Professor Hanson is On a Roll...

Two VDH posts in one day??? The Man is not only a genius, but prolific!

Here, the Professor speaks of Barack Obama as Greek Tragedy.

And here's another one in which the Professor suggests that Barack Obama doesn't know his ass from his elbow on the subject of terrorism.

Enjoy. I know I did.

From the "No Sh*t" File...

Spanking makes happier, more successful, better-adjusted kids than a time out in the corner.

Someone's just spent a shitload of taxpayer money to study something that was already proven by 1,000,000 years of human experience. Good thing we have scientists.

A New Addition...

I'm directing readers to a blog called Stilettos in the Sand, written by an American living in Saudi Arabia. She's been lurking here for a couple of weeks now, and I finally got the opportunity to pay her a visit. I thoroughly enjoyed it, and invite you all to stop by.

You can click on the link above, or get there via my Link Bar below. It really is a treat.

Kids Say the Darndest Things..

40 Most Obnoxious Quotes of 2009, courtesy of Right Wing News.

I especially love the one about Nancy Pelosi and Osama bin Laden, but that's just me.

Perhaps They Could Remove That Brain Tumor, Too?

Oh, wait; That's his brain!

Senator John "Lurch" Kerry is undergoing his second hip replacement today. Presumably, he wore the last one out putting his foot in his mouth as often as he does. I assume there was no government panel to review his worthiness for such medical largess, and the Senator has private insurance...or does he have a plan sponsored by the government that will look nothing like the one he advocates for the rest us? You know, one of those "Cadillac Plans" that needs to be taxed within an inch of it's life?

Because under that system, too, John Kerry would still receive a second hip replacement, and you wouldn't. Health Care Reform is about taking away from those who pay for their healthcare and giving it to those who don't. Those for whom money is no object (because they're very good at marrying wealthy widows) have no real dog in this fight; they can afford the free market, easily. Those at the top of the Healthcare Food Chain; the elite, nothing will ever change. They'll still have access to the best doctors and the best care. The only rationing will be amongst the peasants. I'll bet it even says as much in that 2,500 page monstrosity that Harry Reid is hiding.

In the case of Senator Kerry and the "Congressional Queen Mary Healthcare Plan" (the one all Congresscritters get at taxpayer expense, don't pay taxes on, and which will be left entirely intact while the government dismantles 1/6 of the U.S.Economy), it entitles him to as many hip replacements, hemorrhoid treatments, and all the hair plugs and prostate exams as the taxpayer can afford.

People who get free rides shouldn't be allowed to make this sort of policy. People who are fortunate enough to receive second hip replacements should probably be a little more circumspect about talking healthcare in public, and certainly about taking the privilege away from people who work damned hard to pay for their own insurance.

Hypocrisy deserves a few days off, Senator.

Now You Know How We Got This F***ed Up...

No, nothing wrong with this at all. No abuse of power by the state at all....

These people really have no shame.

Update: City governments need the money for programs like this. (H/T to ClosetConservative)

No Smoking Gun...

That's what John Brennan, Grand High Exalted Mystic Ruler of Something Having to do With the CIA and Homeland Security had to say about the inability to identify and stop the Pantybomber.

According to Brennan, speaking on Fox News Sunday, the Homeland Security folks had "snippets"of information about the Briefbomber, but not enough to put together into a coherent picture that would have allowed security employees to prevent him from getting on that flight to Detroit. According to Brennan, "there was no smoking gun..."

Except that, well, that there was a clear picture...for those of us who aren't government employees. And usually, when you have a smoking gun -- it's already too late.

I guess for someone to be considered a danger to the security of an aircraft, he has to walk through the airport with a flashing neon sign stapled to his forehead that says "I'm a TERRORIST!".

Let's give Mr. Brennan the benefit of the doubt for a moment, and let's say that the Security Apparatus did, in fact, have all the information that it's been reported to have had. According to those reports, Abdulmutallab was denied a visa by the British government, information they pass on to the U.S. Government, he was known to have been in Yemen, a hotbed of international jihad ---and information they got from Abdulmuttalab's own father -- who also told the CIA officer at the American Embassy in Lagos, "Hey, I think my kid might a jihadi."

That information was in the system, and someone took enough notice of it to put Abdulmuttalab on some sort of watch list.

Did they not know about this in Nigeria or Amsterdam? Because the kid got on planes despite being on a watch list. He has a Muslim name. He's travelling internationally without a passport or visa. He's buying a one-way ticket...with $3000 in cash. He has no luggage. None of these actions raised any eyebrows in either Amsterdam or Nigeria, and in addition, conventional airport security screenings missed his bomb entirely. What are the problems there, and why are such things still happening nine years after 9/11?

And then, finally, we have an aircraft damaged by fire, several hundred passengers saved by one of their fellows, and Janet Napolitano proclaiming a false victory.

No, no smoking guns here at all.

You begin to see a pattern emerge when it comes to the problem of catching terrorists before they get on aircraft.

These guys all follow the same modus operandi (I'll say it: the same profile), and yet, no one seems able to stop them. They all engage in the same kinds of behavior which are supposed to be red flags, but which get ignored or overlooked. There is a distinct and identifiable procedure that can be observed which often identifies them; shrewd (or merely just conscious) security people will be able to recognize them in a heartbeat, and thus, we hope, stop a would-be Peni-bomber. The same people who brought you 9/11; the high-school dropout, the obsessive cell-phone-user, the compulsive texter, the brain dead, the lazy, the unobservant, are still on the job. If you need proof of this, a man shut down Newark International last night because he went through 'security' ...backwards....and then promptly disappeared.

The next pattern: they happen to be Muslim. They have Muslim names. They often look Middle Eastern (and yes, I know Jose Padilla and Richard Reid don't look Muslim, we'll get to that in a minute). And somehow, less attention is paid to them and more to the grandmother in the wheelchair. Why? Because no one wants to insult Muslims. Fuck 'em; we wouldn't have to go through all this bullshit if it wasn't for them. If they don't want to be hassled and insulted, tell them to turn in their crazy uncles, brothers and fathers before they kill again. They know who these people are. I'm not concerned about inconveniencing Muslims and making them feel bad about themselves. When they stand up against their own for my right not to get blown up in coach, I'll start giving a shit about their self-esteem. The point is to discourage the Would-Be Muslim Bomber from even attempting to get near the airport by letting him know "We're waiting for you..."

As for Reid and Padilla, they probably (I don't say definitely) would have been caught with the application of some common criminal profiling techniques. Trained police officers are often able to spot the criminals and troublemakers before they do anything, because experience has given them a keen eye for certain details, and allows them to interpret subtle behaviors the rest of us would miss. But here's the thing: if we were profiling Arabs and obvious Muslims, we'd discourage them from flying almost entirely --- and we'd have the resources to better catch the Reids and Padillas with good ol' fashioned police work instead of a multi-billion dollar government boondoggle who's response to a bomb is to restrict rest room use..

Okay, so getting back to Mr. Brennan's assertion that there was No Smoking Gun, given what we know now, it seems that:

a) Homeland Security would never have been on the lookout for Pantybomber in the first place. The information on hand did not point to an "imminent" threat -- just a possible one. TSA and Homeland Security don't work int he realm of the possible, only that which is actually happening, and even then, it's bureaucratic process probably prevents any meaningful action from taking place. I guess to Homeland Security a threat of jihad is simply that. Political Correctness prevents this bureaucracy from paying close attention to the people it probably should be paying attention to (i.e. Muslims and criminals), and even when it is on the ball, the 'system;' is inflexible and reactive, rather than dynamic and proactive.

b) The system which is supposed to share and disseminate this security information and intelligence absolutely creaks and is grossly inefficient. The great clue here is that even when the security regime is in full possession of an awful lot of dots, there is no one to connect them. And certainly not on a Holiday weekend. It's apparent that when the security apparatus is in possession of information that could save lives, that information often falls into a bureaucratic black hole which ensures it's rarely acted upon, or even reacted upon smartly, but which always figures large in the inevitable over-reaction in the aftermath of a (near-)tragedy.

c) Airport security is too-obviously focused on finding conventional weapons (knives, guns, and so forth) and not in catching terrorists. That is a focus that needs to be shifted if we're to actually start catching some of these guys before they do harm. We're about to spend billions on full-body scanners in major airports, and I wonder if the money wouldn't be better spent teaching the slugs at TSA how to spot and stop criminals. The focus is put almost entirely upon technology which, unfortunately, tends to take the responsibility away from a human being. Human beings who begin to realize they aren't responsible for anything soon rely too much on the technology, and failures proliferate. Put the human beings back in charge, train 'em up, and then hold them responsible.

It appears from the tale of the Underwear Bomber that, yeah, there was a smoking gun. Many of them. The line goes all the way back to the American Embassy in Lagos, it runs through the State Department, the CIA, Homeland Security and the TSA. None of these mega-agencies seem capable of putting 2 and 2 together and coming up with 4, not without bureaucratic lag, and certainly not in a timely fashion which might save someone's life, and certainly not with the would-be killer's father ratting him out.

Mr. Brennan should be ashamed of himself for having the gall to appear on television yesterday to defend the indefensible (see here). Nine years after the World Trade Center became a smoking crater, this country is still unprepared to defend itself against terrorists, and it's because of incompetence at the highest level, political correctness run amok, and a failure to apply common sense.

No Smoking Gun, indeed...

Update: More on your government's stupidity here and here.

And Still More: Terrorism is a Low Priority for Obamabi Administration, says GOP. Also, Brennan should have resisted the urge to open his big, pie hole and not spill the beans.

New and Improved More: Ralph Peters says the Terrorists are outsmarting us.

They Just Don't Get IT...

According to Barack Obama, Dick Cheney loves terrorists. This is the response of an Administration stung by Cheney's repeated attempts to get Obama more active, involved and truthful about the War on Terror. That Cheney criticizes the President and his Administration in the wake of another attempted bombing of an airliner somehow equates to Cheney giving aid and comfort to the enemy in Obama's eyes.

That's the same Obama that wants to close Gitmo, read terrorists their rights, give them the full panoply of rights afforded an American citizen, a government-provided lawyer, try them in civilian courts rather than by military tribunals, who holds out an "open hand" to Iran, and dithers for months over a "surge" in Afghanistan to fight the Taliban.

An idiot who can't get laid (the Pantybomber) decides the answer to his dilemma is to strap a bomb to his John Thomas and take 300 people with him, and when his plot is foiled, he's not a terrorist at all according to the Obama Administration, he's an "alleged" terrorist and an "isolated extremist". He is treated not as a war criminal, but as a criminal defendant, no different than your common car thief or shoplifter by the Obama National Security apparatus.

First off: the people on that plane saw him ignite his underwear, subdued him, and put the flames out. I'm not a lawyer, but if 50 people spot someone do something, then "alleged" is not the adjective I would apply to the wrong-doer, neither is the guy a "suspect" under those conditions. Fifty people can identify him as a) a bomber, and b) the asshole who tried to set it off.
Good luck to any defense attorney who can magically call the eyewitness testimony of 50 people into question. This guy isn't entitled to a trial by jury; he's entitled to a trial by waterboarding.

He's a goddamned terrorist, not a jaywalker.

Secondly: Dick Cheney is one of the guys who Obama says "tortured" the very guys he wants to give Miranda warnings to with waterboarding, rendition, sleep-deprivation, cold cells and loud noises (and Lord knows what else). Cheney has defended his support for such policies on a near-daily basis for nearly a decade. In fact, he's quite unashamed to admit that his only regret was that more of the same wasn't done, all to keep the country safer. He makes no bones about what was done, why it was done, and how it was done. The only thing he won't talk about is what the interrogators actually discovered and what was done with the information (except that one time about KSM, and the time he defended himself by daring Obama to release the files) .

Obama and his cohorts have attacked Cheney and former-President GW Bush for their actions in the War on Terrorism, vehemently, and in some of the most disgusting language you can think of, accusing them of being this-close to the Gestapo. Suddenly the men who Barack Hussein Obama claimed are the worst examples of human degeneracy, so totally out-of-touch with "our values", are now clasping terrorists to their bosom and babying them?

Get real. You can't have it both ways, Mr. President.

President Obama and his crowd of morons, like Napolitano, are going to get people killed. And no amount of spin is going to change or prevent that, and no attack on a prescient-Dick Cheney is going to save them from the legitimate criticism they deserve in the wake of this disaster.
I can only wonder how they'll blame Bush and Cheney when the body bags start filling up?

For a guy who is supposed to be so sharp, one wonders how Barack Hussein Obama misses the obvious. And then you remember that he's a politician and his whole world revolves around ignoring the obvious for that which is politically expedient.

Barack Obama doesn't get it because his politics don't account for a world full of evil men who want to kill Americans in large numbers. He compounds this error by surrounding himself with like-minded people who simply parrot whatever he wants to hear. Unfortunately, this self-constructed bubble won't get popped until there's a mushroom cloud over an American city. It usually takes something that difficult to miss to get a liberal's attention.

Dumbass.

Mark Steyn in National Review talks on this very subject.

This New York Post Editorial sums it up nicely.

According to Rassmussen, a majority of Americans now believes we are losing the War on Terror....for the first time ever... Nice going, Mr. President.

I Think The Wrong People Won the Civil War...

I was saddened today to learn that the State of North Carolina has finally succumbed to it's self-inflicted infection of imported Yankees and instituted a state-wide smoking ban in restaurants, bars and public areas.

This is what happens when you allow several million whining north-easterners into your state; they gradually begin to remake the place according to their own whims. If they can't do it with money, they eventually get it done with votes, and if that fails, they whine...incessantly...until you give them what they want. The influx of Northerners into Raleigh and Charlotte following the technology and banking jobs, have brought you to this sorry state of affairs. You can't smoke in the state that lives and dies on tobacco?

Mark my words, North Carolina; the ban will gradually be extended. Soon, you'll not be able to smoke in front of a public building, never mind that you're outside. Not long after that, there will be great debates about whether people who own condominiums in high-rise buildings are allowed to smoke in their own home because of the proximity of their neighbors.

All the while Cigarette taxes will continue to climb, as Yankees gradually spread the misinformation that smokers burden the Health Care System, (wrong; uninsured illegal aliens and AIDS victims burden the Health Care System) which is 'underfunded'. Mostly because the same Yankees screamed that their pet disease du jour -- Juvenile Ingrown Toenails, Athlete's Tongue, Homoerotic Scrofula -- be funded to such an extent that money was diverted from basic care just to shut them up, and to show that the politicians care.

Soon, you too can live in New York; a place where you can't smoke except in a closet equipped with it's own separate air-circulation system, where cigarettes cost $10 a pack, mostly because of taxes to pay for hospitals that are full of drug addicts, AIDS patients, illegal aliens, and people who have lived far longer than they ever had any right or expectation to without insurance or savings. But it's your fault, Smokers; Even if you will eventually have that massive stroke or heart attack in your 60's that will kill you instantly, and thus save the community the burden of having you linger on for months and years, taking up valuable resources.

Things like this are ultimately driven by other motives; the first is the nerve of pushy people to believe they know better, that they can dictate the conditions of other people's lives. And then they have the nerve to say that they do it for the common good. Kathy Shaidle at FiveFeetOfFury likes to tell this sort of pretentious, presumptuous, obnoxious Soccer-Mom/Metrosexual type "You're not smart enough to tell me how to live."

The second motive is to use the process of Incrementalism to slowly erode your personal rights while simultaneously picking your pocket. Politicians cannot help but spend money -- other people's money. It's their disease (how long before that becomes 'underfunded'?). And eventually, they spend so much that the traditional sources ("revenue streams" as they say on Wall Street) dry up, and they have to find more ways to steal from the public. When they can present this theft as a positive boon for society, they're even more dangerous and dishonest. This is all about raising taxes at some point -- and then wasting the money.

And don't think you've escaped if you chew. They'll get you people next with a SNU-tax, and justify that on the basis "of an increase in oral cancers", and to keep these "gateway tobacco products" out of the "hands of the children".

It's always about "the Children." with this crowd, isn't it?

No it isn't, but that's how they fool you. It's about persecuting people they don't like, and since they can no longer persecute Blacks, Jews, Hispanics, Italians, Irish, and whatnot in public anymore, they've had to find new targets for hate but in a way that doesn't get them punched in the face; so they started picking on Christians and Smokers. If I were still in Charlotte tonight, I'd start thinking about joining one of them Civil War re-enactment groups. And then I'd start thinking about how I could get them to join me in doing it for real.

Some Random Thoughts On Polar Bears

I was watching the idiot box today when Noah Wylie (since when does anyone remember Noah Wylie?) comes on for the WWF, and starts talking about Polar Bears. Now, I'm not sure just when Vince McMahon and Hulk Hogan started caring about Polar Bears, but I haven't followed wrestling since I was 12...I grew up and discovered girls after that.

Anyways, Noah starts talking about how Polar Bears are dying because of Global Warming. Apparently, Polar Bears need nut-numbing cold in order to survive.They don't know any better. All this warming is so bad that mother bears can't feed their cubs, and so they die. Why is never explained. The gist is that it's a problem with retreating ice and Polar Bears being too stupid to swim, although every David Attenborough documentary I've ever saw shows Polar Bears with Micheal Phelps-like water skills. Maybe Noah doesn't know what he's talking about (See the pictures, do they look like they're drowning?).

Probably not, since two million scientific studies (it seems) say there's more Polar Bears now than there have been in several hundred years, but what the hell do I know? I though tin the world of Global Warming Science, if you had two million studies that all said the same thing, the science was, therefore, settled. I guess that only applies to studies the Warmies conduct and concoct data for, but I digress.

So, there I am, watching a cute-as-a-button Polar Bear Cub (who will one day grow up to be an 800-pound killer, red in tooth and claw, feeding on whale carcasses that no one but the Japanese would want, see above) frolics in the arctic snow, probably already doomed to die a horrid death and seemingly unaware, when I began to think of Charles Darwin.

Just in case you live in a cave, or go to Harvard, Charles Darwin was the author of the Theory of Evolution which states that organisms which best adapt to their environments tend to flourish. And Here's Noah Wylie, and the people in Copenhagen, and Al Gore and the legions of brain-dead college kids and communists-in-sheep's-clothing all trying to conspire to stop a natural process (evolution) in the name of...saving all the other natural processes?

I mean, it's man's special talent to adapt through technology, through the manipulation of his physical environment. That's what's allowed us to survive and inhabit every corner of this planet. In the process, yes, we do some sort of damage to the natural world, but according to Darwin, the natural world (wildlife, plants, bacteria, etc) should adapt in order to survive. Those that adapt will live, and those that don't will go extinct. Extinction is a is part-and-parcel of evolution.

And I thought libs were all great believers in Evolution, so much so that they sue school boards to keep Creationism and Intelligent Design out of classrooms. So, why save Polar Bears if they won't or can't save themselves? And why does Noah Wylie need my money to do this?

Then I was struck by another thought (two in one day? I need to start drinking again); I remember Irving Krystal, the father of modern Conservatism, once said (paraphrasing) that a "Conservative is someone who stands in front of the runaway freight train of progress, yelling "STOP!" The Tree Huggers are trying to stop industrial progress so that they can save polar bears, and snail darters, and spotted owls, and three-toed Cambodian Cockroaches, in defiance of the Theory of Evolution, and asking for money to finance the project, sorta like when some televangelist(in this case, Noah Wylie) tells his flock that God will do the worst and take him if he doesn't raise $3 bazillion dollars for the new Tabernacle-Theme Park-Casino and Bait Shop.

Then I got confused (I don't need to drink for that to happen): Doesn't all of this halting of progress, asking for voluntary contributions to serve a higher purpose sound a lot like conservatism? I mean, would this sorta-kind make them, these self-proclaimed Progressive Liberals, that is...Conservative...in some fashion? I mean, aren't they denying Evolution and adopting the Judeo-Christian view of man as the Steward of All Creation?

I mean, the similarities don't end there, either. Conservatives are always accused of wanting to 'turn back the clock', to some supposed Golden Era which liberals laughingly insist never existed, only how do you explain their own behavior; True Believers in Global Warming theory have to accept two premises:

a) There was a time when the climate of this planet was somehow 'perfect', not too hot, not too cold, and suitable for the flourishing of all life as we currently perceive it. A Golden Era if ever there was one. And...

b) That if we simply arrest and re-direct progress in the proper way (i.e. under oppressive Government direction), mankind can return to that climatic Golden Era.

So, I guess that Noah Wylie and the Wrestling Folks are out there trying to recruit Conservatives and not save Polar Bears after all?

I wonder, if any Tree Huggers out there have ever thought this same way...and had their heads explode.