality.

He had 8 years to fight terror and he did the best he could, given the circumstances. As he noted in the interview, Mr Bush was in office 8 months. The additional 8 months prior to 9/11 could not have prevented that from happening.

The war on terror is about facing the truth about our adversaries and those who would threaten us. Mr Clinton ought to be making every effort to be telling the truth when it comes to the security of our nation.

Bill Clinton doesn’t have much of a track record when it comes to telling the truth.


Oh my.

“The final policy paper on national security that President Clinton submitted to Congress — 45,000 words long — makes no mention of al Qaeda and refers to Osama bin Laden by name just four times. The scarce references to bin Laden and his terror network undercut claims by former White House terrorism analyst Richard A. Clarke that the Clinton administration considered al Qaeda an “urgent” threat, while President Bush’s national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, “ignored” it. The Clinton document, titled “A National Security Strategy for a Global Age,” is dated December 2000 and is the final official assessment of national security policy and strategy by the Clinton team. The document is publicly available, though no U.S. media outlets have examined it in the context of Mr. Clarke’s testimony and new book.”

More reality. The Anchoress puts on a 3 pointer clinic:

One of the quotes I had missed before reading the transcript of Bill Clinton’s spontaneous (or maybe not so spontaneous ) rage-fest this weekend was the former president saying “now, I have never criticized President Bush…”Which is just too funny, because he has done it before both foreign and domestic audiences – in fact it was his criticisms of Bush just about a year ago…

This is very troubling stuff to consider. Very sad, troubling stuff. When a void needs to be filled with love, but it cannot be because love is confusing, or threatening, or simply not in the plans, then the void will be filled with something else.

I wonder if in Clinton’s profound need to be loved, either by “his public” or his “Bush parents” he is not approaching a place that is very self-destructive. Hate and love are separated by a thin line, and the thin line is often made up of equal parts self-loathing and doubt…

There is just so much more… Read it all.

We wrote in a previous post,

In the strange and topsy turvey world we live in, radical Islamists are incensed enough to believe that death threats againsy the Pope and other threats of violence and terror directed at Christendom, are acceptable forms of religious discourse.

To make matters worse, the media and the left have attached a kind of gravitas to this line of thought, as if the wild, frenzied and irrational behavior were a reasonable and rational response…

The Left and the MSM have a lot to learn about recognizing what is real religious expression.

Real faith is not measured by the lives you take in God’s name. Real faith is in the lives you save in God’s name.

The Gates of Vienna has a superb post, Ahmanjinedad’s Kampf. The Baron’s post provides both political and religious clarity to world that has had both those things obscured or appropriated by political or religious ideologues.

Now fast-forward eighty years. Watch Kristallnacht, D-Day, Auschwitz, the Berlin Wall, Vietnam, and 9-11 fly by in a blur. Hit “play” as soon as you see the face of Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, making his infamous speech this past October:

“The establishment of the Zionist regime was a move by the world oppressor against the Islamic world… The skirmishes in the occupied land are part of a war of destiny. The outcome of hundreds of years of war will be defined in Palestinian land.

As the Imam [Khomeini] said, Israel must be wiped off the map.

The Islamic umma will not allow its historic enemy to live in its heartland. [Emp- SC&A]

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, representing the corrupt mullahs, wants it both ways. As far as his western listeners go, he wants to present Israel as a ‘political’ problem. For his domestic and Muslim audience, he wants to be clear that the conflict is religious.

Says the Baron,

It is as if the President of Iran were eerily channeling the Reichskanzler of the 1930s.



He’s right, of course, Like Hitler Ahmadinejad presented the Jews as both political and as an ideological adversary with nefarious plans to usurp the German volk.

Charles Krauthammer provides some insight into why the dredges and failures of civilization of our time are intoxicated with anti Jewish sentiment (h/t MCB):

There are 13 million Jews in the world, one-fifth of 1 percent of the world’s population. Yet 20 percent of Nobel Prize winners are Jewish, a staggering hundredfold surplus of renown and genius. This is similarly true for a myriad of other “everyones” — the household names in music, literature, mathematics, physics, finance, industry, design, comedy, film and, as the doors opened, even politics.

But it is not just Jewish excellence at work here. There is a dark side to these past centuries of Jewish emancipation and achievement — an unrelenting history of persecution…

In response to a Dr Sanity post, A New Hitler Rising, We left the following comment:

If we haven’t learned that appeasement is a bad idea, we may deserve exactly what is going to come our way.

I can only hope that we make that stand clear before Almahdenijad decides to kill a few milliion Jews within missile range.

I recall a lecturer once making the remark that Jews were the ‘canary in the coal mine’ for much of recorded history.

He was referring to an Abba Eban quote, “The Jews are the living embodiment of the minority, the constant reminder of what duties societies owe their minorities, whoever they might be.”

I think real magnitude of that remark just hit me.

The Jews have survived everything that has been thrown at them. That will not change.

I can only hope we can survive what appears to be history repeating itself. We seem to be abandoning the Jews again, because it appears to be politically expedient.

God help us.

Roland Gittelson delivered a eulogy that memorialized those who fell on Iwo Jima. His magnificent and noble words, also made note of the following:

…To one thing more do we do we consecrate ourselves in memory of those who sleep beneath these crosses and stars. We shall not foolishly suppose, as did the last generation of Americas fighting men, that victory on the battlefield will automatically guarantee the triumph of democracy at home. This war, with all its frightful heartache and suffering, is but the beginning of our generations struggle for democracy. When the last battle has been won, there will be those at home, as there were last time, who will want us to turn our backs in selfish isolation on the rest of organized humanity, and thus to sabotage the very peace for which we fight…

When the final cross has been placed in the last cemetery, once again there will be those to… who will insist with the voice of sweet reasonableness and appeasement that it is better to trade with the enemies of mankind, than, by crushing them… To you who sleep here silently, we give our promise: we will not listen…

Anne Bayefsky, in a speech to the UN at a conference, Confronting Anti-Semitism: Education for Tolerance and Understanding, sponsored by the United Nations Department of Information, said this:

At the U.N., the language of human rights is hijacked not only to discriminate but to demonize the Jewish target. More than one quarter of the resolutions condemning a state’s human rights violations adopted by the commission over 40 years have been directed at Israel. But there has never been a single resolution about the decades-long repression of the civil and political rights of 1.3 billion people in China, or the million female migrant workers in Saudi Arabia kept as virtual slaves, or the virulent racism which has brought 600,000 people to the brink of starvation in Zimbabwe. Every year, U.N. bodies are required to produce at least 25 reports on alleged human rights violations by Israel, but not one on an Iranian criminal justice system which mandates punishments like crucifixion, stoning and cross-amputation of right hand and left foot. This is not legitimate critique of states with equal or worse human rights records. It is demonization of the Jewish state.

As Israelis are demonized at the U.N., so Palestinians and their cause are deified. Every year the U.N. marks Nov. 29 as the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People–the day the U.N. partitioned the British Palestine mandate and which Arabs often style as the onset of al nakba or the “catastrophe” of the creation of the state of Israel. In 2002, the anniversary of the vote that survivors of the concentration camps celebrated, was described by Secretary-General Annan as “a day of mourning and a day of grief.

Naturally, the conference was boycotted by Arab states.

Of course, Amnesty International isn’t the least bit concerned with Almahdinejad’s bigoted and racist remarks. Nowhere on the AI website can anything be found on the subject. Given Amnesty’s record on Israel and anti-Semitism, that isn’t surprising. While quick to denounce the US gulag, Jews and Israel are another matter. Bayefsky notes

…The change became abundantly clear at the U.N. World Conference Against Racism that took place in August and early September 2001. The final declaration of the forum of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) said Zionism, or the self-determination of the Jewish people, equals racism and went downhill from there. On the final day prior to the adoption of this declaration, international NGOs, including Amnesty, deliberated about their position as one caucus. As a representative of the International Association of Jewish Lawyers and Jurists I was about to enter our meeting place along with the president of Amnesty, Irene Khan, when the chief representative of Human Rights Watch, Reed Brody, turned to me in the presence of the others and told me I was not welcome and had to go. Said Brody, to the objection of no one (although I had worked professionally with many of them for years), I represented Jews and therefore could not be trusted to be objective…

However, despite the rhetoric of “inclusiveness,” the Amnesty International chief sat on her hands when a motion to delete the voices of Jewish victims of racism was put to the vote and adopted. Every Jewish NGO from around the world walked out. Amnesty and company stayed.

Of course they did. It has become apparent that Jews are as relevent to Amnesty International as they are to the UN, the President of Iran and the rest of the Arab world.

The world has tired of talking about Jews, the Israel-Palestine conflict and the Holocaust. A visit to Auschwitz puts things into perspective- and also highlights the evil of those who openly declare their genocidal intent.

If every diplomat and memeber of human rights NGO’s were to visit that portal to hell, were possible, the preposterous notion of Israelis (read: Jews) as Nazis would be put to rest. Rwanda would not have occured and Darfur would probably be a very nice palce to visit. Those dysfunctional regimes that have oppressed and oppressed their citizens would not be regarded as anything but the thugs they are.

The Jews are the Jews…. They do not have any moderates or any advocates of peace. They are all liars. They must be butchered and must be killed…. The Jews are like a spring – as long as you step on it with your foot it doesn’t move. But if you lift your foot from the spring, it hurts you and punishes you…. It is forbidden to have mercy in your hearts for the Jews in any place and in any land, make war on them anywhere that you find yourself. Any place that you meet them, kill them.

This call for a genocidal war against the Jews was made in 2000 by Dr. Ahmed Abu Halabiyah, rector of advanced studies at the Islamic University of Gaza on PA TV, the official channel of the Palestinian Authority. Halabiyah has given scores of similar sermons. Throughout the region, similar sermons and lessons are taught, to cheering, frenzied throngs. The same voices that exhort and rejoice at even the idea of killing Jews are the same ones that threaten Pope Benedict and anyone else with whom they take issue.

Will we not hold these Eichmanns to account? Or do we need for the further slaughter by radical Islamists, of Jews and Christians to take place first?

Caring about trees, the rainforest, or puppies or not eating meat doesn’t say a thing about your morality or ethics if you don’t stand up against the hate- the real hate, the kind that kills- now. Irwin Cotler, Canadian Minister of Justice, said rather succintly when talking about the likes of Iranian President Almahdinejad.

It is not surprising then, that the Supreme Court of Canada, in the trials of Holocaust deniers, affirmed: “the Holocaust did not begin in the gas chambers. It began with words.” Tragically, fifty years later, this lesson has still not been learned. The hate trafficking in Rwanda and Bosnia took us down the road to ethnic cleansing and genocide; and the worst arena today is to be found in the Arab countries and Palestinian Authority.

In the strange and topsy turvey world we live in, radical Islamists are incensed enough to believe that death threats againsy the Pope and other threats of violence and terror directed at Christendom, are acceptable forms of religious discourse.

To make matters worse, the media and the left have attached a kind of gravitas to this line of thought, as if the wild, frenzied and irrational behavior were a reasonable and rational response. It is ironic that the vast majority of Muslims reject the violence out of hand, even as the left and the MSM want to attach credibility, portraying the response as a ‘political response’ to ‘politically incorrect’ or ‘insensitive’ remarks made by Benedict XVI. It is curious to note how hard the left and the MSM are trying to bury the fact that the Pope’s remarks were an invitation to dialogue and an acknowledgement that Islam was a religion that valued reason.

As the MSM, the Left engage in a deliberate attempt to redefine religious tolerance and understanding, itr bears remembering what real religious tolerance, understanding and elevation looks like.

One of the most extraordinary acts of heroism during World War II occurred in the icy waters off Greenland after a U.S. Army transport ship was hit by a German torpedo and began to sink rapidly. When it became apparent there were not enough life jackets, four U.S. Army chaplains removed theirs, handed them to frightened young soldiers, and chose to go down with ship…

…Amid the disorder, the four Army chaplains quietly spread out among the soldiers, preaching courage to the frightened, offering prayers to the wounded, and guiding the disoriented.

After most of the survivors had struggled up on deck, the four chaplains opened a storage locker and began handing out life jackets. Soon they ran out.

“Padre,” a young soldier hollered, “I’ve lost my life jacket and I can’t swim!”

One of the four chaplains, it is not known which, removed his and said, “Here, take mine. I won’t need it. I’m staying.” The other three followed his example.

“It was,” an eyewitness recalled, “the finest thing I have ever seen or hope to see this side of heaven.”

On that day, on that ship, a few lucky men saw what God had in mind when He created us in His image.

…the last thing seen of the ship by witnesses was the four chaplains, standing on deck with their arms linked, praying as the ship went down.

More on the four chaplains, here, here and here.

The Anchoress noted too, how real faith is expressed.

bless those who are lonely with a sense of your nearness and consolation. Bless those who are afraid with the presence of your most excellent angels. Give them worthy chaplains, companionship, decent food, restful sleep, and most importantly a sense of satisfaction in duty and clear evidence of the differences they are making for the better, in the lives of those whom they currently train and protect

The Left and the MSM have a lot to learn about recognizing what is real religious expression.

Real faith is not measured by the lives you take in God’s name. Real faith is in the lives you save in God’s name.

Sunday Morning Brain Jihad

September 24, 2006

What do the Pope, President, three thickly accented dead psychiatrists and most of the civilized world have in common?

Dr Sanity’s Carnival Of The Insanities, that’s what.

Leading the global jihad against inadequate, pedestrian and rather average thinking, Dr Sanity provides those unfortunates with lower IQ scores (read: average)  the keys to the kingdom.

That’s right- now you too, can sound up to date, suave, sophisticated and on the cutting edge, as Dr Sanity’s Carnival Of The Insanities provides you with enough insight and ammunition to fool your psychiatrist (convince him/her that you are an ‘interesting case,’ instead the run of the mill dysfunctional, with 12 year old children more balanced than you are) friends, family and terrorists worldwide, into believing that you can see through their petty mind games and are indeed, in possession of a cutting razor-like intellect (like our own).

Go. Read. Live. 

Congratulations, America.

We now live in a country where the likes and ideas of Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmandinejad are afforded equal, if not greater respect than ideas and principles of Abraham Lincoln and Thomas Jefferson. The applause and attention given to Chavez and Ahmandinejad by the media and million of adoring idiots are proof positive of that truth.

Thanks in no small measure to a corrupt media that has made it abundantly clear that journalism serves an agenda before it serves it’s own ideals, Cindy Sheehan and a half dozen fellow protesters are given tremendous media attention- and more than the almost 35,000 people, as Fausta notes, including politicians, dignitaries and Nobel Prize winners that showed up at the UN protesting the appearance of Chavez and Ahmandinejad are ignored.

See Fausta for more absurdities- and more tragedies, authored by Chavez, et al.

The majority of members of that august body headquartered on NY’s East River celebrated Chavez and Ahmandinejad’s ‘free expression’ of derision and excoriation for our nation and our leaders, who believe the ideals of Lincoln and Jefferson are noble, true and universal. The majority of the regimes represented at the United Nations stomp on human rights, liberties and a free press in their own countries. They are encouraged by a biased American media, and a leftist agenda that (like them) cares not a whit about the lives and freedom of billions of people. They are driven with the idea, hope and prayer that what Jefferson Lincoln and built, they will tear down.

Much of academia, in concert with the media, are so filled with hubris, hate and bigotry, that they willingly propagate racist agendas and wild conspiracy theories that malign our nation, so that might be participants in dismantling this ‘great experiment.’ Academic institutions, suffered from academic ED, lamely defend their employees by citing ‘free expression,’ over truth as an academic priority.

The ideals we as a nation stand for, are receding into the past. Those ideals are being replaced with doubt, deceit and corrupted ideologies of hate and intolerance. The very tyranny and oppression those who first came to this country were escaping, has found a welcome home here.

Does anyone think that Abraham Lincoln could get elected today? A lawyer only by virtue of an apprenticeship, he was self taught and self educated. He was poor and he was not a handsome man. His wife was never in the best of ‘spirits.’ He had no speech writer and he was, as Horace Greely recalled,

“…an heir of poverty and insignificance, obscure, untaught, buried throughout his childhood in the primitive forests…Nevertheless, become a central figure in the Western Hemisphere, an object of honor, love and reverence through out the civilized world…He was not born a king of men…but a child of the people… by dint of firm resolve, and patient effort and dogged perseverance.”

Such a man could not today be elected to a local school board.

Is there a politician today who could pen Lincoln’s intimate words to Mrs Bixby, of Boston,on behalf of a grateful nation?

The Anchoress broadcasts in Chavez Clearly Listened To Dems And Air America, some real and ugly truths that have contributed to the an environment of the lowest common denominators.

But maybe some on the left finally understand that while they’ve been having fun and laughing while calling President Bush every manner of ugly name and insult, dangerous people have been watching…

And I’m sure some Democrats were shocked to see just how ugly their words sounded, when coming out of the mouth of someone else, someone with “no right,” to spew hate for political expediency.

There are some on the left who are suggesting that Hugo Chavez’s remarks are simply an indicator that the world “disrespects” President Bush…well…I wonder who gave them the idea that they could? Was it John Kerry calling him a “fucking liar,” and not having to answer for that rudeness to anyone while the press shrugged it off? Good heavens, Bush calls terrorism “evil” and he was mocked and criticized for using that word, but the press never had a problem with “fucking liar, fucking crooks and thieves” or with adolescent musings about the president’s name and female genitalia. It was alllllll soooooo funnnnneeeeeee, newsreaders could hardly deliver the spite without grinning, themselves.

(watch for the idiot brigade- and media- to defend their behavior, with even more invective directed at the administration)

The truth is, many on the left excoriated Rangel and Pelosi for their remarks.

The Anchoress isn’t done. She follows through to the bitter- and truthful end:

But if Bush is being disrespected, then the Democrats need to look to themselves and their actions and understand how complicit they have been in encouraging it. Dems like Charlie Rangel, who called President Bush “Bull Connor,” knowing full well how wrong, inaccurate, unfair and inflammatory that was, or like the idiots who called Bush “a genocidal racist” after Hurricane Katrina, or like the party (and the press) who spent years telling America about Saddam’s Weapons of Mass Destruction only to later pretend they never said such things, and to pretend further that somehow Bush’s believing the same things they believed…made him a liar…

The press repeated it, ad nauseum, and the press and the Dems promoted films with that message, and books, until that damnable, transparent and nonsensical lie was repeated enough…because everyone knows that if you tell a big lie enough, it becomes “the truth…”

If tinpot tyrants and madmen now come to the United Nations and believe they can say anything they wish about The American President, it is because – as some of us have been warning, for some time – while all manner or irresponsible nonsense and hate has been directed at this president…the world has been watching.

And now, these tyrants and madmen sound eerily like the Democrats and the press and the left.

It is as if the media jihad had it’s own 9/11, intent on killing what they hate, replete with the requisite deceit and pious claims of justification. All the while, the left dances with same joy and fervor in same way and with same celebration of equally dysfunctional Muslims that danced on 9/11.

The media, two bit academic hacks and left desperately want you to believe that these tin pot dicators and dysfunctional and dangerous lunatics that are playing with nuclear programs are sincere when they say, “we love Americans, we just hate your government.” We are civilized.” (notwithstanding this).

Indeed, the well worn phrase, ‘Slaughter the Jews!’ and similar such sentiments, are really no more than an Arab world terms of endearment, right? After all, why else would the media and left ignore that kind of remarks, right?

Despite well documented records of abuse, repression, racism, bigotry and worse, the media, academic hacks and the left want you to believe that the likes and ideas of Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmandinejad are more representative of what are American values than are Jefferson and Lincoln.

Congratulations, America.

NYC rent for a one bedroom apartment reaches $3,000 a month

The cost of one-bedroom apartment rentals in Manhattan’s doorman buildings is surging, with starting prices for these apartments hovering around $3,000 a month — about $500 more than they were just three years ago, city brokers say.

A bevy of condominium conversions has shrunk the number of available rental units, thereby driving up rents, a researcher at the Real Estate Board of New York, John Cole, said. “There’s been so many conversions, with a good number of them having gone from rentals to condos,” he said. “With less supply, the prices have gone up, and the vacancy rate has become infinitesimally small.”

One-bedroom apartments account for about half of the rental units in the city, according to the “Black & White Report,” a real estate guide published semiannually by Citi Habitats.

Five years ago, roughly one in 100 rental apartments were unoccupied. Today, only about one in 220 of these units are available for rent, according to a sales agent with DJK Residential, Daniel Kahn. “Inventory is so low that, even people who have the money, and have all the paperwork prepared, are still having trouble finding places,” he said.

So tight is the market in the one-bedroom category that it can be a challenge just finding listings to show clients, Mr. Kahn said. “We used to be able to go out and show clients 10 places, and now we can only show them, maybe, four.”

As a rule of thumb, New York landlords require their would-be tenants to earn a gross salary of 40 to 50 times the price of one month’s rent. By those standards, a person looking to rent a $3,000 one-bedroom apartment would have to earn between $120,000 to $150,000, or else secure a co-signer to guarantee the rent will be paid. Mr. Kahn said he recently worked with a couple, both professionals in their late 40s, who had to secure a guarantor to seal a rental deal. “I’m constantly dealing with people who don’t want to have to ask their parents,” he said. “To avoid this, some offer to pay six month’s rent upfront.”

While luxury one-bedrooms will generally run closer to $3,000 in areas like the West 40s, the East 30s, or the Upper East Side east of Second Avenue, an asking price of $4,000 is not uncommon in some of Manhattan’s more sought-after areas, Mr. Kahn said.
During the last six months of 2005, the average price of a one-bedroom unit in a doorman building in the West Village or Chelsea —two of the priciest rental neighborhoods — was more than $3,200, according to the “Black & White Report.”

The skyrocketing cost of a one-bedroom in a full-service building also means fewer people can afford to graduate to two-bedroom apartments. The lack of transfers further cuts down on the number of available units. “It used to be you could raise your budget $400 or $500 and get a bigger place,” Mr. Kahn said. “These days, people are raising their budget, and they’re not getting anything different.”

Even at the higher price points, Manhattan one-bedroom rentals are generally spoken for within five days, he said.

“It takes me longer to decide what kind of coffee I’m going to get at Starbucks than whether or not I’m going to take the apartment,” a 30-year-old schoolteacher, Benjamin Joffe, said. “I wish I had time to process it. That’s what killed me about the whole process.”

In most other cities, Mr. Joffe said his salary would enable him to rent a one-bedroom in a full-service building; in New York, however, he’s settled on a ground-floor studio in a no-frills building near Columbia University. At $1,400 a month, he said he considers the rent a deal.

The high cost of living, in part, accounts for the Cleveland native’s “ambivalence” about living in New York City. “The difference between the haves and the have-nots, it’s depressing,” he said.

For others, the short supply of rentals has been a boom, a broker at Prudential Douglas Elliman, Judy Kendall Levine, said. “It’s really an owner’s market now,” she said.

Ms. Levine has just listed for $3,800 a furnished, one-bedroom apartment in a postwar building with a doorman. “It’s a good apartment, but does it have park views? No. Is it on a high floor? No,” she said of the cond-op apartment on Third Avenue in the 80s. “In this market, they’ll probably get what they’re asking for.”

Why were Pope Benedict’s remarks considered so ‘politically insensitive’? Why were are the remarks made by Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmandinejad at the United Nations considered alternative ‘political’ worldviews? Why is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict seen as tortured ‘political’ issue only?

Simply stated, by clothing evil or immorality as ‘political,’ we make evil and immorality more palatable and at times, if packaged cleverly, evil and morality can become acceptable and even agreeable.

In portraying the Pope’s remarks at Regensberg as ‘politically’ extreme or ‘politically’ insensitive, the Church is put on the defensive, as if they and they alone, are responsible for the backlash in the Muslim world.

This morning, Fausta in Rage, Epictetus And Benedict, quotes the Muslim blogger, Iraq The Model (link at Fausta’s)

So why don’t we admit that the “other” is better than us at responding rationally when criticized? Why don’t we learn from others?

When we closed our ears to anything that doesn’t match our beliefs and refused all criticism wasn’t that enough reason for the deterioration of our civilization?

How is it that question is asked by a Muslim blogger and not by the media or even critics of the Church? How is it that even the most vociferous of Church critics or opinionated media editorialises, who want us to see the world through their moral eyes, ignore far more egregious statements made by some major Islamic religious figures?

When evil is presented as nothing more than alternative ‘political expression,’ it becomes acceptable to question the singular truth that defines America and the western democracies. The proponents of a particular agenda and the media compare the idea of bringing freedom and democracy to nations under the boot of repressive and dysfunctional regimes, as no more than a moral equivalent to those who would usurp freedom.

For decades, the Palestinians (and most of the Arab world) have done little, if anything, to conceal their contempt for Israel and Jews. Routinely, vicious anti Jewish and anti Christian expressions are ignored or dismissed by the agendistas and much of the media as ‘merely rhetoric.’

The Pope, America and Israel express politically unacceptable ‘racist’ ideologies, by demanding human rights, freedom and civilized behavior.
Everyone who else who expresses even the most vile hate,racism and bigotry are expending mere ‘political rhetoric’ and need not be taken seriously, even when the bigotry and hate lead to violence. When that happens of course, it is always the fault of the victim.

The classic example of that kind of upside down logic is the Israel-Palestine conflict. In the face of an onslaught of obvious one sided proclamations and unfairness in the UN, in the media, Israel has to defend herself for exercising the right of defending herself from the violence, racism and bigotry and hate that has become a part of the culture, education and religious expression of virtually all the Middle East.

Notwithstanding the stated desire for a ‘political solution,’ in the region, it is clear for anyone to see that when it comes to achieving that ‘political solution,’ violence is either acceptable or ignored when it comes to the media or the agendistas of the left. Americans are excoriated for sending military advisers to combat the Colombian drug trade- at the request of that nation, but groups that have blown up school buses filled with children, among other obscene acts of terror, are considered thoughtful and civilized.

There is another not so subtle distinction between the Israel-Palestine conflict and other territorial disputes. In virtually every other dispute, the object of mediation is to restore rights that are violated. Tibet, Kashmir, Sakhalin Islands and a myriad of other disputed territories are matters of real estate- no more, no less.

The Israel-Palestine issues are very different. Israel has accepted the rights of the Palestinians to establish their own state. Nevertheless, radical and not so radical Palestinians in both the religious and secular communities call for the destruction of the Israeli state. In addition, Palestinian media and religious expression clearly reinforces the idea that not only the political state is unacceptable, but the Jewish inhabitants are to be eliminated as well. Somehow, the agendistas of the left and the media ignore those kind of expressions.

Notwithstanding those truths, the Israelis have agreed to a two state solution, in the hope (and prayer) that a Palestinian state would behave responsibly and equitably. They are clearly willing to go a long way to make that idea work and enter negotiations with the Palestinians in the hope that despite the election of the rejectionist (and blatantly anti Jewish) Hamas, Palestinians really do want peace.

The Palestinians are equally clear. They have never given any mandate to their leaders to negotiate a peaceful solution. In fact, every Palestinian negotiating position that has even a remote chance in resulting in peace with the Israelis, has been met with resistance. Mass demonstrations opposing a settlement are de riguer, as are the charges of treason. Resignations are demanded of leaders who even appear to seek a resolution to the regional conflict. There is no peace movement, and the moderate voices among the Palestinians are repressed or extinguished by various Islamist or other hard line exterminationists.

Like it or not, that is the reality, and not even the agendistas or media can fully hide away those truths.

That highlights another truth. With whom shall the Israelis negotiate? Who speaks for the Palestinians? What guarantee does Israel have that a treaty would be honored by a new regime? That is not ‘rhetorical.’ The recently elected Hamas government have repeatedly made quite clear they have no intention of recognizing Israel, renouncing violence or honoring past agreements. The agendistas of the left and the media ignore those realities even as they make demands on Israel and her allies.

Hugo Chavez, Mahmoud Ahmandinejad, the Palestinians and much of the Arab world are representative examples of hard line ideologies adopted by failed and brutal regimes, all given credibility, gravitas and moral equivalence by the agendistas and a morally bankrupt media. For decades, the media have turned uncritical and blind eyes to the corruption, brutality and failed policies that have left hundreds of millions stripped of a present and future. They will not be forgiven or find redemption, easily.

In fact, it will takes decades to clean up the mess the failed and oppressive regimes have created. The infrastructure of new century will have to be brought to those who barely had the infrastructure of the last century. A culture of government responsibility, accountability and the preservation of real human rights and property (see this) are still unknown to most citizens of this planet.

Hugo Chavez, Mahmoud Ahmandinejad and all those who support the leaders of these failed and oppressive regimes, including the media, aren’t really progressives at all. In truth they are anti progressives, dedicated to fight tooth and nail to preserve the status quo of corruption, incompetence, dysfunction and oppression.

While there is no shortage of the agendistas of the left or a deliberately biased media, their numbers do bestow upon then any kind of relevance or credibility. The civilized will not regress and support the ideologies of regimes that espouse hate and repression. It really is that simple.

As a troubled world looks for solutions, they overlook the straight line.

Unless and until those leaders that are the real anti progressives are repudiated, there will be no world peace. As long as the likes of Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmandinejad are accorded any kind of credibility, real peace and progress will elude us. As long as they demand the kind of ‘democracy’ abroad that supports their agenda, and they continue to deny even the most basic of freedoms at home, we will continue to live in a world of a many more ‘have-nots’ than ‘haves.’

Then again, outrageous expressions of hate, racism and bigotry have always sold newspapers.

The Anchoress too, sees the imbalance and inelegance of the media and the agendistas. Her post, Cap’n Goes Int’l, Hugo Goes Home, Press Goes Missing, is like fresh squeezed orange juice- no freezing, processing and with nothing added.

This clown comes to the United Nations, calls the American President a “devil,” (not that the religion-hating folks minded that – the irony!) and the other clowns in the room (whom we fund much-too-much) laugh and applaud, and it’s not a leading story the next day? Well. I guess we can quickly figure out that the “mediating intelligences” who determine what we will and will not see have decided that – for some reason – we’re better off not seeing the behavior of a pack of mad jackals…we might not want to continue funding them, or rushing to their aid when disaster strikes, you know? Or maybe, they figure the American public would look at yesterday’s very telling absurdities and say, “you don’t come to America and say that about her president…”

Charlie Rangel and Nancy Pelosi, Democrats made of granite, said just that. The Anchoress, once more, in Rangel Blasts Chavez, Clinton Mush Mouthes it, notes,

Rangel detailed earlier this week some of his “problems” with this president (Rangel is going to rescind every tax-cut he can, if the Dems win in ‘06), but he is exactly right – you don’t do what Chavez did. Good for Rangel.

Good heavens, even Nancy Pelosi – not the brightest meat cleaver in the pork store – has managed to figure out the right side of this issue. She calls Chavez “a thug”. Which is probably less harsh than some of the things she routinely calls Bush, but that’s okay. She’s an American; she can call the president names…

Much smarter than Clinton, it seems, who couldn’t work up a proper sense of umbrage, even as a former president.

Actually, that particular post really is chili-like. It gets better with a second reading.

The Anchoress also notes

So, the press is trying to go as quiet as possible on Hugo and the UN gigglers and Ahmadinejad – so beloved of Mike Wallace – didn’t come off too well, either. I said yesterday that a “smart” press “would bury” the Chavez and Ahmadinejad stories…

Yeah, that’s probably why the press has gone missing on a rather big story. They seem distracted, those “mediating intelligences,” and perhaps that’s why they missed the 35,000 people protesting Ahmadinejad’s visit to the UN, a protest which included speakers such as John Bolton, Nobel laureate Elie Wiesel, New York Gov. George Pataki and Alan Dershowitz. That’s a pretty luminous bunch of speakers and a lot of people, but the intelligent ones mediated that we did not need to know about it. Meryl Yourish points out that the only paper to mention this large protest was the NY Sun.

The ummm…approximately 2,000, who showed up to protest President Bush and the Increasingly Popular Iraq War, though, they got plenty of headlines. Note that all of those headlines read “thousands,”of protesters, not “only 2,000.”

No one makes reality as clear as the Anchoress.

One of the big differences between free and not so free worlds, is the sanctity of property rights. Hugo Chavez, Mahmoud Ahmandinejad and virtually every other member nation of the Non Aligned Nations (NAM) would do just about anything not to have property rights discussed. Why? Because in discussing property rights, the true nature of the kind of regimes Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmandinejad represent becomes crystal clear.

As we consider the war on terror and those regimes and cultures that have declared us their enemies, understanding the importance and meaning of property rights becomes essential.

One of the ways our adversaries maintain their grip on their citizens is to deny them absolute property rights and the absolute ownership over anything. What you own, or what you think you own, is in reality a mirage. In fact, in every tyrannical or oppressive regimes, owning property of any kind is allowed only by the grace of the leader. Deny the the leader or the leader’s regime, and you may end up with what you thought was yours, taken away. The threat of having what is yours taken away, is an ever present and powerful threat to human dignity. The implied threat of living under a form of government that can seize your property at anytime, is a kind of terror visited upon a cowed citizenry, by a kind of evil.

In fact, that kind of terror is a threat to human dignity and a threat to plurality- the idea that people can have different ideas and beliefs and still be secure in their personal and property rights and live in safety, free from fear of retribution. That kind of freedom is only found in free and democratic nations. American and western democracies defend individual and property rights and always allow for disparate views. Irrespective of our beliefs, we remain free from the threat that of being stripped of our rights and property, simply because our views weren’t in line with the powers that be. In other words, we live in a tolerant and inclusive society, very unlike the societies of our adversaries. The citizens of those regimes are under the boot of tyranny, in one way or another.

The mindset of the leadership in Iran or Venezuela, for example, have constructed exclusivist societies that demand loyalty and tolerate no dissent or difference of opinion. In the case of Iran and much of the Arab world, decades of indoctrination and the tidal wave of hate taught in school and preached from the pulpit, have resulted in the marginalization and slow decay of those societies.

In the case of these repressive societies, democracy is a threat because in a democracy, there is no real ‘us versus them’ mentality. Citizens in a democracy understand that they can agree to disagree and not worry about our personal or property rights being violated or abrogated. No matter how contentious, our society is inclusive. We respect each other’s rights and we respect the freedom to dissent.

One does not need to believe in God to understand that tolerance is the lifeblood of civilized societies. If that were not so, none of us would be here. In order to accommodate efficient trade between nations, we accept and tolerate differences. In fact, trade, respect of property rights and the free exchange of ideas have done more to expand understanding and acceptance than any other kind of exchange.

We have also learned the hard way that when tolerance and property rights were not respected, we all suffer. Centuries of war, empires, persecution, death and destruction have reinforced that truth.

American and western societies enjoy lively political debate and a very independent media. Real democracies have judiciary systems, that while not always perfect, are always free and independent.

There is a great distinction between events and experiences. An event has a finite beginnings and a finite end. An experience is very different. We are impacted and influenced. We are molded by our experiences and we learn and grow from them. Because of experiences, we can see the future through eyes of what can be, rather that the dead eyes of what was and will always be.

Living in an open and free society is living an experience. We are not defined by particular events or bogged down by a gray history. Free societies are always moving forward and in fact, our best days are yet to come, shaped and built on what we have learned and always looking forward to the possibilities of tomorrow.

In contrast, regimes that reject democratic values, principles and beliefs, are usually bogged down by basking in former glories or dreams of a world where they and their beliefs are imposed and dissent is not tolerated.

More than one pundit has made clear that in regimes led by tyrants and tin pot dictators, citizens have overwhelming feelings of humiliation and failure. Through no fault of their own, economies fail, education levels are sub par and the awareness that they cannot even control their own destinies. In desperation, they look for someone- anyone- to blame. Of course, they cannot blame their leaders- to do so is to risk loss of liberty and property, so they willingly look to blame others, anyone, anywhere. As is often the case, they look to their ‘rich and free’ cousins- America and the free world. As in all families, the meanest and most vicious ‘conspiracies’ are all in the family.

In addition, blaming the ‘enemies of the state’ serves yet another purpose. In what is a kind of perverse ‘win-win’ situation, frustrated and oppressed people get to vent at America and the free nations and venting at the ‘right’ target kind of also allows people to be perceived in a favorable light by the regime security services, bureaucrats and leaders, as long as they vent at the ‘right’ target.

How is it that some free people support such tyrannies and their leaders? In The Spectrum Of Stupidity, Dr Sanity minces no words:

The stupidity… comes in all shapes and sizes, a veritable spectrum that extends from the willful blindness on the part of Western leadership and media; to the passive, uncritical and morally bankrupt minions who nod sagely at any idiocy as they desperately try to maintain a world view that ignores reality as its founding principle.

Both ends of this spectrum of stupidity are incapable of responding in any appropriate manner to the deeply despicable and nauseatingly hypocritical speech the lying President of Iran delivered at the UN last night…

Only in a world that values nothing would there not be instantaneous outrage at the lies, deceptions and self-serving tripe offered for world consumption by a man who clearly has no conscience and enjoys lying and distorting for the fun of it. How could such a man be given the world stage to spew forth his lies, let alone be feted and honored for them? How could most–if not all–of the rest of the world swallow whole the protestations of sincerity and victimhood? How could it be conveniently forgotten what his real intentions and attitudes are even for a moment as he coyly presents himself as a simple man of peace and brotherhood?

It bears remembering a certain truth: In nations and regimes where the state first claimed property at will, it was only a matter of time before the state determined what freedoms were applicable and to whom. Shortly thereafter, the state claims the right to take your life at will, for any reason they see fit.

Dr Sanity rightly notes the hypocrisy and ignorance of those who are so easily swayed by deceit and false logic. Her outrage is understandable. This isn’t a political debate, with only ideas and beliefs at stake. Support of these tyrannical and dysfunctional leaders means more untold misery, fear, failure and death.

Of course, the likes of Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmandinejad can easily criticize America and free nations because they are never held accountable or responsible for they say or do. Their mistakes and oppression are never pointed out because there is very little, if any, free press at home. There is no criticism because criticism comes at great risk and at great cost. Whoever takes it upon himself to dissent put their liberty and even their lives at risk.

It is ironic that dissidents who really care about the welfare of their fellow citizens in those countries under the boot of tyranny, risk all and courageously demand the same freedoms and rights we enjoy here, including property rights. In many free nations, the regimes of those oppress dissidents and those who would deny freedom, are happily supported by those who happily share in the bloody hands of oppression- and that is exactly what Hugo Chavez and Mahmoud Ahmandinejad count on.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 83 other followers