Dumbest (uncorrected) Choices in American History: Shortlist

100_0172a

My list of REALLY STUPID CHOICES made in American history; just a short-list I am afraid:

Diet Food” that is more chemicals than food

Having the Soviet Union an “ally” in WWII – better to have let them go it alone; email for full argument

The Electoral College in the Age of Communication; direct election of all offices should be the norm; Political Parties are OBSOLETE and COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE

Public Sector Unions

Adding “under God” to the Pledge making it a point of division instead of unity

Lotus and Apple’s Patent-the-Universe Syndrome making the courts accept patents on things never meant for patent

Failing to live up to Dr. King’s vision and refusing to stop being prejudiced regarding race

Private campaign donations of any kind other than labor

Campaign donations by businesses

Supreme Court deciding that money= a right to a louder voice for YOUR ‘free speech

Dropping the no-partisanship requirements for radio talk-shows and ‘interview’ programs

Letting Lawyers advertise

Supreme Court declaring that nothing of value is earned by the recipient of a military award or decoration

Women’s, Chicano, Black “Studies” propping up people selected, distorted and lionized with blatant prejudice; taking away self-respect while pretending to help by ‘giving the poor things a hand’, and White Studies designed to rip on Western Culture for the same purpose – removing its self-respect – it seems non-whites are too dumb or clueless to run their own lives or stand up to whites and that whites are just intrinsically demonic – welcome to the enlightened world of PC education

Failing to settle on the point in a pregnancy where a woman’s choice is MADE and she must be held responsible for an infant rather than a piece of owned tissue. (6 month preemies regularly survive today and the Radical Right’s agenda on abortion would make women all but chattel)

Worrying more about which consenting adults, what age, color or how many may legally get ‘married’; ignoring the concept of duty, honor and responsibility anyone brings to their marriages

Bilingual Education as a policy

Helmets, knee and elbow-pads for tricycle riders

Peer promotion in school

Affirmative Action after 1990 – where was the transition to color-blind government?

Worrying more about what actual people have DONE with their guns than trying to get law-abiding folk to not have any at all

Electing Andrew Jackson, Jimmy Carter, George W., and Obama

Forgetting that ALL countries do best with immigrants if they pick from the TOP of the pile instead of the bottom

Paying a private group to print/coin money like a product to be bought forgetting that money has no ‘intrinsic’ value’; dollars are just counters for the economic game; increasing or decreasing the supply by fiat to ACCURATELY reflect the production/wealth of a nation is the ONLY reason when deciding when or if to print more money, or let the cash pool contract

Deciding that political consensus and no working model or scientific theory that has been tested is sufficient when making decisions in haste that could wreck the world’s entire economy/infrastructure; in the 70’s it was the next Ice Age that was imminent… no models then either

Making an “eco-friendly” light-bulb containing hazardous amounts of mercury

Adults stealing Halloween from the children and making it another grown-ups party holiday

The Writer’s Strike

ANY serious university or college that “emphasized” sports to make money and enabled ‘tails’ that can wag Great Danes with ease

How Dumb are Creationists?

Whose Side Were You On Again?

Just when it seems that the Right is getting its act together by nominating a truly original candidate for president, one that has a chance of moving our republic in more healthful direction, we get a resurgence of conservative-embarrassing silliness from their theocratic fringe.

Why is it so much trouble for the Republican party to step back from one of their more idiotic platform positions? Is it all merely the result of decades of defending traditional ideals against the worst idiotic of the ideas of non-Republicans, and not a few good ideas just because they come from “liberals”? Is tribalistic partisanship the only culprit?

Personally I doubt this; the Right has too many of its own people caught up in ‘magical thinking’. Case in point would be this article, or sermon I should say, targeting Bill Nye for having the temerity to lecture parents about programing their children to believe nonsense instead of science.

‘Creationists’ run the gamut from ‘theistic evolution’ believers so “unitarian” about the subject that they might as well be Deists, their God does not interfere once the Big Bang has the ball rolling, to full on Young Earth Creationists who believe that the Earth, and the entire universe for that matter are barely more than 6,000 years old!

The anti-evolution brand of Creationists have been a long time in building their base, God knows no-one else will give them the time of day once the theistic underpinnings of their “science” is exposed. Unfortunately they have long tuned their message to appeal to uninformed ears. Using “common-sense” arguments and misrepresenting real science the peddlers of YECH (Young Earth Creationist Hokum) depend on the complexity of the subject to prevent anyone in their audience from being able to refute them convincingly.

Creationist presentations are aimed at their target audience’s emotional and religious prejudices, and tailored to the blind spots in their understanding of science and mathematics. There is nothing random about biological evolution when you look at the species level; there is certainly nothing random in the progression of gene-evolution resulting from natural processes!

I could not pass up this opportunity to high-light the manipulative lack of real reason or real science in the apologetics of the creationist creed, this time it is the Right that is in the hot seat. Get your pencil and be ready to take notes Virginia!

Bill Nye the Pseudoscience Guy

By Terry L. Mirll

In a recent YouTube video, former children’s TV host Bill Nye weighs in on evolutionary biology by telling the rest of us how to raise our children.  If we want to deny evolution, he says, that’s our business, “but don’t make your kids do it.”  Presuming that what we teach our children is any of his business, a more fundamental question presents itself: how do we presume to teach our kids something that may or may not be true, particularly when we don’t really seem to understand it?”

I sometimes wonder if Creationist writers moonlight as speech-writers for radical Leftists or Islamist apologists; those are the only people I know of that use this blatantly disingenuous style of bull crap. It is all there – from the insulting headline to the bending and twisting of other people’s words, to the all-pervading unfounded assumptions that are meant to lull the ignorant into accepting, instead of questioning, the outrageous.

Let us be charitable and Leave aside the idea that someone who has long been thought of as “America’s Science Teacher” is not the person to publically call out parents for deliberately programing their kids to believe theistic creationism is a science and that tools used every day are unreal simply because those kids parents’ pastors fail to understand BS level science.

No offense but, the conservative Protestant sects have not been known for producing cutting edge biological scientists; for that matter no heavily partisan sect or nation has done well in that regard – think Lysenkoism under the political religion of Stalin.

But what about the last bit? Does our outraged Mr. Mirll have a point here:

“how do we presume to teach our kids something that may or may not be true, particularly when we don’t really seem to understand it?”

Nope, not even close! If it were a valid argument then it would be wrong to teach psychology, sociology, neurology, micro-biology, quantum physics, electronics, climatology (as a SCIENCE, not just the politicized version), metallurgy, all meditation, relaxation or visualization techniques… the list is endless. Being unable to explain in detail all aspects of a phenomena is hardly uncontestable evidence of fallacy; that is why testing is part of the process.

There is a tendency in the economy of belief to oversimplify.  Generally speaking, this is a good thing — or if not good, at least practical.  One hardly needs to understand how an internal combustion engine works in order to drive a car.

However, oversimplification is anathema to maintaining a robust and rigorous science.  As Einstein famously put it, make it simple, but not simpler.  He meant that any theory, if it is to be a scientific one, needs to be reduced to its fundamental elements, without omitting any elements necessary to make the theory workable.”

That last bit was apparently included so that the author could have a nice, high pseudo-scientific platform from which to pronounce the next bit of data-free character assassination.

In Nye’s mindset, there are two basic positions concerning evolution: 1. You believe in it, or 2. You’re just a big fat doody-head.

This, I would argue, is an oversimplification.”

Without a doubt I agree; Mr. Mirll’s characterization of Dr. Nye’s inner mental functions as supposedly revealed in his video is an oversimplification; after having viewed the video in question, rather than an article about it, I also think it is an insult.

The pattern of demagoguery continues with three paragraphs showing supposed objectivity in the “Science vs. God” debate followed with a flat-out declaration that science, in the person of Dr. Nye, is simply wrong.

“What is most remarkable is that Nye is hardly alone in his asseveration.  In fact, the vast majority of people — among those who believe in evolution wholeheartedly, as well as those who see evolution as just so much nonsense — seem to hold the same view.  Either we believe in evolution, or we believe in God.

Unfortunately, however, those who hold this view fail to understand what it implies about science and religion, setting up what philosophers of science call the Conflict Thesis — that science and religion are mutually exclusive domains (that is, with no overlap) and are thus at odds with each other.  But the Conflict Thesis is incorrect, offering up a false choice: science or religion.  What, then, are we to make of Stephen C. Meyer’s claim that “[s]cience, done right, leads to God”?

Additionally, this already overly simplistic notion is further exacerbated by another oversimplification — that science is a rational proposition based on reason, while religion is a spiritual proposition based on faith.  Thus, scientific formulations are reliable, based as they are on the Scientific Method of observation, hypothesis, theorization, testing, and reformulation; religion, in contrast, is antithetical to the Scientific Method, akin to fairy tales and superstition.  Framed in this way, we can understand the essence of Nye’s concern for what we teach our children: assuming that evolution is scientific, for any parent to teach his child to deny evolution is thus to teach him to deny reason.

And Nye would be right but for the inconvenient fact that he is wholly and utterly wrong, in his basic assumptions as well as his understanding of evolution.””

Now, our defender of parental dignity-in-ignorance marshals his forces of misstatement, misdirection and mischaracterization to defeat the forces of evil reality!

“When we examine the underlying assumptions of Nye’s position, we find:

§ Science is not “based” on reason,

§ Religion is not “based” on faith,

§ There’s no such thing as “the” Scientific Method,

§ Religion is no fairy tale, and

§ Evolution is not what Nye thinks it is.””

Now then, stop giggling Virginia, show respect to older people, even if their heads are spinning slowly widdershins; I am sure Mr. Mirll will “explain” his “logic” in each case.

“First, though reason is certainly a component of scientific inquiry, it is not the only component.”

That was slick; he says ‘not ‘”based in reason”’, then refutes a totally different concept –  the idea of reason as the only component of science!

“There are, for instance, any number of scientific assumptions that cannot be proved and thus must be accepted on faith.  First and foremost among these is the assumption of uniformity — that what applies to our corner of the universe applies to all corners.  (This, after all, is what makes a universe a universe and not, say, a polyverse.)  Imagine the caterwauling among physicists if we discover that light travels at a uniform speed within the confines of the Milky Way, but at a variable speed in the galaxy Andromeda.”

This is a willful distortion of science, the assumptions science makes are ones for which we have virtually no negative evidence; if solid evidence of variance is found the assumption is abandoned; such as the very idea that the speed of light can be exceeded by material particles.

To address the non-proof above: if the speed of light were different in Andromeda we would either a. see the difference or b. there would have to be mechanisms built into the universe essentially ‘reformatting’ the light as it traveled to us so that we would see only effects compatible with our speed of light… sounds dumb doesn’t it?

“Nor is reason relegated only to science.  Religion, too, has its rational component, with pronouncements based on observation and empirical knowledge.  The Buddhist considers the Buddha, studies his life, hears his message of compassion and service to others, and makes the rational decision to emulate him.  The Christian hears the story of the resurrected Christ, an event that is claimed to have occurred in real time and witnessed by some five hundred, and chooses to follow him.  These are not simply matters of faith.”

He now doubles down on the same strategy with religion; he states one thing then refutes something else but, the fact remains – ‘based in’  is not the same as ‘excluding everything else’

“Instead of “the” scientific method, we find any number of methodologies that share various features but which cannot be said to demonstrate anything akin to a single, uniform method.  Consider, for instance, the notion that science is based on observation.  If this is a necessary prerequisite to a scientific theory, what are we to make of the claim that our universe may be only one of a series of universes?  Has anyone ever observed one of these extra universes?  How can such an observation be possible, even in theory?  There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for the multiverse.  And what do we call “the evidence of things not seen”?”

The above armchair physics comes courtesy of someone who obviously never bothered to incorporate quantum physics into their version of reality; isn’t this the guy who was so concerned about over-simplification a while back in this very same piece?

All he does is make all of science’s shades of color into a 320dpi black and white line-scan, and then complain that it does not represent the real world accurately. If he bothered to learn the subject he would find that it was the evidence, the results of observation and experiment, that made people see the cracks in the classical view of reality!

The multiverse theories Mr. Mirll disparages are based solely in observational science. To put it succinctly, quantum physics is the most un-refuted theory/world-view in the history of science. It has been held valid in its most bizarre predictions every time those predictions have been tested; I am sorry you don’t understand it, the entire industry involving things we call ‘electronic’ from can-diodes to micro chips is nothing but quantum physics-based engineering.

And the entirety of micro-biology is based in evolution, not as a theory, but, as a tool!

“Those who equate religion with fairy tales fail to understand what the word means.  “Religion” comes from the Latin religio, which means “to bind or constrict” and thus entails a twofold meaning.  First, it identifies a body of adherents to the religion itself.  These need not be adherents of any particular religion; it is sufficient that they identify themselves as members of the group, whatever the group.  Second, it is in some way normative; that is, it prescribes what the members of the group ought to believe, though it does not necessarily imply that the members will adhere to their beliefs at all times.  In other words, though a Christian will on occasion do things that are demonstrably un-Christian, this does not stop him from being a Christian altogether.  Neither aspect of religio has anything to do with fairy tales.”

That is nice. What does this have to do with the myths that form the foundation of almost all religions so adhered to? How does it prove that any religion’s myths that cannot be substantiated by objective historians are on a par with ‘fairy-tales’?

Answer: Nothing, and it doesn’t; moving on…

“In fact, Nye’s own understanding of evolution is itself a kind of fairy tale.  For him, it is akin to biological magic, to be believed for its own sake.  (Woe unto you, ye unbelievers!)  Evolution, he says, “is the fundamental idea in all of life science, in all of biology.  It’s like, it’s very much analogous to trying to do geology without believing in tectonic plates.”

Other than a handful of multi-doctorate polymath geniuses who understand first-hand and in detail more than a simplified, cartoon version of what really happens in any of the sciences? That is why science demands theories be testable, and the test be repeatable.

Actually, it’s like, it’s not like that.  For one, geologists operated for centuries without believing in tectonic plates.  As nifty as plate theory may be, it’s hardly fundamental to the idea of geology; rather, it’s derived from geology, based on current scientific understanding of the earth’s structure. 

Virginia, it is not attractive when you cross your eyes like that; stop pretending to be a zombie columnist stalking the brains of gummi-republican.!

I do see your point though; it is hard to know where to begin deconstructing that mass of congealed steer-residue!

Unless you are reading your history while standing on your head the early geologists’ whole purpose in “operating” was to learn what was happening in the way of a dynamic Earth; what exactly does he mean saying that they “operated” in ignorance of most of the how’s, what’s and why’s of the Earth’s structure? Is this how doctors “operated” in medicine before the advent of germ theory?

Did they find gold? Yes, sometimes. Did they know why it formed and where it might be found absent surface clues? Error, faulty, faulty!

And please take note of the lovely all-but-lying way he claims plate tectonics is a nifty theory when the basic notion that the plates exists and move in certain ways is an observed fact. The plates move, have moved and still move.

Young Earth creationists believe that The Flood produced virtually all of the erosion and sedimentation etc. that science understands to be the result of uniform processes over time. They have to go to all sorts of lengths to deny reality though refuting evidence is everywhere to see.

In Southern California is a desert park that has often been used by the movie and TV folks for interesting outdoor locations because of its unique rock formations and convenient distance from Hollywood. It is called Vasquez Rocks and has formations familiar to the entire movie and TV watching world. I mention it because there are several places within the area of a suburban lot that give lie to every Young Earth fairy tale ever told.

There you will find pebbles of metamorphic rock  made by sedimentary rock being compressed and distorted and then rounded by water mixed into a sedimentary sandstone, and the whole mess folded over with igneous formations from volcanic eruptions from AFTER the formation of all of the above, AND major water and wind worn patterns in all of the above that are continuous over the different materials; explain to me, Virginia, how all that happened in a forty day flood!

That the movement of the plates explains events organically and phenomena that the creationists have to pretend are still mysteries surely produces the most amazing mental gymnastics given that lasers from satellites in space have for a long time watched and measured the motion of the plates; which in no way deviate from the expectations of the “theory” that Mr. Pseudo-Reason finds so controversial.

Evolution, likewise, is deduced from two primary observations: the fossil record, which, so it is claimed, shows evidence that life represents a continuum of biological forms expressing a progression from the simple to the more complex; and the similarity of hypothetically related species, such as human beings and apes.

We should not be surprised by now I suppose to see this author seeming to tell outright lies, it is part of his faith apparently but, that does not mean I have to respect the lies.

Those two observations are not honestly complete, let alone the only basis for the modern understanding of evolution or for when the theory was being formulated; many different observations and types of evidence went into the mix that produced the first evolutionary theories.

But these are mere claims, not scientifically, independently verified facts.  The fossil record is stubbornly discontinuous, and human beings ultimately may only look like apes — a 1972 Chevy Malibu looks an awful lot like a 1971 Chevy Malibu, but this does not mean that the ’72 Malibu is biologically descended from the ’71 model.

It is not nice to stare at crazy people Virginia. Yes, I know that on a biological level, from micro-biology to forensic anthropology there is no genus Homo, and that humans are of the genus Pan, like our only living ‘species’ cousins, the chimps.

Someone hurry and go tell the zoo vets that all the apes in their care are really humans under the fur; think of the money saved in simplifying simian care across the board; not to mention using simian vets to fill the gap in qualified pediatricians!!

Think about it, imagine calling something a ‘canine’ when no other ‘canine’ cousins exist and it is 98% identical in its genes to the lion family of genus feline. Is that a ‘canine’ or just another feline? The pan genus has several species of chimp and we are 98% the same but, we are our own genus? Ri-i-i-ight!

Welcome to Pan Sapiens, Homo Sapiens was a fairy tale!

As far as the “incomplete fossil record” goes I do not expect that any number of ‘missing links’ will satisfy the creationists. They have been making this objection since the fossil record resembled an etch-a-sketch more than an oil painting but, today the record for many species, like birds and horses, looks more like a time-lapse YouTube video and they still  make the same objection!

“Nye’s position, then, is no acquiescence to scientific truth; it is merely a component of his belief system.  He may as well tell us not to raise our kids as Presbyterians.

And Bill Nye the Pseudoscience Guy can keep his beliefs to himself.”

Sorry, this guy is not making any points at all, now he wants to steal the credibility of the Presbyterians when most of them are comfortable with billions of years and a god that uses evolution; Jesus wept.

Leftists and Right-wingers Conspire Against Constitutional Government

hypocrite_fish

I am a bit disappointed in the both the Left and the Right; no-one seems to know how to declare victory and move on, or realize the futility of their actions and let go.

There is a certain similarity to those who are gravitated toward the amassing of political power; for the most part their agenda is not the one they publically serve, instead it is one of ego and power, narcissism and insecurity.  The occasional sincere and talented leader that comes along is a happy accident in the purposeful insanity in pursuit of power we call politics.

On the Right we have people who do not seem to be able to accept that  how a person dresses or wears their hair, what books or films they enjoy, which adult they fall in love with, what kind of music they listen to, or which particular chemicals they choose to soothe themselves with against outrageous fortune matters little compared to issues that breaks their leg or picks their pockets.

This is principally because a conservative mindset supports the status quo against disruption from “outside; it is hard to tell who is not “one of us” if we fail to look alike and act alike.

On the Left we have those folks who simply cannot let go of the rush of having been on the side of “Truth and Light” against the monolithic “Man; if some group quacks like victims of “oppression” the Left immediately labels it a duck, turning a blind eye to any “regretful but vital temporary irregularities” committed in the pursuit of “social justice.”

Today it seem that to the new breed of “liberal” any traditional or overly familiar group is automatically suspected of evil intent and attacked; meanwhile any foreign, unfamiliar or new ideology is seen as persecuted, helpless, and in need of protection; they are not shy about shaming others into “doing the right thing“; even if they would call their actions evil if perpetrated by a non-Leftist.

The sign that makes this cognitive-dissonance the most obvious to me is the seeming inability of anyone belonging to a partisan group to see their own leaders engaging in hypocrisy or toxically self-serving politics.

Case in point Left:

Three distinguished ‘sociologists‘ having a panel discussion at a prestigious, elite university on the cumulative emotional/political scars of the “Palestinian people” who never even mention the existence of the PA, PLO, Fatah or any non-Israeli leadership, organisation or government!

Case in point Right:

Every bill that is passed by a conservative state legislature regarding abortion or the first amendment that they know will be thrown out by the Supreme Court on a “No Duh” basis; not to mention voting against humane laws only because the law might, possibly, in theory, in a Blue Moon and with a tail wind undermine their goal of passing other laws designed to eliminate the right to any abortions.

Case in point Left:

The partisan Leftie will bend their brain into a pretzel to justify and declare natural and normal any deviant behavior practiced by consenting adult homosexuals while at the same time denigrating the “un-naturally” traditional sexual tastes of more conservative folk, most of whom are not interested in regulating the homosexuals’ lifestyle beyond the usual restrictions on anyone committing rape, pedophilia or other criminal activity.

Case in point Right:

The partisan Rightie will get their panties in a twist contemplating all the heinous and disgusting sexual crimes a homosexual “could” be prone to while ignoring rampant child abuse in the home, or a culture of rape in an institution; that homosexuals in reality have a lower violent crime rate than straights seems to totally escape them.

Case in point Left:

Lefties just hate women who like the idea of having babies and being a homemaker, they simply loathe it! When you pin them to the wall, as happened recently when someone said that Mitt Romney’s wife who raised five sons and battled a deadly illness had never worked a day in her life, they mostly admit that there is nothing wrong and much that is admirable, about a “non-working” home-maker. Then a few days later they will once again say something that denigrates mothers.

Case in point Right:

Statistics show that the highest divorce rates, the highest teen STD rates and the highest teen pregnancy rates all occur in precisely the same areas where the most conservative sex-ed is the norm and sex is only supposed to happen after a person gets married. But, the lowest rates for divorce etc. are found amongst agnostics and secular Jews! I will leave as an exercise for the student the contemplation of reasons why two people with no clue whether they are socially compatible in the long term, or if they are sexually compatible at all, might be a bad risk for marrying; living together first is a  statistically proven better strategy!

Both sides seem to feel that all the worlds problems are sourced in the opposition’s intentionally perverse and stubborn need to fuck everything up for the other guy; I have more faith in my fellow man than that, but the partisanship has got to go!

How to Recognize the Assassin’s of the Mind

Guy DeWhitney at Heretics Crusade says democrat and republican partisan politics do not serve the people or the united states

How can we eliminate partisanship if we have problems telling a partisan from a potato-head??

Here is a quick checklist to help in the citizenry’s quest to cope with the politically challenged:

A. Is more concerned about who is right than what is right.

B. Thinks social harmony will be achieved just as soon as the opposition’s voice is successfully eliminated from public debate; “It’s their fault!”

C. Always responds to any critique of their politics by attributing to critics the most radical attitudes/positions of their opposition and then responding to those positions/attitudes instead of addressing the point raised.

D. Is dedicated to gaining an unassailable political “mandate” for their party/ideology; “Give us the power, turn your backs, close your eyes and then we will make the world a better place for everyone, we promise!”

E. On the Right they work the system making the status quo the “victim” by default in order to exercise unjust power; on the Left they game the system, and the underdog is the default victim in the quest of partisans on both sides to control the most political “sheep“.

 

 

Existential Twits and the Case for Lying Through Their Teeth

I have always been fascinated by language and how flexible and nuanced our communications could be. Growing up with television, radio and magazine ads became an endless game of “what are they trying to make you think they are saying” and “what are they really saying”. “Who benefits” detectives ask when analyzing a possible crime. It was good clean fun!

But now the BS and word-juggling that we are used to are being replaced by an influx of Middle-Eastern style political and commercial speech; in a nutshell, blatantly lying through your teeth is ok as long as your emotional state is extreme. Passion in speech is coming to replace truth as the bottom line for public in the marketplace of ideas. From the speeches of President Obama to the impassioned rhetoric about “consensus” in the AGW pronouncements we see facts being over-ridden by no more than the verbal tantrums of un-elected “leaders” pursuing goals hidden in clouds of misdirection, arrogance and secrecy.

The Trayvon Martin / George Zimmerman case is the poster-child for the new trend in Pravda so, let’s take a look at a recent piece by a poster-child of the new breed of “statesman” whose tongue never fails to drip honey and venom in mixtures so subtle one imagines his words crafted in Ahmadinejad’s most sophisticated laboratory. This piece is fairly typical of Aslan Media’s kinder-and-gentler form of self-righteous character assassination.

Existential Threats And the Case of Trayvon Martin

The first round of the Trayvon Martin saga is finally over. George Zimmerman is behind bars 45 days after the shooting of an unarmed African American teenager — an act that snowballed into a national soul searching crisis that evoked strong and poignant questions about race and racism in America.

It just dawned on me how similar the semantics in this article are to those used by passive-aggressives in deflecting all responsibility onto another party; never admitting who the real actors are/were in any situation.

Instead of revealing the vast and co-ordinated politicization that preceded the arrest or mentioning the slanted audio and video editing and carefully chosen photographs of Martin before his transformation into a blossoming thug as causes for the “snowballing” the author assigns sole blame to the shooting itself. His mind is as made up on the facts as he wants yours to be Virginia!

Activists, celebrities and ordinary citizens stepped up to express their outrage and demand justice. Tweets from Justin Bieber and Spike Lee along with thousands of angry phone calls flooded the airwaves; and civil rights politicians like Reverend Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson came out to denounce the act as an egregious example of racist hate crime.

So? Not one of them has a single fact that the rest of us have not been given;since when does the opinion of a singer whose testicles have yet to fully drop or a racist film-maker with an ax to grind have to do with the truth of what did or did not happen that night in Florida? Or with the dispensing of “justice” in this case?

Oh, and will someone please tell the author that Sharpton and Jackson are not politicians; they both shun standing for office (sad truth, if elected they would actually have to DO something – it is far easier to stand on the sidelines and throw wrenches into the spokes while profiting from the problems).

The Rainbow Push coalition held hands, singing “We Shall Overcome” and the “Million Hoodie March” rallied in cities across America. In a short period of time, over 2 million signatures petitioned for the arrest of George Zimmerman who continued to invoke self-defense under the “Stand-Your-Ground” law, which expands the rights of citizens to use deadly force in any public space if they feel threatened.

Again, so what? All the emoting and hand-holding in the world will change nothing in the facts of the Martin/Zimmerman incident; rule of law is rule of law, not rule of law unless the mob disagrees; no matter how weepy the mob!

The law which has been promoted by the National Rifle Association and Republican politicians has now been passed in 25 States and since its enactment in 2005, “justifiable” murders have increased several fold – 36 in Florida, up from 12 just 5 years ago. Had the other 24 been literally getting away with murder before the law, or are we getting jumpier as a nation?

Everything in the above paragraph is hyperbolic spin and emoting; facts mean nothing, the audience being on his side seems to be the only concern of the author. The author sets himself entirely above the court system by putting scare quotes around justified and changing homicide to murder; he is not content with casting doubt on the justifiable in “Justifiable Homicide”, he wants you to know that it was not only un-justified but murder as well.

The last bit is the kicker though! The author simply assumes that anyone who is free after having avoided prosecution for a defensive killing is getting away with murder! He fails to admit even the possibility that up to 24 people had been shielded from unjust prosecution for an act of self-defense that before the new legislation might have ended with them in prison, and their families devastated!

… The national debate is curiously timely considering the broader global context.

An obviously manufactured “debate” that took weeks of aggressive rabble-rousing to accomplish is curiously timely? R-i-i-i-i-g-h-t!

That was funny, tell me another one!

In the past ten years, since the attacks on the Twin Towers, the U.S. has been increasingly basing its foreign policy narrative on the concept of preventive and pre-emptive attacks.

Over the course of the past decade what started as a deadly attack by a handful of non-state loosely aligned actors in New York City, has lead to the invasion of several countries, the death of hundreds of thousand, and the displacement of millions in the Middle East and beyond as America consistently “stood its ground”.

What the hell is a “narrative”? Our foreign policy, wise or unwise, has been based on the events and acts of the nations and groups involved. Sorry to have to point it out but, the proper English would be “handful of loosely aligned, non-state actors”.

As to the invasion of Afghanistan, that is what happens when a state decides to make non-state actors into state-actors by shielding them; I never supported the invasion of Iraq.

The rest is more bile and spin all aimed at holding the U.S. responsible as an international criminal for responding in any fashion at all to the hateful and racist thugs that are spilling over the globe from the author’s back yard.

There was one more funny bit; the author casually reveals his racist viewpoint…

more than our European counterparts who seem to prefer sex – thanks to their Mediterranean DNA

There you have it! Europeans are hornier than Americans because they have Mediterranean DNA; culture means nothing, blood is all according to the author of this flight of propagandistic fantasy!

Read it all and be amused, amazed.

Obama Falls for Latest Palestine Peace; Con – A Musical Tribute to Hamas & 67 Israel Border

Israel suicidal to accept 1967 border (67 border) or 1948 border (48  border) or 1973  border (73 border)
After Obama’s amazingly naive speech on peace in the Middle East I just have to repost this wonderful satire by Latma, Caroline Glick‘s Hebrew language humor site.
You have to give Hamas some credit for chutzpah, they really do manage to “Con the World”…
Pre 67 border Safe for Israel? Now, THAT is a Con!
israel 1948 border, 1967 border and 1973 border obama is as genocidal as hamas

map of israel 1948 border, 1967 border and 1973 border

Mexican flag casts giant shadow on Obama at border – Washington Times

image

This has to take the cake… especially when we remember that Mexico secures it’s Southern border like a prison and charges illegals as criminals, AND prosecutes anyone that aids an illegal; tell me again how the descendents of Cortez, Pizzaro and the rest of that jolly crew have managed to become victims after raping away ALL indigenous culture of a civilized nature from the social gene pool.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/10/mexican-flag-casts-giant-shadow-on-obama-at-border/

Striptease 2011: The Muslim Brotherhood’s Private Parts

No Virginia, that is not Santa Clause; that is a wino in a red suit who wants in your house so he can molest you.
That article is just easing you into “things you do not need to know yet.” Yesterday the MSM said that the MB was a “mostly secular” political group that is on the fringe; today they admit the “banned” group may represent 20 to 40 percent of the populace AND is hardline Islamist AND likely to have a “share” in the new gov.
The fact is that unless secular and Christian factions on the ground in Egypt stand fast against them the MB will make Egypt a Sunni Iran.
The real question is: why does Obama WANT this to happen when he ignored similar unrest in IRAN?

Posted with WordPress for BlackBerry.

The Time has Come to Speak of Many Things; of Fools and Tips and WikiLeaks; of Cabbageheads and the Fall of kings

6a00d8341c60bf53ef0120a5f53d7c970c-500wi

The Time has Come to Speak of Many Things; Of Fools, and Tips, and WikiLeaks;Of CabbageHeads, and The Fall of Kings

I just saw on al-Jazeera that WikiLeaks has released information showing that the Lebanese government had actually dared to attempt to give sensible advice to Israel on how to best attack Hezbollah; which happens to seek to bring down the Lebanese government.

Al-Jazeera has used this information the way every opposition group would, they make as much religious discord and political hay as possible. This is occurring over and over, all over the world. Russian leaks have revealed political gold for those who have fought the Russian combination  of paranoia and aggression for decades; including those who have used the rightness of that fight to exercise their own paranoia and aggression, like McCarthy. 

In the US haters of every “regime” since Washington are either slavering over data released or fervently praying that the next batch will give them what they need to finally bring about the collapse necessary to their promised utopia (Utopia is a word derived from the title of a book about the “perfect” society/city; when it was chosen to be the name for such a city the word meant nowhere.).

The thought occurred to me today that the PC fanatics have so focused the publics mind on an imaginary “ideal” society’s reactions to any present reality that they have rendered any sensible action in the present insensible to that same public mind. If your goal is to support the nation of Lebanon, as opposed to the Muslim or Christians within that nation, then it certainly makes sense, in attacking Hezbollah, not to attack Christian areas that are at the top of the ethnic/religious cleansing “To Do List” Hezbollah keeps for when they triumph.  But in today’s world that sort of thing is seen as nothing but an expression of religious favoritism, for Christians no less, who suffer violent persecutions across the face of the Muslim world today, to be made into political coinage by those who are the epitome of religious bigotry – Hezbollah.

One of the few nice things about president Obama is that he is such a narcissist that he sometimes let slip his mask when preening in front of the cameras more than most politicians accustomed to the national and international stage. On one such occasion he spoke of his support (faint, fading, and only present when it was/is expedient) in the face of sporadic rocket attacks by “rogue” and “independent” rebels who happened to enjoy the full support and resources of the PA, Hamas and/or Iran.  He said that if someone in Canada started lobbing rockets at a town his daughters lived in he would, as a citizen, vote to flatten the area if it did not give up the attackers willingly and cheerfully. Most of the “liberal” world then proceeded to castigate him for that most sensible reaction.

The “elite” exist on all sides however. On the “conservative” side a religiously based form of PC has sought dominance for decades; attempting to “bring back” a better time that never really existed, every era being like this and every other time, comprised of reality not idealizations, and enforce a “natural law” that can only be found in a modern, conservative Protestant interpretation of the Bible. Tolerance for the “deviant sin” of homosexuality, or revealing that the once held stupid, youthful ideas not from the fringe of the conservative Christian paradigm (as opposed to stupid ideas that do, like racism or gay bashing and whatnot). To do so is to be declared outcast from political power or, at the very least legitimacy.

To defeat this inhumanly incorrect trend the people must be willing to see the tribalistic partisanship on all sides who seek to seize the political stage from large segments of society for their own personal/political ends; mistake me not, I mean all parties, everywhere. No political group is immune to this, as Larry Niven declared in one of his Niven’s Laws “there is no case so noble it does not attract fudgeheads.”

Yes, I mean you, and you too over in the corner. The solution to social issues is never to simply suppress any dissent; “reasoning” that does not have its foundation in reality is always going to trend toward the unreasonable, regardless of the righteousness, or self-righteousness, of its proponents. Most of the information released by WikiLeaks is not really juicy at all, it is just the details of a real government dealing with reality. The few bits that are “hot” are about individual actions or things not part of the publicly known policy of the given nation.

WikiLeaks is not a noble rebel, it is an insidious tool for enforcing the PC fascism worldwide with the fall of governments the price of deviance without usefulness. It is dangerous in another way that I have yet to see discussed; who can possibly tell if they are adding or deleting things when virtually no government is going to release the original documents to the public?  WikiLeaks need only keep close to the truth in the beginning; as soon as the public feels that there is credibility they can slowly adulterate their “leaks” with tiny changes that spin them where they want them to go. Given enough time and acceptance WikiLeaks could begin a true campaign of Pravda, “truth” that is only true if it supports the political paradigm of the WikiLeaks controllers. It is not hard to imagine how easy it would be to scour reams of documents, then change only a word or six in several pages but change the political implications of the document entirely; you then release this “leak” and site back while the government and opposition do your work for you. Easy, if you are Dr. Evil, not so easy when you care about the ideals this country was founded upon.

Back in the Saddle, Almost…

IMG_21

This has been a time of reflection on Life, Death, Family and all that makes us Human…  A sudden, but not unexpected, death in the immediate family has reminded me of my own mortality and the impermanence of all that we are and do in life. But, it has also renewed my commitment to cherishing all the moments of my own life, and the lives of those I love.

There have been changes, moves, and family re-alignments, but now the time has come for me to get back to work; please bear with me as I re-focus on the world of politics and society amidst the aroma of baking bread and a pile of ongoing family/house projects – writer/house-husband requires some serious multi-tasking skills!

We just had an election didn’t we? Smile I usually try to avoid writing about local politics, but this election was an all time record for electoral disconnect, simply voting was a huge challenge. I have also decided that I do NOT like this new keyboard! It is simply too small for my hands and does not have a positive click in the mechanism to indicate the key-sent… I type to fast for the more “subtle” keyboards.

This election has shown me one thing though, the country is ripe to abandon the entire party concept and start voting for candidates based on ideology and positions and voting records, NOT arty affiliation.  Politics has become Patronage once again; it is past time to return the power of the vote to the people – Corporations have NO rights of Free Speech as “individuals” under the Constitution! Supreme Court decisions saying otherwise rival Dred Scott in their inanity!

No to Parties, No to ALL Campaign Finance!

Real Reform, RIGHT NOW!