50 Shades of Bullshit

The Modern Liberal's Torrid Sado-Masochistic Relationship with Lies

Niccolo Machiavelli once postulated (paraphrased) that politics could not be conducted without The Lie. That while force was not always necessary to the business of politics, one could not truly practice the art with any great skill or subtlety without a healthy dose of fraud. Machiavelli justified -- or at least rationalized -- the Lie as an unavoidable accessory to power, for in order to exercise it over the Masses it is often necessary to make use of them -- their desires, fears, aspirations, hatreds, opinions -- and if the Masses were ever to discover that they were being used in this fashion, they would revolt.

The Lie is necessary; it serves to hide one's true motives from the people over whom one wields power. Machiavelli understood that achieving power means lying and justified it, perversely, as a matter of honesty. The Ruler who was honest about his intentions (always to himself) could conduct public affairs in a much more straightforward, more efficient manner. For his ultimate goal is not, strictly-speaking, always the most good for the most people, but rather to continue in power, for no one accepts or takes power with the intention of voluntarily giving it up.

This is the genesis of the old saying that "The Ends Justify The Means".

Youth Is Wasted Upon The Young...

That little gem was uttered, I believe by Mark Twain, an American original. It is a truism that youngsters have no idea of what they have -- in fact, it's almost an indictment that youngsters have no idea...whatsoever. It was once axiomatic in my former field of work in the business world, that the best idea anyone under the age of 25 ever heard was usually also the last idea they ever heard. There is a tendency for those who are very young to simply parrot what they've been told, or to make great leaps to illogical conclusions based on faulty and unexplored premises.

Which is fine: people have to make mistakes, or else they'll never learn anything, and youth is the time to make them.

And then I was reminded of another pearl of wisdom regarding the stupidity of youth, this one uttered by Winston Churchill, a veritable dynamo of intellect, who said, vis-a-vis. the numbskull factor of the young and their politics:

“A man under the age of 30 who is not a liberal has no heart…a man over the age of 30 who is not a conservative, has no brain…”

Report: Half of Detroit Functionally Illiterate.

Only half? That sounds to me like maybe no one in Detroit can count, either.

Tell me again why the Public School system -- and the Unionized, tenured, over-paid, lowest-on-the-scale-of-academic-achievement 'teacher' who lords over it -- is a good thing?

Last week, Mayor Michael Bloomberg (Doofus-NY) was pilloried in the press for making a rather stupid remark that the Federal Government should turn Detroit into holding area for immigrants who should be "required" to live in there before they are granted full American Citizenship. Somehow, this plan is supposed to repopulate and rejuvenate one of America's worst cities, although true to form, the details of his 'plan' are very sketchy and probably involve a slew of Upper-East-Side-Solon-approved social experiments, huge tax increases, and an increase in government authority, because that's what people like Bloomberg always do -- when they're not busy changing political affiliations from week-to-week, depending upon which political party is for sale this month.

There are five demented ideas, never examined by the Press because that would mean, like, work, that run through Bloomdouche's ...I hesitate to call it a thought... process:

1. That left to their own devices, the people who already live in places like Detroit, Washington, D.C. or Cleveland are incapable of making life in their cities better for themselves. They require government to 'do' 'things' and direct (i.e. ruin) their lives because they're all knuckle-dragging apemen who see their IQ's drop every time they take a dump.  People like Bloomberg love stupid citizens because they're so much easier to control and take advantage of.

2. According to some political idiots, it is only Government action that is capable of making life better for anyone, and the more drastic that action, the better life is supposed to get. Except that we have tons of  undeniable evidence that this very formulation has made life in some places considerably worse, if not bordering on unbearable.

3. Government, suitably empowered to 'make life better', should then be able to create racial and ethnic ghettos as it sees fit, if Mike's ideas are taken to their logical conclusion. It's worked so fabulously well here in New York, you know. Oh wait, the government already does this...

4. The Government does things so spectacularly well, according to the Bloomberg set, but it's just that we're too stupid to appreciate all this fine work. We should never, ever think to hold government and it's policies accountable or responsible for the wasteland that is Detroit; it's always the people who live there who are to blame, so why not just replace those doofuses with a whole bunch of new, even bigger doofuses? (in fact, this may be at least half-right; after all, if Detroit is a shithole, the people and the politicians they elected help make it so).

5. What makes anyone think that filling Detroit with people who come from countries where concepts like individual rights, respect for the rule of law, constitutional government, the importance of an education, a work ethic, and tolerance are, literally, inconceivable, is going to save the city? Isn't that indicative of the sort of people they already have in Detroit? And contrary to all the politically correct mushiness out there; immigrants don't come here to 'make a better life for themselves' in the conventional sense, anymore; they don't come here for freedom and opportunity, like the immigrants of old, the New Breed comes here for the no-strings-attached social benefits, which we hand out like candy. The Ideal of the hard-working immigrant who wants nothing more than to become an American and be a contributing member of the greatest society on Earth was sooo last century. Now we attract immigrants who sneak across borders to use our hospitals, suck on the welfare teat, work off the books, use the schools, etc., who avoid contributing to American society (i.e. they don't pay income taxes) like they would bubonic plague.

If you doubt this, come to my neighborhood and watch the Mexican ladies buy groceries with food stamps while their husbands/boyfriends overrun the local (taxpayer-funded) playing fields waving Mexican flags, playing a game most Americans consider gayer than Tim Gunn.

Detroit, and cities like it, will never be 'saved' by an influx of more immigrants. If anything, the problems in those cities will become worse as they become government-sponsored ethnic enclaves full of people who are never encouraged (or made) to assimilate because that would offend everyone's multi-culti sensibilities, and deprive the democratic party of easily-manipulated voters. The solution to the problems of Detroit are not to be found in a mass migration from Afghanistan, Mexico, or Upper Volta; they are to be found in ordinary citizens, exercising their rights in a responsible fashion, auditing their public servants and demanding better services for their tax dollars. The Government -- at all levels -- should either respond to their will, or get the hell out of their way.

This would mean a wholesale rejection of 20th century 'liberalism' (a misnomer; it's really Libertine-ism, when it isn't outright Socialism), and electoral defeat of the entire Liberal establishment, including the parasites that cling to the democratic (small 'd' intentional) party like barnacles to a rusty hull; the poverty pimps, the racial hucksters, the unionized douchebags, the professional bureaucrats.

One of the hallmarks of the 2000 Presidential election (the one Al Gore lost, as he attempted to sue his way into the White House) was the incredible lack of literacy shown by many of the democratic voters in Florida (Al Sharpton and Je$$e Jackass called this stupidity-on-display 'disenfranchisement'); many, (according to the Press reports of the time) having been told to 'vote for Number 2'  on the now-infamous 'Butterfly Ballot' -- that would have been Gore, except that he was actually Number 3 -- didn't even bother to read the damn thing, even to make certain they punched out the right chad!

Naturally, Gore only demanded a recount in the districts where a large number of minority voters were present, i.e. where he knew all the illiterate folks were. Gore was, in effect, saying "check these districts because we know that's where all the stupid people are!"  Hence all the talk about scratches, and dents, and swinging chads, hanging chads, and 'divining the will of the voter, as if someone who punched out Number Two but left a scratch mark at Number 3 should have their vote overturned. Gore, the biggest pile of Number Two in History, had to find ways to turn all those Twos into Threes, even if it meant stealing an election on national television.

Literacy, or rather lack of it, has far-ranging consequences. Just ask Al Gore; he lost the White House because of it, and he's made billions off of fake environMENTALism on the backs of the illiterate, as well. People who can read would know that if you take away carbon dioxide, you kill plants, and thus, destroy the planet's oxygen supply, thereby, killing us.

If you want to know why Detroit is a toilet that rivals the open sewers of Yemen, Somalia or Tegucigalpa, here's your first clue. It's a pity no one in Detroit will ever read this, because if they did they might become embarrassed and do something about it.

And as for Micheal Bloomberg, he's the last person on Earth you should ever ask for advice on anything.

On 'The Managerial Revolution'...

I made reference to James Burnham's The Managerial Revolution a few days ago, and got some mail from people asking me where they could find a copy, since it doesn't seem to be floating around many Public Libraries these days.

Of course, you can find all the Jacqueline Suzanne you want, but very little in the way of Political Science. Unless it's Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals, which I'm led to understand the library can't keep on the shelves, or Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged (can't wait for the movie!). Amazon.com has The Managerial Revolution -- at an unconscionable price. I personally found my copy at The Strand bookstore in Manhattan, many years ago, and I think I paid about $8 for a used copy, so try them. Otherwise, I'd keep my eyes peeled at used book sales, swap meets, etc.

For those who can't afford the ass-rape price over at Amazon.com, I'll summarize the book for you here as best I can.

Burnham wrote the book in about 1940 or '41, at the start of the Second World War. His basic premise was that laissez-faire capitalism was as dead as a doornail, and as proof of this dictum, he pointed to the defeat of the capitalist nations of France, and the hanging-on-by-it's-fingernails desperation of Great Britain and it's empire. Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy were going to win the war, according to Burnham, because they had abandoned the old-fashioned, outdated, unworkable system of Capitalism. The superiority of the Nazi/Fascist economic system, where industries were nationalized but their owners allowed to keep ownership -- and profit -- by the State, was evident by it's visible effects upon the battlefields of Europe.

Burnham also made the point that while Capitalism was doomed, Socialism wasn't exactly automatically going to inherit the Earth, as many Leftists had hoped (the Soviet Union, he felt, would also be defeated, or at least come to some accommodation with the Nazis in order to simply survive). What was going to replace those two systems was a mixture of both; a planned economy (on the Nazi, socialist model), geared to national aggrandizement and victory, but run by a new generation of people who weren't interested in such old-fashioned notions as mere profit, as much as they were eager to be the New Arbiters of Power within this new system.

This New Generations were to be called The Managers. Their ranks were to consist of the politicians, scientists, technical specialists, inventors, lawyers, media types, and so forth, who were willing to put their talents to work for the empowerment of the State in return for special privileges; the opportunity to manipulate the levers of power for their own benefit. These were the men and women who would remake society according to their tastes, and being privileged employees of the State, they were to also acquire the ability to direct resources as they saw fit (usually, in their own direction).

The Managers, in the new, Managerial State, would find their way into positions from which they could influence business and government according to their efforts, while remaining invisible.

A similar idea was once also promulgated by the Italian Communist, Antonio Gramsci, who postulated that if given a choice between full-blown Communism and Capitalist Democracy, the greater mass of the people would choose Capitalist Democracy almost every time. Therefore, the Communist was always assured of defeat in fair electoral politics. So, instead of engaging in electoral politics, the True Believer Commie would instead make an effort to insinuate himself into the institutions of the State -- into the educational system, the judiciary, the legal profession, law enforcement, labor unions, and so forth -- and work within the bureaucracies to promulgate his stupidity. Much like the Managerial Class would do.

In any case, Burnham turned out to be wrong in a major way: the Soviet Union, Great Britain and the United States defeated Hitler and Mussolini, and it was the American Capitalist System that had become the Arsenal of Democracy that built the guns, ships, planes, grew the food, pumped the oil, and shipped it all over the oceans to every battlefield where it was needed, and wherever it could be brought to bear against the enemy.

In fact, I think it was 1944 -- when Germany was staring certain defeat in the face -- when Burnham changed his original thesis in another book, The Machiavellians, in which he basically said "forget what I said before...it's obvious that Hitler and Mussolini had the right idea, but were just the wrong guys to lead this new Managerial Revolution, but the idea will survive. Democracy, it turned out, was far more amenable to Managerialism after all than Dictatorship was... just you wait..."

And we waited.

You now live in a world which is managed by selfish little toads to the nth degree. Products are produced with built-in obsolescence as a major consideration, and with full knowledge that newer-and-better technologies and products are available now but deliberately held back by Big Business. Government advocates on behalf of this industry or that, sends trade missions to foreign countries on their behalf, and negotiates Free Trade Agreements which allow favored industries to relocate the more expensive aspects of their operations overseas (where wages are lower and regulation non-existent). Where it would be inconvenient to move operations, the government then allows masses of illegal immigrants to pass into the country unmolested, or issues H1-B visas to effectively do the same thing. The Middle Class is deliberately destroyed so as to make them dependant upon government.

There is no longer anything that can be described as a Free Market, anymore. Markets are now manipulated by a hybrid of Business Interests and Government Regulations. Government now picks winners and losers in industry. Businesses are started overnight with government subsidies, and then quickly die when the subsidy money dries up without having produced a single thing except profits for it's executives. Banks are allowed to defy economic logic and extend their reach into stock markets, mortgage markets and insurance industry, and then are bailed out by legislators and Presidents who have been bought and sold by corporate money when they become Too-Big-To-Fail -- and no one notices that it was the lawmakers (manipulated by the Managerial Class) who allowed them to get that way by issuing this or that waiver, or failing to perform the basic oversight duties its empowered to conduct.

And when the inevitable happens -- disaster looms -- then government simply demands more restrictive and intrusive powers to ensure that 'this never happens again!' Restrictive and intrusive powers put into the hands of...you guessed it: the Managerial Class (i.e. the bureaucracy).

How do you think GE has managed to avoid paying any taxes whatsoever, get Jeffrey Immelt (perhaps the worst CEO in America today) on the President's Economic Advisory Board, and then stand to profit enormously because of its involvement in Green Energy, Electric Hybrid Vehicles, High-Speed Rail and Nuclear Power projects? Not to mention having it's finance arm, GE Capital (the largest such finance company in the world) bailed out by American taxpayers? The Oil and Coal industries are being slowly strangled in the name of environMENTALism -- another branch of Managerialism; this one says we can control the weather with lovely thoughts and strangling Western Economies -- from which GE will profit handsomely, and gladly return some of that tax-free profit into Obama's and the democratic party's coffers.

General Motors and the UAW have also been the recipients of government largess, and they will, we're assured, in the very near future be building automobiles powered by GE products. Those automobiles will be  protected against foreign competition by the government (remember all those Potemkin Toyota Hearings last year? Oh, btw, it turns out that Toyotas don't have accelerator problems...only stupid drivers). The Defense Industry has it's hooks into every Congresscritter who's ever lived, so that Congress can fund 400 F-22's when the Air Force only wants 300, sell tanker aircraft the military doesn't even want, build tanks which are overkill for the current battlefields were on, fund jet engine programs that no one wants, and spend money to ensure that every soldier has every high-tech geegaw, regardless of it's actual battlefield utility?

NASA only exists to ensure that thousands of highly-trained specialists actually have jobs. In return, we get to watch them shoot golf carts to other planets we could never live on, chase asteroids, build an International Space Station for which we bear the burden of cost, and look for exoplanets in other galaxies we can't reach for millenia, if ever. There is currently no replacement due for the Space Shuttle for another decade, and not too much of a domestic, commercial Space Industry in this country: Do you believe the government is simply going to allow all that talent and experience to either wither away, or worse, head overseas? NASA engineers and technicians will, mark my words, be able to write their own checks.

You get your news and entertainment from corporate conglomerates that are cheerleaders for this-or-that political point of view, and they don't even try to hide their biases anymore. The executives of the major networks exert their influence on behalf of the political parties. Hollywood makes films attacking this or that political standpoint, or cultural tradition. News anchors have absolutely incredible power to shape public opinion. Newspaper editors, too. All contribute to political parties and candidates, and then actively seek to aid the very politicians they've bought, or raised to prominence. Editorial content is carefully vetted, crafted, infused with orthodoxy, to ensure that only one point of view is presented, and that any other point of view is discredited.

Washington, D.C. (and every state capitol, also) is absolutely lousy with lobbyists, lawyers, think tanks, special interest groups, etc. These people actually write legislation in cahoots with lawmakers, carving out special breaks, tax credits, waivers, relaxation of regulations, legal immunities, for themselves or their clients, and then ensure that a steady stream of cash flows into campaign coffers, or that lucrative job offers for 'retired' politicians are available when needed, in return.

The healthcare industry is about to be handed over to the Federal Unions. The private insurance industry is about to be squeezed out of the medical insurance racket by legal means, economic factors, and state-run insurance exchanges, all brought into being by ObamaCare. That new system will be run by the bureaucrats who made Medicare such a rousing success. The ultimate goal is to de-privatize as much of the healthcare system as possible, and then leave the business of deciding who lives and dies in the hands of a nameless, faceless, unelected mish-mash of bureaucracies, approval boards, Death Panels, government accounting boards, lawyers, and so forth.

President Odingbat, in order to better run all these new government bureaucracies that he's created and dole out the giveaways to politically-favored people and entities, has appointed something like 35 'Czars' who are unelected, unanswerable to the people or Congress, and as we have seen, have little or no regard for the law. They seem to act capriciously, and pick-and-choose who wins and who loses according to their personal preferences, or according to political orientation/affiliation.

Your Public Schools and Universities are chock full of people pretending to be educators, but their real job is to indoctrinate; to prepare future generations of people for the day when every aspect of their lives will be controlled for them, where their decisions will be made for them. We turn out college graduates who can't add. We promote elementary school children who can't read. Textbooks are devoid of facts, and full of pie-in-the-sky garbage disguised as scholarship. The price of a college education continues to climb, ensuring that only the 'right'people  -- i.e. rich liberals who can afford it, or who have been exempted from the more onerous and oppressive dictates of government -- will be able to get one. And where will they work? Not private industry -- which will soon be destroyed -- but for the government. The schools impose "Speech Codes" ostensibly for the protection of people's sensibilities, but mostly because no dissent against the coming Managerial Revolution can be voiced, or even tolerated.

Wall Street, once a bastion of Conservative Capitalists, is more and more coming to be dominated by the Rich Liberal. Wall Street poured more campaign cash into Barack Obama's coffers than they ever did any republican, in the last election cycle. In return, ex-Obama administration appointees find themselves with highly-paid sinecures when they leave Public Service, and the Firms find themselves with a ready supply of people who have the ears of those in power, or in a position to re-write this or that reg, squash this or that investigation. And to be fair, it was going on long before Obama came down the pike; How many Clinton Administration officials found themselves on the board of directors of Citigroup, JP Morgan., AIG, and others?

How much influence do NOW, the NAACP, United Nations, Council on Foreign Relations, EncironMENTAL groups, a thousand think tanks, study groups, blue-ribbon panels, immigrant spokesdouches, Advocacy Groups of a Thousand Stripes visibly exert upon American Policy? How often do we see the same people leave -- and then re-enter -- 'government service' on a regular basis?

Burnham predicted this would happen; a collusion between business, government, and politically-favored-and-funded groups in which one hand washes the other; but instead of just the old-fashioned notions of plain old graft and bribery, all this coziness has an identifiable, and yet not-too-easy-to-discern, goal; the Management of the American Public by people and groups who will stand to benefit the most from the re-ordering of society when the fruits of capitalism are 'spread around' in the proper fashion. And by the proper people.

Of course, such a thing will eventually destroy the very capitalism that it depends upon to fund it, but that was the goal all along. Once there's no more money and the ensuing crisis such an event will create finally arrives, government (i.e. the Managers) will simply grant itself  "Emergency Powers" to re-order society as it sees fit. The decisions on who gets what, if anything, will be made by the same Managerial Class (bureacrats, 'experts', and so forth) that probably engineered the crisis in the first place. Socialism will arrive -- if not in name but surely in effect -- without there ever having been a vote in favor of it, without a violent revolution, and without anyone ever identifying it as 'Socialism' at all.

NOTE: This post has been edited for spelling, and punctuation, and a few additional notes have been added since the original publication.

The Klan and the Taliban ARE the Same Thing, But...

(Ed. Note: Throughout this stupidity the word 'Taliban' is used as a catch-all, and refers to any organization -- Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Iranian Theocracy, Palestinian Authority, etc. -- that espouses a Radical Islamic view, or engages in terrorist activities).

With regards to some of the more frequently asked (by Libtards) questions surrounding the recent King Hearings on What Makes an American Jihadi:

Why aren't we asking questions about the Klan, instead of The Religion of Peace? Why are we focusing on the bad actions of a non-White people, and ignoring the terrible behavior of White people? Wouldn't this seem to indicate that (White) racism is still alive and well in America? And if racism is still alive and well in America, then aren't these hearings little more than the open expression of that (White) racism, directed against yet another minority group that has drawn the misdirected ire of (White) racists with bad intent, themselves?

The reason this line of questioning/reasoning has been adopted by the American Left is very easy to understand: Liberals, especially those with a vested interest in keeping the America-is-a-racist-country scam going, simply don't want anyone to ask questions about Islam, or about the methods by which young Muslim men are drawn into terrorist acts. Because obstruction and changing the subject ensures that no facts ever can be found. Once people are in possession of facts, meaningful, effective action can be taken, and the problem (hopefully) eliminated. Once this formula (ask-questions, get answers, formulate effective policies) is applied to the problem of Muslim radicalization, it's only a short hop-skip-and-a-jump before it's applied to some of the other problems of American society.

And therein lies the problem, if you're a Lefty or one of the parasites that the Leftards attract. The answers (mostly rooted in Common Sense) to those questions would, literally, destroy the foundation of Modern Progressive Liberalism (three lies for the price of one) because it would expose the true intent of those who profess it's commandments with the loudest voices; the creation of a society wherein those who are politically connected or possessed of the proper political, educational, racial and ethnic 'credentials' get to run a society for their own, personal benefit.

If you really want to see how the 'system' designed by Liberals is intended to work (i.e. that is, intended to fail in such spectacular ways as to create popular sentiments calling for further government control of everything from private property to healthcare), then I suggest you find yourself a copy of James Burnham's The Managerial Revolution, and settle in for a (no pun intended) terrifyingly informative read. Racial and ethnic politics is the Progressive Moron's main tool in the fight to keep himself comfortable by means of someone else's misery.

But, back to our original question: Is the Klan the equivalent of the Taliban?

I've thought about this, and done a bit of research, and the answer is...YES...and...NO.

To begin with, the Klan and Taliban are exactly the same in these regards: both are built upon a foundation of extreme chauvinism. Both use murder and the threat of violence to advance their causes. The two are virtually indistinguishable from one another in virtually every aspect of their politics, religious views, anti-Semitism, ethnic snobbery, and the stupidity of their footsoldiers (i.e. inbred, mentally-challenged dupes who couldn't find their own asses with both hands and a flashlight).

There is but one difference between the Klan and Taliban:

The Klan, largely, has ceased to exist.

That is not to say that racism doesn't continue to exist, because it most certainly does. So long as human beings are at least capable of being aware of the differences between people, no matter how slight, racism will continue to endure. As a race -- the Human Race, that is -- we can't help ourselves. Man may be Master of the Planet, he may have split the atom, broken the Sound Barrier, and conquered Measles, but he still has not managed to control the more dubious aspects of his own Nature and Stupidity.

As for the Klan, it was killed a very long time ago (or at least mortally wounded), and while there are still isolated pockets hanging on here or there, you don't see people walking around in their laundry burning crosses, or having necktie parties... unless they happen to be in a Labor Union... these days. The reasons for this are:

1. American Society has Evolved: We're not perfect people, but we're much better than we were 400 years ago. We're even better than we were 50 years ago. We live in a society which celebrates even the most brain-dead achievements of people regardless of skin color, and which puts no official or legal barriers in the way of anyone who wishes to better their lot in life. For every Willie Horton, I'll show you a Neil Degrasse Tyson. For every Mumia, I'll show you a Russell Simmons. For every Al Sharpton, I'll show you a Ward Connerly, and raise you a Thomas Sowell, Clarence Thomas, Colin Powell and a Condoleeza Rice.

Hell, I'll go All-In, and raise you a Barack Obama.

The cultural conditions under which the Klan once thrived no longer exist; most people would be more embarrassed to be seen in the company, or even thought to be in the company, of such people and such a discredited mindset they'd almost rather be falsely accused of being a pedophile. It's not just a matter of people adopting more fashionable attitudes, either, it's the realization that such notions as racial supremacy simply should not dominate the thoughts and actions of decent people anymore. They have better things to do than to waste their time on such stupidity, and because they've seen the tragic and disgusting results such mindsets create when they are a) excused, and b) perpetuated, and we won't stand for them anymore.

In fact, where there are circumstances which are dominated by questions of race (i.e. instances of what the Professional Grievance Lobby calls 'Institutional Racism') we're most likely to find the source of all that rancor contains one (and often, all) of the following ingredients:

a) Ignorance
b) Political advantage
c) At least one act of Congress
d) a Battalion of Lawyers, Civil Rights Activists, Busybodies, Professional Douchebags, all fighting for a government grant.

2. Cross-Pollination: There was a time when 'Separate-but-Equal' may have been the Law of the Land in some parts of America but that is a thing of the past, and even in the days when it was the Golden Rule, people routinely ignored the Law if it didn't suit their purposes or tastes. Even in the days of Slavery it was not uncommon for people of different races and classes to form bonds of friendship and mutual respect. I don't mean to imply that such circumstances were the Rule rather than the Exception, but they were a lot more common than most of us really know, or even care to admit.

We live in a country and within a culture that is the direct result of these person-to-person contacts and recognition of our shared humanity. To believe otherwise is to ignore the evidence right in front of your own nose. Even in times of the most obscene and blatant racism, individuals still formed bonds and alliances that transcended official diktat, or societal norms.

How different this country would be if no white people enjoyed the music of Louis Armstrong? How many would have died had Charles Drew not discovered the process of separating blood plasma, and had his discovery judged by the cold, clinical process of medical science rather than by Jim Crow? Would we be the same people if Muhammad Ali had remained Cassius Clay and not reminded us of both our moral and ethical obligations towards one another, while still exemplifying the triumph of the individual? Would we be the same people if Jim Thorpe, Jesse Owens, Carlos Santana, Maya Lin, or Mae Jemmison had never existed, or weren't permitted to make the best of their opportunities, or even denied the opportunity to make any contribution to our common life and culture?

The fact is that Hyphenated-this-that-or-the-other History is American History. These sub-cultures are all part-and-parcel of American Culture. One hundred years ago if a group of whites were caught dancing to 'N*gger Music" their society would have taken drastic -- often deadly -- measures to 'protect the Children' from a pernicious (in their own minds) influence. Nowadays, how many white kids do you know who don't know Snoop's rhymes, who don't wear baggy clothing, or who wouldn't want to emulate the success of P. Diddy (or whatever the fuck he calls himself these days)?

What would a Blue Blooded New England Money family say 50 years ago if Reginald Augustus Primrose-Twitt III decided to marry Consuela Coocheefritos from San Juan? What would be the reaction then if Sweet Polly Purebred brought Rayquan home to meet the family? Do those attitudes persist to this day? I'm sure they still do. But do they still exist to the same extent? Are Raul, Sven, or Antwaan in danger of being scooped up off of the street, in the dead of night, and dragged off to be brutally executed in order to 'send a message' to them Uppity ______ about reaching for forbidden fruit, for attempting to be something he isn't, or for daring to cross some invisible line that 'destroys' the old distinctions between 'Civilization' and 'Barbarism' ?

The 'sub-cultures', White, Black, Hispanic, Asian, Jewish, Italian, Irish, Swedish are now inseparable. They've been in contact with one another for so long that they have melded together to form something greater than the sum of their parts. Yes, there are still frictions, but these are typically minor concerns, mostly reconciled peacefully, and without resort to IED's, hijacked airliners-cum-WMDs, or lynchings. In the grand scheme of things, in America, the Melting Pot still works....when it's allowed to, free from Progressive Libtard interference.

I often think of Malcolm X's oft-repeated mantra that "We didn't land on Plymouth Rock...Plymouth Rock landed on us...", and can't help but think that such an utterance is a (probably-unintentional) double-edged sword. It's intent was to call attention to the hypocrisy of a white society that failed to live up to it's own rhetoric about freedom and equality -- fair enough --but there is a deeper truth that can be taken from that pronouncement; you may have come from Africa, El Salvador, Russia, or China, but you now find yourself in a completely different culture which plays by different rules. If you wish to truly be a part of the Great American Experiment -- fuck, there's plenty of room for you on the bandwagon -- you have to check some of your cherished Ur-cultural beliefs (hang-ups) at the door; we often find wonders in diversity (not by the definition employed by the of douchebags looking for quick-and-easy legal settlements and money), but our true strength derives from a commonality in belief in certain, core principles.

I would even go as far to say that even though this is still a culture dominated by the ideals of White Europeans, it's still capable of making concessions and compromises, incorporating those that work, ejecting those that don't, and re-crafting itself on a continuous basis.

America hasn't always had clean hands, nor has it always lived up to it's stated ideals, but we, as a People, always strive to improve ourselves and our nation, and part of that process demands that at some point distinctions based upon Race and Religion have to be thrown away for the common good, or even in the name of simple utility. Some came to America as refugees, some were dragged here in chains, others arrived here eager to have a chance of personal success, and while that promise hasn't always been fulfilled for all, creating the conditions under which they can be realized is still an activity that is front-and-center in most aspects of American Life.

Organizations like the Klan or the Taliban are antithetical to such notions as personal ability being the key to success, of freedoms, of the idea that things can be perfected without having to kill your enemies, real or imagined. So far as they are concerned, God has set the World in it's current state and order, Man cannot change the world because to do so would be to question the Will of God. Man's purpose is only to do the Will of God, and to Maintain the World as God Created, Ordered and Commanded it.

3. Sunlight: The Klan eventually went too far, even for some of it's more adamant supporters, and brought upon themselves the scrutiny -- and repudiation -- of a public which questioned the morality of what they had done, and what they stood for. This scrutiny ensured that the full force of American public opinion, the Legal System, The Press, and Religious/Ethical imperatives were brought to bear upon them. They were investigated. They were infiltrated. The Greater Public was made aware of who they were, what they thought, what they did, and how they did it. The actions and thought processes of the Klan were exposed to the merciless light of day, and what America found hiding in those dark corners both astonished and disgusted us. The hue and cry went up that this sort of stupidity had no place in American life. Slowly-but-surely, the Klan was taken a part at it's joints.

You would be hard pressed nowadays to collect more than a handful of open Klan members at any gathering, even if you offered free sheets, blowjobs, and ice-cold beer. And if there were to be any substantial gathering of Klansmen in the public square, there would be a larger -- and angrier -- gathering of people opposed to to them. The Klansmen would be shouted off the streets. They would be harassed by an angry populace. They would be investigative-reporter-ed to death. In the age of the Internet, instantaneous communications, and handy gadgets that make every American a potential informant, the Klan couldn't organize a game of checkers in a broom closet without drawing attention to itself and bringing down the wrath of the American Public.

We know who they are. We know what they're doing, and saying, and thinking, and when you know the Who-What-Where-When-How and Why, you have already half-way defeated your enemy. The other half of that defeat stems from a population of well-intentioned human beings who are willing to stand up and say "Not here, Jim Bob (or Muhammad)...we don't like that shit, and we'll kick your inbred Cracker (Sandflea-riddled) ass if you even think of trying it..."

I knew a Southern Lady who once told me that despite the bad reputation of the Klan, and the terrible things it did, it still "managed to do some good". I found that statement somewhat ridiculous, and asked her to explain. She replied that, in the Old Days, the Klan served some vital social functions in the rural south; they took care of veterans, took care of cemeteries, went after deadbeat dads and forced them to live up to their obligations, sobered up the local drunks. There was never any drug dealing, and very little crime in the community, they hounded the prostitutes out of town (presumably after making copious use of their services?), they made sure people showed up at church (unless they burned the church down, of course). Naturally, they only performed these vital services for you if you were white, but that's splitting hairs, ain't it?

Well, I'm perfectly certain that the Taliban does these things, too, in their own ways, and we know that Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Saudi Wahabbis and the rest of the assholes follow suit. But in both cases (Klan and Taliban) the ultimate purpose is not to 'do good', it's simply a way to continually recruit a new generation of members who will perpetuate their insanity. It's called 'Public Relations', and the fact that the Klan had 'good PR' amongst one group doesn't erase the fact that they were murdering thugs intent on constructing a society that was under their total control at the expense of another group.

Had society been informed of only 'the good things the Klan did' -- and kept ignorant of the bad stuff --there would still be legions of doofuses out there in their sheets, burning down churches, hanging people, threatening politicians and newspapermen, and committing a vast array of crimes. The Klan may have started out as the (self-appointed) protectors of a unique Southern Heritage, but it quickly devolved into a murderous Criminal Enterprise. All the same things about 'the good' were said to various extents about the Mafia, the Chinese Triads, The Irish Gangs of the West Side -- and all were considered the enemies of the Common Good-- so you'd better damned well look into the activities of the Klan, and the Islamic Groups who are it's Modern-day inheritors. I don't care if Hamas feeds every Palestinian Prime Rib and Red Velvet Cake three meals a day; they also massacre sleeping infants, lob mortar rounds into public swimming pools, and mangle their daughter's vaginas. We subjected the Klan to close, careful scrutiny and we continue to do it, because those sorts of activities fly in the face of our beliefs in the sovereign rights of the individual -- the rights to Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

Sunlight would do the same thing and disarm Radical Islamofascism. It would concentrate all sorts of resources, moral, spiritual, ethical, legal, academic, military, to stopping the slaughter and mayhem such an ideology produces. Once you know the Who-What-Where-When-How-and-Why, the threat they pose to peaceful, lawful society is lessened, and perhaps is even sent on it's merry way to becoming little more than a bad memory. Societies which do not investigate, question, or attempt to learn from their mistakes, or arrest their more onerous impulses, are societies that die quickly and quietly in chains, both real and intellectual.

The 'great shame' of investigating the roots of Islamic Terrorism is not that someone might be singled out, or that the process may become the harbinger of some great totalitarianism, but that in avoiding it, for whatever reason, we're dooming an entire nation and culture -- the greatest yet constructed by human beings -- to destruction, not by lunatics with bombs, but by a fear of what the investigations might uncover, and the application of it's techniques and discoveries to other areas of American life.

When a liberal democrat or intellectual screams 'racism' and 'what about that other group of bad people...' they're not so much applying the flawed theory of moral relativism, or even making an attempt to be intellectually honest, they're telling you there's something there that they don't want you to know. Mostly, they don't want you to know how such stupidity usually has the Progressive's fingerprints all over it, and how you've managed to pay for it all (and how they got a cut) without your knowledge.

On this very page, I have screamed for the massacre of Muslims by the millions and been accused of racism because of it. First, 'Muslim' is not a race, and second, Islam is not a religion; it is a military code which excuses the worst excesses of it's followers, provided the victims aren't Muslim (and even then, the Islamic world has found a variety of means by which to slip even this thinnest of prohibitions when it suits their purposes). The Muslim is expected to remain in a state of perpetual warfare against The Enemies of God, and is given license to rape, murder, enslave and steal from anyone not part of his little group. In fact, God commands him to do these things; God says that's his birthright, you see.

Islam makes no distinctions other than 'Us' and 'Them', and neither did the KKK. It doesn't look for 'Moderate' Infidels anymore than the Klan had a list of "N*ggers we're cool with".

So, as far as I'm concerned, we're not at war with a 'radical element', nor are we in conflict with a few misguided souls who managed to read the Koran in upside down fashion; we're at war with a society which believes it is their right, and it's obligation, to kill us for it's own benefit. The faster we understand that and the quicker we get around to defeating such a deadly thought process, the better off we are as a society. Holding hearings into what causes a computer programmer to wire his Jeep Cherokee into a weapon of mass destruction is the key to ensuring that his brand of stupidity doesn't cost any of us our lives, or any more of our freedoms.

The Klan thought and acted in much the same way as the Islamofascists. That they are no longer as active, or as-deadly, an element in American society started with someone asking the most basic of all questions:

Why?

When you live in a society which tries to prevent you from asking "Why?" -- by playing crass politics, by making false accusations of racism, creating rifts between people and communities, by manipulating emotions -- then deep, perhaps even dangerous, truths are probably being kept from us, and for all intents and purposes we'll eventually find ourselves to be no different from the Klan or the Taliban in the very near future, and just about every conceivable way.

Update: Edited for spelling/grammar.

Unions: Guaranteeing Stupid People Jobs at Salaries They Could Never Earn in The Free Marketplace...

How Union members Christmas Carol.

Harken back to the heath care debates, the Town Hall meetings, the fight over GM and Chrysler Bailouts. Remember how the Unions tried to "fight for their rights" to keep cushy jobs at inflated salaries that bankrupted their employers back then? Usually by beating their opponents up (typically elderly Tea Party folks and Conservatives).

(Ed. Note: Forgot to mention this: the Obama Stimulus Bill was largely a pay-off to Public-Sector Unions for their political support, which is why it has so little positive economic effect).

The truth is that Unions exist to protect the following categories of people:

a. The Stupid
b. The Lazy
c. Thugs
d. All of the above.

Without a Union job, these categories of people would be limited in their career choices. Their choices would be:

a) Orange jumpsuits
b) Any job that required them to ask a customer if they wanted fries with that.

Now, mind you, that's a broad-brush description of the Unions, I'll admit. I do happen to know plenty of people who aren't stupid, lazy, or thuggish, and who belong to a Union. I also probably know twice as many who are, and the good Union folks are outnumbered by the bad ones by, in my estimation, a 3-to-1 margin.

If the Union doesn't exist to ensure the drooling knuckle-draggers in society have (arguably-)gainful employment, then it exists to extort the best possible kickbacks for itself under the guise of Worker's Rights. In a day and age of the EEOC, Civil Rights legislation up the wazoo, an overly-litigious society, and Diversity-for-the-fucking-sake-of-it, exactly what rights is the Union guaranteeing, besides inflated wages from which it takes a healthy cut?

And what does the Union do with that money? Well, after it pays it's executives handsomely for being a bunch of douchebags spouting communist boilerplate, it buys politicians. Democratic ones, because they're the closest in terms of commie sympathies to the Union executives, so they can keep the scam going. But when the executives aren't busy doing that, they're organizing a bunch of Neanderthals to trespass on private property on Christmas for the sake of yelling "Fuck You!"at the people who employ them, the ungrateful bastards.

Money quote from the article:

"Yes, those evil business owners who are trying to cut costs because a president who the unions supported and donated money to is forcing business to trim costs so they can afford his massive health control law and other regulations thrown on them. If the unions are unhappy with this then perhaps then need to look at the economic situation this president has created instead of blaming skittish business owners simply trying to stay afloat in a dismal economic period."

The Unions supported Obama, they can now think about just what that support has cost them. Right after they start thinking about what their members are costing America; right now, New York, California and several other states are on the verge of insolvency, if not outright bankruptcy, because they will not be able to bear the costs of their Public Union pension obligations.

I can promise you that if these states go into default, the first thing the Federal bankruptcy judges will do, with the connivance of democrats in Congress and Obama, will be to allow states to abrogate those pension promises, and give the Big Purple Shaft to all those Union people. Will they then bus themselves to 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. to shout "Fuck You!" at the Savior of the Universe?

Or will they just start beating up elderly folks engaged in the exercise of their Civil Rights again?

I await the answers to these questions eagerly.

The next time someone tells you that a labor union exists to ensure the rights of the working man, and to advance concepts of fundamental fairness and brotherhood, make sure you ask them if busing people in to beat up Tea Partiers, or to intimidate a man's family by shouting obscenities on his front lawn on Christmas Eve is really the best way of doing those things.

Here's an example of what happens when the Unions collude with politicians:

Teacher accused of sexual assault spends 13 years in Rubber Room...With full Pay and Benefits.

Totally-related true story: All this stuff about the rights and needs of the Working Man reminded me of the ultimate fate of a friend of my father's, who was a member of UAW. This man had begun working for GM sometime in the late-1950's/early 60's as a Leader (that's the metal, Lead, and not as some sort of General) back in the days when auto chasis were slathered in layers of lead as an anti-rusting measure.

Sometime in the 1970's -- I believe after Nixon had created the EPA in any case -- the use of lead in car bodies came to an abrupt end. Too dangerous, too polluting. However, this would have meant the forced unemployment of thousands of UAW members,and so the Unions fought to keep leaders on the job. Only they weren't always on the assembly line or reassigned to other jobs. So, "Frank" basically had a job that he showed up to where his only obligation was to punch a time clock, and where he had the access to tools and materials to make little lead figurines all day.

In fact, I was given some of the lead soldiers "Frank" used to make as playthings when I was a child.

Anyways, sometime in the (I think) mid-1980's, "Frank" dropped dead of a massive heart attack, just a few years shy of full retirement. I remember people saying at the time that "Frank" was, indeed, fortunate to have perished so quickly, for had he lingered much longer, he would have suffered a much worse fate because he was beginning to show the effects of prolonged expsure to lead. Had he actually lived longer, his life would have been one of incredible pain and discomfort, shuffling between one hospital and another waiting for transplants, because many of his major organs were damaged beyond repair by lead poisoning.

The UAW, far from protecting his rights and seeing to his needs, would probably have killed him via lead poisoning in the process of "saving" his redundant and unecessary job, just so that the UAW could continue to collect his union dues with which to bribe politicians and enrich the Union Execs.

America's Ruling Class

If you read nothing else this weekend, you should read this in the American Spectator about America's Ruling Class.

It's long,and in places a bit thick, but it's pretty accurate and enlightening, and worth the effort required to get through it. I promise!

"Why Are You Doing This?"

That was the question asked by Allison Blais, a 24-year-old "Journalism Student". You see, Ms. Blais, and a number of other people, had just been pepper-sprayed by the
Toronto Police Department. Why? Because thousands of young Canadians made the hazardous voyage into downtown Toronto. (it is hazardous...I've been there) to make complete asses of themselves in order to put themselves in a position from whence to get pepper-sprayed. It's the very least the police department can do after their officers have been attacked, their cruisers set ablaze, and thousands of hemp-heads and faux-Anarchists are roaming the streets burning, looting and vandalizing everything in sight in the name of "World Peace", and stupid notions of fundamental justice.

And Ms. Blais is one of the exceedingly lucky ones, in the sense that the Toronto Police Department (or is it Ontario Provincial Police? I always forget) pretty much took the day off to let the protesters do their thing. Why, I'll bet that 99% of those protesters weren't pepper-sprayed at all. You should be proud, Ms. Blais, that the Police found you objectionable enough, what with all the rioting going on, to take the time from their overtime-pay coffee break to make the effort to do their jobs and squirt you right in the fucking kisser, Missy. Why, you were either a very easy target (I gather you were seated during your personal protest?) meaning that you made it easy, or you just really pissed them off.

On the bright side, you could just be happy that you'll now actually have a story to write for your "Journalism" class.

Everytime there's a G20 meeting, or some other political get-together where the World's Elite gather to figure out how to fuck up the planet even more, you will find protesters. Most of them are well-meaning people who actually believe that if 20,000 like-minded people get together with really spiffy signs, and clever four-words-or-less slogans (it's best if it all rhymes, they say), that the Chinese or Russian delegations might actually listen to anything you have to say. People like Barack Obama or Angela Merkel pretend to listen to you, because the Western style of politics demands that important personages at least appear to be "Men of the People", even if they really have no actual connection with the Huddled Masses, and barely think of them of actual human beings rather than as voting blocs, a source of tax money, or photo-ops.

I can promise you that even if you brought 100,000 people with signs, the Chinese will still bind women's feet, and stifle any nascent political dissent in their country with tanks and Secret police. I can almost guarantee that genocide will continue in Sudan or Rwanda, because the people there are fucking savages who can't read your signs, and who don't have televisions with which to actually see your protest, and discern your good intentions.

As far as "getting a message through to X", a protest march is all-well-and-fine, even if typically futile. It's your right, and I don't object to people trying to get their message out. However, it's usually the legions of douchebags who glom onto the well-meaning protesters' protest which often throws a monkey wrench into the whole thing. These New Age Anarchists, the Watermelons (Green on the Outside, Red on the Inside), the new breed of Anti-Semites, the Older-and-Surgically-Preserved Breed of Radical Feminists, The Militant Queers, the Tinfoil Hats, and the Plain Stupid, join in these protests for a variety of reasons that usually don't have anything to do with the doings of the actual "Summit". They just show up for the Media Attention. There may have been a few tens of thousands in the streets, but most of them were probably of the "Civil Rights for Three-legged Blind Gerbils" type who more-or-less belong to entirely fringe-of-the-fringe-within-a-fringe "movements" which deal with an extremely narrow -- and often ridiculous -- issue. Those are the ones who show up on the odd chance that their sign might get 5 seconds of airtime on the nightly news, because almost any large gathering of people draws cameras, and they need to find or give moral support to the other seven people in Canada who believe in The Cause...whatever it may happen to be.

It's the smattering of assholes in there who showed up specifically to start trouble that are the problem. And those are the ones who most likely got Ms.Blais pepper-sprayed, assuming she just happened to find that grassy median a convenient place to take sit-down after a heavy afternoon's shopping, and had nothing to do with the protest at all.

Most "Anarchists" are really middle-class kids. Very well-off-upper-middle-class kids, who are a) stupid, and b) bored. Mostly they're college students who live in a world of abstracts idly tossed about by aging hippies who have even less experience of reality. Most have probably never done an honest day's work in their lives -- because Mom and Dad have provided everything -- who are drawn to the "romance" of play-acting as the Disaffected Political Streetfighter. They rail against the excesses of Capitalism (despite the fact that it's what allows them to live very comfortably; most would probably die of starvation within 15 minutes, if left to their own devices and lack of real survival skills, or ability to get e-mail), screaming their heads off about the plight of the "poor" in the "Third World". They do this dressed in their "Radical Chic" uniform of black Urban Guerillaware -- complete with the de rigeur Che Guevara t-shirt and red bandanna -- that costs a shitload of real money (after all, it's high fashion for a select clientele), probably produced in a sweatshop by some 11 year-old Nicaraguan making 3 cents a week. If she's lucky.

They rail against the "greed" of the "Evil Corporation", and yet, they take full advantage of the Evil Corporation's products; They drive or take public transport to the protest. They've organized themselves on Facebook, they use cell phones to communicate with one another and take pictures of one another like the riot was some once-in-a-lifetime event that needs to be recorded for posterity. Or, they might use Twitter to spread disinformation during the riot to make the Police look bad. They're certainly glad for the hospitals they'll need after the cops crack their skulls. Some even sport gas masks -- brought by the Gas Mask fairy, no doubt. They'll all gather at the local Starbucks, or McDonald's, three hours before their planned attack for an Egg McMuffin and a couple of double-caramel mocchiatas -- because breakfast IS The Most Important Meal of the Day. Don't worry; they'll be back to throw chunks of concrete through the store windows a few hours later.

When they're arrested, I'll bet at least half of those...ahem...tough, committed Soldiers of the People cry like bitches, and the other half huddle together in the corner of the common cell for fear of being gang raped by the "downtrodden" people they took to the streets on behalf of. No worries, though: Mom and Dad will come through with the bail money. They always do, because leaving Junior in jail overnight might damage his self-esteem.

I've had experience with three protests in my life, and when I say that, I mean a protest in which some aspect of my life was changed;

The first was sometime back in the early-90's when my then-girlfriend went to a NARAL march in Washington, D.C. I picked her up at the bus station after she had returned to Manhattan. She was exceedingly proud of herself for having attended the march and having stood up for Women's Rights. She was so exuberant that she wouldn't shut the fuck up about it, and I got tired of saying nothing but "well good for you", and not getting a word in edgewise, for near on 20 minutes. Her attempts to get me to validate her good feelings were painfully annoying; (if the conversation had been written down, she would have been finishing every paragraph with "Don't you think I've done a great thing?".With each new pronouncement of pride, my ears got just a teensy bit wearier. I asked her if she wouldn't mind talking about something else.

Needless to say, that relationship did not last much longer, for I had killed her Self-Esteem buzz.

The Second Experience was with an Earth Day celebration, with another ex-girlfriend. I didn't want to go, but I did want to get laid, so I got with The Program. The Program involved travelling to Central Park with her Hippie Girlfriend, and the Hippie Girlfriend's Pothead-25-years-older-than-she Boyfriend. So, the four of us hopped into Pothead's car for the half-mile voyage to Central Park -- a 1980's model Chevy Suburban that trailed enough oil smoke behind it for a battalion of Marines to maneuver behind, and adorned with this little gem of Eco-wisdom; A "Split Wood - Not Atoms" bumper sticker. Once we arrived at the Earth Day "Celebration" Hippie Girl and Cradle-Robbing-Pothead-Douchebag began their "work"...distributing the 5,000 printed fliers their "Green Workshop" had prepared to inform the citizens of Sodom-on-the-Hudson about the evil people destroying the Rain Forests so that the selfish bastards might have someplace to grow food.

I think all 5,000 of those fliers wound up on the ground in the Sheep Meadow and the Ramble. And that relationship, alas, also did not last much longer. Note to all my readers; if you date an Ecochick, don't buy her Coach leather when her birthday arrives a week later, because it means you learned nothing at the rally -- and it only makes it worse if you say "who really gives a fuck about Earth Day, anyway?"

The final encounter was a "Legalize Pot" rally on Boston Common. I wasn't there of my own accord -- I just happened to have accidentally found the damned thing while I was sightseeing. If there is anything more stunning than the sight of the Boston P.D. standing idly by while 5 or 6-thousand lit up in a futile group attempt to Give the Entire City a Contact High (their stated goal, I gathered, an amazing amount of ambition shown by slackers, I must say), it was watching a goodly number of them lay down, or simply pass out, when they themselves got too stoned to continue standing within the massive cloud of smoke generated during the attempt. Once they were conveniently horizontal, the cops just scooped them up at their leisure.

What does any of this have to do with the Toronto Riot?

I've come to the conclusion that many people who attend most "rallies" and "protests" are the dumbest forms of life yet discovered. Most are there for some reason other than the one stated, and usually are too stupid to see that what they protested against yesterday, they've invalidated by their actions today (rail against Big Oil, fill up your gas tank). Instead, I think many go for psychological reasons; the kid who vandalizes McDonald's isn't really concerned by the plight of the Third World as much as he is guilty for all the wonderful shit he's been given -- or he's just a fucking loser trying to strike back at the world that has marginalized him. The Woman who marches with NARAL doesn't go because she actually believes Feminist garbage -- she went because her circle of girlfriends would have ostracized her if she didn't. The Pothead doesn't really want pot legalized -- because if it was, regulations would probably require the least-potent weed imaginable, and it would be taxed to the hilt -- only he's too fucking stoned to think that one through. After all, if the Fed'ral Gubmint can mandate beer with less alcohol in it than you would use to sterilize a paper cut, it can surely mandate weak Ganja as being the only sort suitable for public consumption. He went because he's fucking stoned, and doesn't know any better.

It is my opinion that if you protest against something that is, ultimately, about nothing -- like the G20, which is a complete farce -- there's more than likely something wrong with you. If you attend a protest that is, ultimately, about nothing -- like, the G20 -- and you burn police cars and riot in the streets, then you deserve a fucking face full of fucking pepper-spray, and you should stop crying about having gotten it. Actions have consequences, you know.

Something Annoying...

With regards to the double-edged sword of Obama Criticism by those "on the right";

We hear almost every day that President Odickhead is in over his head. He lacks Executive Experience, and this makes him an ineffective leader, as well as contributes to his confusion about how "government should work". We are beginning to hear the brilliant formulation that Obambi "never really wanted this job" (nah, he only spent half-a-billion of other people's money, and invented 57 states to visit, and took all the Birther and Jeremiah Wright stuff for shits and giggles). They suggest that, maybe, he takes far too many vacations and breaks, because he's not up to the task of governing? He's totally unqualified for the office, runs roughshod over the Constitution leading some to question if he has ever even read it. He's a tool of the Left -- or worse -- of the Evil Triad of Emanuel, Pelosi and Reid.

That's when he isn't a total tool of the Unions and the environMENTALISTS, and George Soros, and that when he isn't mollycoddling terrorists and bowing to foreign potentates. He's a Manchurian Candidate from Hawaii and Indonesia, sent to restore the Comintern. He's capable of trying to turn the United States into a New Soviet Union (on a bad day), or a new Greece (on a good one), apparently all by himself, and despite his lack of acumen and ability, which is just an act, you know.

They complain that his "vision" is Un-American, that term typically being defined by the same people who bought George W. Bush's "Jesus is my favorite political philosopher" spiel. American-ess is now being judged by what church you attend, whether or not you wear the flag on your lapel, and all that which passes muster with a crowd of people, who, if they could, would burn fags at the stake, and frog-march abortionists to the ovens. And do so cheerfully if their Pastor told them it was the will of the Almighty. He's arrogant, continually turning a deaf ear to the will of the"American People".

Why, Barack Obama is perhaps the worst thing to happen to America since Jimmy Carter, Disco and the Pet Rock hit us all in the same decade. He is an unmitigated disaster of Biblical Proportions, so bad that even the people in Zimbabwe, Sudan, Outer Mongolia and East Buttfuck, Bangladesh laugh at us. He is a a National Embarrassment, so much so that even the 52% who actually voted for this douchebag are ashamed to admit it in public.

Why,Obama is soooo godawfully-bad that he's made it perfectly safe for Black Conservatives to come out of the woodwork, show themselves at Tea Parties, and even to call for his Impeachment in public.

Then, when something happens (an Oil Spill, a foiled Terrorist Attack, and so forth), and the man who isn't qualified to run the local Taco Bell, who has no business being in the White House for his lack of experience and qualifications, the Man with the Absolute Worst Judgement on Planet Earth, somehow becomes the Only Man on Earth who can and should provide "leadership". And he gets hammered when he can't do it.

Suddenly, when it becomes convenient, the Punditocracy on the Right demands that He be everything they say He cannot, nor ever, be.

Now, I agree that Barack Obama will go down in history as the worst American President Evah, provided we aren't all made extinct by an Iranian or North Korean nuke. He is probably the last Black Man who will ever reach such heights in my lifetime, setting the cause of Civil Rights back 100 years. He will, historians will say, have done the impossible:Obama will have made George W. Bush seem Regal, John McCain seem saner, and Hillary Clinton appear to have been the better choice all along. He will have made Sarah Palin a billionaire and Kingmaker of the Right. He will have made Jimmy Carter appear to have been smarter than he ever was, and Joe Biden seem a goddamned statesman of the First Rank.

It's apparent to me that Barack Obama couldn't lead a three-year old to the crapper without a Blue-Ribbon Commission and a 2,500-page piece of legislation that no one will read before voting on, and only after he's made a dozen Potemkin-village stops to rally the Union Workers being paid to attend the rally and feign enthusiasm. I get it. I got it a very long time ago. However, could we PLEASE stop with the endless parade of "conservative" flapping rectums on TV who make the wild swing from "Obama's Utterly Incompetent" to "Obama Should Suddenly Get Competent"?

Quite frankly, I'm damned happy that he's not"engaged". I'm ecstatic that he plays golf three times a week and makes as much time for the wife and kids as he can. I'm tickled to death that he spends half his time flying from staged-event-to-staged-event, re-fighting battles that have already been won (that, incidentally, is the stock-in-trade of the Civil Rights/Community Organizer crowd. It's what they do because they are allergic to original thought and hard work) . I'm so happy I could shit that Obama spends less time in the Oval Office than the (presumably) Illegal Alien who cleans it every night.

Why?

Because an "engaged" Obama always results in higher taxes, more government, the destruction of the free enterprise system, transparent pandering to every "victim" group under the Sun, charges of racism where none exist, panic in the markets, uncertain Allies, more-brazen enemies, more debt, fewer jobs, more misery. When Obama is not thinking "wouldn't it be cool if...." , and then actually working to see it come to fruition, I feel safer, and better. Imagine what kind of damage he could do if he were actually qualified for the job...and trying!

I understand the nature of political criticism is "damned if you do, damned if you don't", but the recent criticism seems, to someone who actually agrees with most of it, to be exceedingly gratuitous. It's like shooting fish in a barrel. It's like kicking three-legged, blind puppies. It's like hunting turtles with a power drill. It's that's easy, and requires little in the way of sophisticated thought, or preparation. It's getting to be almost as annoying as those stupid horns at the World Cup. You can't make the case for incompetence one day, and then --mystically -- demand it from the man the next, and expect me to take you seriously.

I'm not defending Il Doofay, nor his Insane Clown Posse. They deserve most of what they get. I'm just annoyed at the pundits who apparently assume we're all dummies who need to be reminded every day of just what is happening (or not happening) in this country.

Quod erat demonstrandum -- the thing speaks for itself. You can make a point or two for the really dense people in the room -- the ones who might be obsessed with 16 and Pregnant, or Jersey Shore, but the rest of us don't need the constant repetition and Power Point slide shows. This continual hammering upon a single theme is, in part, why Republicans lost so badly in 2008 -- they did the same thing and repeated the"the terrorists will get you"meme 700 times a day. Eventually, it turns people off, even the ones who agree with you, because it wearies the ears.

Now, as for the flapping rectums on the Left, who go out there to defend President Asshole -- You've pissed me off, too.

I'm getting rather tired and annoyed with you, too. While the Right-wingers get on the TV and yap-yap-yap like poodles, ad nauseum, about what is painfully obvious to a brain-damaged hedgehog, you guys simply look into a camera and lie. There's not even a question as to whether or not you're being truthful, because your pronouncements defy the evidence of my eyes and ears. I can tell you don't even believe the crap you spout, because you look so ridiculous trying to defend it. There was one democratic dickhead on Fox last night who tried to brazen out the fallacious idea that Barack Obama was the best thing to happen to America since penicillin.

That he looked guilty as hell as he did it -- like a schoolboy who has wet his pants in the presence of the Headmaster -- that he gave you not the slightest indication that any of his defense was waged with any real conviction. It was too much to hide from the camera. I realize that this is your bread-and-butter, but goddamn it, at least try to make a logical case for what you argue instead of trying to turn turds into silver coins, and when you can't even make a good argument, then at least have the good grace to shut the fuck up.

I suppose that we're reduced to this 3rd-grade level of political criticism (on both sides) because this is, for better or worse, a country inhabited by mouth-breathing morons. This is the same public who pays far too much attention to some publicity-whore dipshit with 8 kids, or which considers NASCAR, Lady Gaga and American Idol to be entertainment of the highest caliber. I understand that we have created a country full of idiots, run by and for the benefit of idiots, and that, therefore, our political discourse will naturally be idiotic. It's not in the least to be wondered at that the people who make their livings on criticism will often be bigger idiots, themselves (The Poli-Sci majors and ex-lawyers who make up the Punditocracy often turn out to be the biggest, dumbest, assholes you'll ever meet. They're like fanatical ex-smokers, the In-crowd that snubbed you in High School, and Jehovah's Witnesses all-rolled-up-into-one).

I'm just wondering when intelligence will make it's way back into our conversations -- on any subject at all -- and this cheap, "gotcha!" opportunism, from both parties, will come to an end.

Maybe I'm asking for too much?

Ivy League Elite: We Deserve to Rule Because We're Better Than You Scum...

According to this Washington Post Editorial, the fact that Ivy League elites from Harvard and Yale dominate the Supreme Court (Elena Kagan, if confirmed, would make the Court All-Ivy) is a good thing, because well, they're the best and smartest people available. And when we're talking about lawyers (themselves supposedly the smartest of the smart) then, hell, we should be looking for the Ivy League Lawyers to fill the top legal spots in America (the superlatively smartest of the smart), because without them, we dolts will probably degenerate into destructive and immoral behavior of the sort not seen since we were all swinging from trees and throwing feces at one another.

That, of course, was all written by an Ivy League lawyer. Talk about conceit?

Then again, this idiot also boasts that he worked on Micheal Dukakis' presidential campaign. According to some (the Ivy-trained Libtards and Kennedy School sorts), Dukakis lost that election not because he was a dull, criminal-loving, mono-eyebrowed, ultra-libtard, wanna-be elitist prick who was as interesting and exciting as scabies, but because he was just too highbrow for the rest of us to understand where he was coming from. Oh, and that picture of him in the tank, looking like a green mushroom -- with a monobrow -- didn't help much either.

If The Ivy turns out such superior people, then please explain the following calamities:

a) The Economic Crisis. The author should also explain why all those Ivy MBA's are in favor of the piece-by-piece destruction of capitalism (for reasons other than their own immediate paychecks), why they're in bed with politicians who advocate policies that are damaging and destructive to business and commerce, and who support confiscatory rates of taxation which might be common in say, Soviet Russia or Venezuela, but not in the United States of America.

b) Why the nation is fighting two wars that it seems to lack the political will to actually win (you know, by killing the enemy?), and the foreign policy chops required to encourage our allies, and outmaneuver our camel-fucking-wife-beating-illiterate-child-raping-Stick Age opponents. You begin to wonder how all of these Ivy Elites at the Justice Department, Homeland Security, and the National Security apparatus view the world, and when they advance policies such as reading terrorists the Miranda Rights or "negotiating" with Iran, you begin to ask just what the fuck they are they thinking, and do they inhabit the same planet as I do?

c) A Congress which passes bills so complicated it cannot be bothered to read them first, but somehow still manages to exempt itself from. A Congress which is so focused on achieving narrow party-line goals, that in the process it shreds the Constitution, tramples on the rule of law, and bestows honor and credibility upon the biggest and worst of hacks, idiots, con-men and ticket-punchers, while making them fabulously wealthy in the process.

d) A media which doesn't even pretend to be objective, which is the first requirement of a democracy. The ability to audit, criticize and question authority and to hold them to account for their misdeeds, is what separates us from the ignorant savages of the Middle East and the authoritarian hordes of Asia. It's one of the things that makes ours a dynamic, advanced society that continually reinvents itself, and promotes the concept of progress and modernity. It's one of the reasons why the filthy nose-picking masses of the world hate us; because we have, through our media, the ability to ask the question which is fundamental to both peace and progress; "Why?".

Once you lose that ability, either through the abuse of power by the elite, or through the media failing to live up to it's responsibility, you no longer have democracy. We're seeing both -- the Obama Administration has done things it was never empowered (by the Constitution) to do, a democrat-controlled Congress has enabled him to do more, and the Media is not tackling the vital question of "Why?", but is instead more concerned about the burning question of whether a picture of Elena Kagan playing softball is suggestive of hidden homophobia.

Considering the public track record of the Ivy League Elites of the last 20 or so years, I would think that elevating yet another one to the Supreme Court would be a further sign of the degeneration of American society. Maybe we could find one of those Good-ol' boy country lawyers, like Matlock, or even in a pinch, I'd settle for Jack McCoy or, an A.D.A. Ron Carver (from back in the days when Law and Order was less political. Confession: Courtney B. Vance is one of my favorite actors).

I say instead of elevating Ivies to the Court, we instead find them suitable employment at Burger King, or on the assembly line somewhere, so they can experience life outside the Ivory Tower for once -- and learn the hard way -- what actually goes on in this country in places where people don't drink $200 Merlot, and specifically ask if the Ahi-Ahi is farmed and dolphin-free.

The new battle lines in American politics are forming. Our "Elites" are lining up against "The Rubes". One side is represented by people like President Obama, Eric Holder and Elena Kagan -- and the fellow-traveler asshole who wrote this article -- and the other by Tea Parties and the likes of Sarah Palin. The Elites are trumpeting their superior intellects and educational "qualifications" as their Reason to Rule (that sounds a lot like the Divine Right of Kings!), while the Other Side has only Right, Common Sense and Public Opinion on it's side, and as we've seen, there isn't a Libtard politician, judge or pundit alive with an association with the Ivy that hasn't, at one time or another, ignored Right, considered Common Sense inferior to pragmatic Conventional Wisdom, and derided Public Opinion as little more than the mental diarrhea of the incredibly retarded masses.

They Have Nothing to Fear But Fear Itself...

The more you examine the liberal thought process (oxymoron), the more it seems like the manifestation of a mental disease than a serious political philosophy.

(H/T Instapundit)

And While I'm At It...

The people who "make the laws" in this country are totally divorced from reality. They have no first-hand experience of the consequences of their self-interested, politically-motivated (in-)actions which are simply designed to maintain their rice bowl at all costs, with no thought given to what happens tomorrow. So long as this basic necessity (how do I best maintain my office and power today?) is met, who gives a crap what the Proles think? So long as they pay their taxes and vote the right way in elections, and their emotions can be appealed to, they're not important. When the Proles finally discover they've been had, the reaction is not to reconcile them or change tactics, but instead to insult them by calling them racists, Nazis and ignorant clods. Which is not far from what they think about us in the first place. The Political Class then wonders why it gets nasty voice mails and death threats, and are --in poll-after-poll -- rated as just slightly-less-popular than Ebola.

The Ruling Classes of the United States are under the mistaken impression that they Know Better. This Paternalism comes in two flavors: For Your Own Good (Republicans) and For All Our Sakes (Democrats), and neither is a very good philosophy, nor is either very amenable to modification. In years past, this was not a difficult system to maintain, as the lines of communication and dissemination were restricted, and often bought-and-sold adjuncts of either party. Not so now with the explosion of the Internet, blogging, cell phones, and Social Networking.

The technical ignorance (not to mention the reduced mental capacity) of the Rulers is astounding. The People of Official Washington still live in the technical atmosphere of the 20th Century, while the rest of us have advanced into the 21st. We are more aware, as they become less so. It explains much of the recent dissent (which used to be patriotic before it was directed at a man who represents the greatest hopes and aspirations of a formerly-oppressed minority who can't keep race out of anything he does -- then it's somehow blatantly unfair) and much of the apparent disconnect between Governor and Governed. We know what they do now; the Internet and the 24-hour news cycle make this possible, but the politicians have not seemed to grasp this fact, and it gives us Regular Folks access to the weapons which no ideology or government can withstand; Facts and the ability to disseminate, organize around them, and focus attention upon them...quickly. This is the virtue of the New Technology that they haven't grasped; it makes mass political movements -- and the ability to change the habits and activities of government -- possible in a way that the Old Methods could never hope to achieve. This why Tea Parties are "dangerous bigots" and why state laws against illegal immigration are akin to "Apartheid and Jim Crow". The New Technology, and the ability to organize political movements with it threatens the Statist view of the purpose of government, and their rank within it.

It's my belief that had Chinese dissidents been equipped with cellphones, portable video cameras and the Internet that Tiannamen Square could never have happened, and the China might actually be a fledgling democracy rather than a dictatorship in Capitalist clothing right now. Why do you think the Chinese government hates Google so much?

This inability to recognize and reconcile the effects of New Technology is perhaps the sole reason why politicians keep trying the same tried-and-failed "solutions" to the same, persistent problems they never "solved" the first seventeen times around, always convinced of the (eventual) efficacy of their efforts. In a world of greatly expanded communications, their channels still only go one way -- outwards from the center of power. You only have to notice that in a day and of age of ubiquitous cameras, microphones and instantaneous debate on the Internet, that most politicians seem to forget themselves (an awful lot) and say the stupidest things over open mikes or in snippets that wind up on YouTube, which serve to give insight to us all about their innermost feelings and attitudes. It's the reason why the President of the United States can announce his hostility to Capitalism and Economic Freedom by saying "at some point, you've made enough money...", and half the country knows about it three minutes later. Not only does half the country know about it within three minutes, but they're debating it in chatrooms and forums on ten thousand platforms, and posting their defenses or refutations in a million blogs! And that Regal Pronouncement was made at a carefully-staged event where SWAT teams were called in to keep protesters at bay, presumably a 'safe" place for President Odickhead to chat with some of his most rabid cohorts and confidantes.

It's as if they assumed that every camera and microphone in the room was on their side --and accounted for -- and that these snapshots of Obama's stupidity would never leak out of the hermetically-sealed room. This inability to get any "feedback" from the greater public -- or more accurately the inability to listen to and interpret dissent when it makes itself known -- results in a ruling class which finds itself absolutely stunned that The People resent and reject the unchecked immigration, government bailouts, vast expansions of bureaucracy and a chilling vision of the future in which Private Property and Free Markets no longer exist. This vision is absolutely vital to the Political Class' continued survival -- the Parties play off each other in a Pro-and-Con arrangement in a ballet of power, voting blocs and campaign contributions which can only work when both sides are able to control the means of communication -- but which does not serve any greater public good. They are simultaneously aware of what they're doing, and unaware that anyone is watching. This new paradigm perplexes and vexes them to no end, and their only retreat is back into their cocoon, an the cycle of Bad Government Run By Bad People continues apace.

Many of the issues we face today are not so much about Right vs. Left or Pro- vs. Anti-, as much as they are about communication. One side of the Great Debates of Our Day -- the people who pay the taxes and supply the votes which support the political structure -- are not entirely certain the Other Side is hearing what they say, or worse, is quite happy to go on ignoring their wishes and concerns. You can pick from a multitude of reasons why this is; They don't care. There's too much money in Washington to be made. Ideology. Stupidity. Politics. All of the Above.

I'm reminded of an old saying (the origin of which I can't recall) that states -- paraphrasing -- that if YOU refuse to engage in politics, you will be ruled by those who will engage in it. Politics is perhaps the dirtiest and basest of all human endeavors, because at it's foundation, it involves the ability to manipulate and coerce people, often against their wills. It's become clear that those who will engage in politics are far from being the best and brightest people available and we're now ruled by a class of craven, manipulative people possessed of a bulletproof-stupidity, an unwillingness to listen to what The Rest of Us are saying, and an arrogance that can only come from complete separation from the greater part of society, and which blames us when their failures run full-circle.

This bunch of idiots -- people who live and die by the methods and ideas of the past, who seem more concerned with their personal status and comfort, who couldn't find their own asses with both hands and a flashlight on a good day -- have almost succeeded in creating a system wherein every activity you engage in has a political significance; filling up your gas tank, mowing your own lawn, what your children are taught in school, what you buy or sell, right down to the very food you eat and what medical care you should be entitled to, is somehow controlled, directed, taxed, sanctioned or prohibited by some layer of government.

Somewhere in all of these processes, Government has a hand -- mostly because it gave itself permission to do so while you were not looking. This has been achieved by both parties for their own, often contradictory, reasons. They have taken away, in many cases, your right of choice -- and we're not talking about "Choice" in the sense that you have the right to an abortion as Birth Control of Last Resort as an adjunct to a hedonistic and irresponsible lifestyle, but your right to decide for yourself, on any subject. The few true freedoms you have left are already in their crosshairs. We have the Right, and the Means, to ensure that it doesn't progress any further, and beyond that, to begin to reverse the process by which we're all discounted, ignored and abused by an unresponsive and irresponsible government run by the least productive and self-obsessed.

We have this power because we're all firmly grounded in reality. We're all talking to each other, and exchanging ideas. We're holding those in power to account. We're organizing and informing ourselves with the new technologies which the Politicians don't fully understand (and which they don't yet control, but they're working on it!), and we're making sure that even the meekest amongst us has a way to express their opinions, and find like-minded individuals for mutual support. In the 1960's/70's, these were the activities of the Political Left. Today, they are the activities of the Political Center, and the Not-Really-Political-Just-Really-Pissed-Off. What the Flower-Power-Stop-The-War-Impeach-Nixon crowd hoped to achieve back then, is now technically feasible, but it's now being directed in a more positive direction (the great flaw of the ideological and political movements of the Left of Days-Gone-By is that they were all, without exception, about negatives) by advocating on behalf of the Great Middle.

Just my $0.02.