Friday, June 30, 2006

Reading is Fundamental


Read the following explanation before looking at the picture�


This picture is not doctored. Most Syrians struggle to even read Arabic, much less have a clue about English.

Question: So, how does a group of Syrian protest leaders create the most impact with their signs by having the standard "Death To Americans"(etc.) slogans printed in English?

Answer: They simply hire an English-speaking civilian to translate and write their statements in English. Unfortunately, in this case, they were unaware that the "civilian" insurance company employee hired for the job was a retired US Army sergeant.


I don't know if this is for real or not, but it's funny either way.

HOW TO BE A GOOD LIBERAL

In order to be a good liberal you have to believe...


that there were no charities before welfare,

that there was no art before federal funding,

that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high,

You have to believe that the same teacher who can't teach 4th graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex.

6. You have to believe that gender roles are artificial but being homosexual is natural.

0. You have to believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it.

11. You have to believe the military, not corrupt politicians, start wars.

that the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding,

that taxing the use of gasoline or other energy will reduce the use of gasoline or other energy, but taxing work and investment will not reduce work and investment,

that a man's home is his castle only until the city condemns it so a politician's developer-crony can build a high tax-paying shopping mall there (which would be for "the public good"),

that private property rights are morally repugnant because they are based on selfishness,

that the right to the pursuit of happiness is also morally repugnant because it too is selfish,

that bigotry and prejudice are evil unless they're against selfish bastards, in which case they're good,

that honest hard-working people who want to spend their money on their own damn families and businessess must be lumped-in with criminals so we can feel self-righteous about despising them as if they were the exact same kind of selfish bastards as criminals,

that the best ideas are more government intervention in the economy, more aggressive confiscation of private property, more government funding of socially destructive behavior, and a foreign policy subordinated to world opinion,

that freedom of speech and of the press does NOT apply to TV, radio, cell phones, PDAs or the internet which must all be government-regulated to enforce our ideas of "access" and "fairness",

that whenever there is a question about the purposes and motivations of the United States, one must assume -- no, make that believe -- the worst,

that the United States must not make the decision to defend itself by itself; it must first get permission from the U.N.,

that the only people worthy of being a leader, especially president, are those who display our definition of intelligence, which is: showing signs of being an analytical, reflective, self-doubting, slow-acting intellectual who accepts, and adheres religiously to, modern liberal doctrines, including the following:

that all generalizations are false,

that there are absolutely no absolutes,

that you can be sure that nothing is certain,

that it's really bad, even evil, to make or pronounce moral judgments,

that all cultures are equal, but ours stinks; that all truth is relative, except the unquestionable truth of "post-modernism", that no race, class or gender is superior, but middle class white males are clearly inferior, that no books are superior, except, of course, those by third-world authors,

that it's good to support minority, homosexual and women's rights and simultaneously make common cause with Islamofacists, who would attack all of them,

that identifying individuals by their uniqueness is "racist," but identifying them only as a member of a race is not,

that those who oppose liberalism, nomatter how thoughtful or scholarly, can be dismissed out of hand simply by calling them "racist, sexist, fascist homophobes," because, after all, they have to be such, don't they?

that the independent broadcasters who give us 500+ TV channels can't deliver the quality that PBS does,

that good economies are caused by politicians and not by entrepreneurs,

that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity,

that farmers, ranchers, hunters and fishermen don't care about nature and the long-term survival of species, but "animal rights" activists who've never been outside the city do,

that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical, documented changes in the earth's climate and in the cycles of the sun, and more affected by yuppies driving SUVs,

that people who drive cars are bad, but people who ride buses or trains are good,

that people who live in single-family homes (or want to) are bad, but people who live in high-density apartments (or admit they ought to) are good,

that the thinning of forests by lumber companies and forestry workers "destroys habitat," while burning them down in their entirety by allowing unhindered forest fires makes animals "thrive,"

that American corporations' drilling for oil in "environmentally sensitive" areas is bad, but paying billions of dollars to moslem countries for their oil is better,

that the entire earth is an "environmentally sensitive" area, so no development, drilling, or building of any kind is justifiable ANYwhere,

that Betty Friedan and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, George Washington Carver or Thomas Edison

that any person or any country which has a higher standard of living than any other must have achieved it as a matter of luck, not freedom, opportunity, foresight and work -- and must feel guilty about it -- but if they're not, they must be forced to "pay" for their good fortune in a manner which we (who feel guilty for them anyway) will decide is best,

that there is only one moral code, and it is the pure altruism of the self-sacrifice: first-foremost-only-and-always kind,

that the only people who should decide which sacrifices anyone must make are the ones in government,

that the correct view of the state is one that sees citizens as children who need nurturing, and bureaucrats and politicians as the only adults who can do the nurturing,

that private citizens should not be allowed to choose their doctors, their childrens' schools, where they live, what foods they eat, where and if they smoke, and when they speak or write: which "politically correct" words they may use and which "incorrect" ones they may not -- without your help,

that there is no such thing as a "sovereign citizen." In fact, there is no such thing as "inalienable rights," only permissions from government,

that everything not forbidden should be mandatory, and everything not mandatory should be forbidden,

that trial lawyers are selfless heroes and doctors are overpaid,

that Robin Hood should be remembered for "robbing the rich to give to the poor" (because that was "good"), even though it wasn't his motive, and not for "taking back from the taxors and giving back to the taxees" (because that's always bad), even though it was,

that recessions and depressions are caused by businessmen, and not by politicians and bureaucrats,

that it would be vastly preferably to risk destroying the economy of the United States even in wartime than to allow drilling in areas which might risk the well-being of wildlife,

that FDR must be remembered for "ending the great depression," even though he didn't (in fact he made it worse), and for giving half the people "hope," even though he decimated the Constitution and gave the other half despair,

that the explosions in medical and prescription drug costs since 1965 have been caused by greedy doctors and drug companies and not by medicare, HMO subsidies and labyrinthine government regulations,

that you can acquire self-esteem without actually doing something to earn it or living up to a code of ethics,

that public schools must be given ever-more money and protection from competition, no matter how poorly they perform,

that intolerance may be horrible, but "zero tolerance" is wonderful,

that social changes must be made by classroom propaganda and coercion, not by persuasion, and certainly NOT by example,

that it is racist to be color-blind and that good policy is to be color conscious -- in fact to identify people ONLY as a member of a group,

that all cultures are precious, must be preserved at all costs, and must all be treated as equal, not because of their outcomes, but because we say so,

that the new ideal paradigm to be established is "multi-cultural diversity", which means making sure every organization has at least one black liberal, one militant-feminist liberal, one gay liberal, one Latino liberal, one transgender liberal, one Native American liberal, and so forth. The one kind of diversity NOT permitted is diversity of philosophy, politics, views or values (especially merit- or accomplishment-consciousness),

that, since hatred is horrible, it's okay to hate haters. And independent people. And SUV-owners. And gun owners. And business people. And the merit-conscious. And other individualists. And any other politically incorrect policy advocates. And whoever else it's chic to hate today. In fact the new definition of "hater" is "anyone who disagrees with us."

that if a private person or organization refuses to sponsor, finance, allow or provide a venue for, a speaker, movie maker or demonstration, then that's "censorship," and that's bad, but if a government or government-run enterprise does it, then that's quelling "hate speech,"and that's good,

that it's shocking -- and worthy of detailed, damning and deliciously horrifying expos├ęs -- to find that free-market scholars are actually able to fund their work with voluntary donations from wealthy individuals and businesses -- while it's pleasing to find that socialist scholars are able to fund their work "virtuously" with tax money (extracted from their opponents -- and victims -- by government coercion),

that CHANGE is good -- but ONLY so long as it is change TO liberal values FROM other values,

that people who resist your vision of social change should be jailed,

that everyone who believes in free markets is a religious conservative (or if we know better, we pretend we don't -- since we don't want the general public to know about libertarians),

that everyone who believes in civil liberties is a big-government liberal (or if we know better, we still don't want the general public to know about libertarians),

that the ancient left-right political spectrum must be defended as the only yardstick for evaluating ideologies because (unlike the Nolan Chart, for example) the old left-right one conveniently implies that "the democratic ideal" is nothing more than a compromise between socialism and fascism, and so the ONLY question is "WHAT KIND of huge, powerful, all-pervasive government do you want?",

that black people can't succeed without your help, but those who do, or tell others they can, must be vilified as "Uncle Toms,"

that the NRA is bad, because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good, because it supports certain parts of the Constitution,

that guns in the hands of law-abiding Americans are more of a threat than U.S. nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese communists,

that more people are killed by guns than are saved by gun owners simply brandishing their weapons,

that even though there are 54,000,000 children under 16 in the U.S., and you can never achieve "zero" accidental deaths from drowning, choking, fires, falls, poisoning, motor vehicles and medical mistakes, you can somehow achieve zero from firearm accidents (perhaps because there are always so many fewer such accidents every year),

that it's possible to develop a system to identify and locate absolutely all random suicide bombers so they can be stopped before they strike, but it's impossible to develop a system to identify, locate and shoot down incoming missiles before they do,
that corporations are more dangerous than governments -- even when they haven't been sold a government-protected monopoly and can't make you buy from them, and even though the federal government is hundreds of times the size of the largest corporations and has guns, jails, IRS kangaroo courts, and can and does make you buy from it or deal with it,

that the quantity of natural resources in all of existence remains finite, and will always run out unless government controls its use and mandates horse-and-buggy "substitutes",

that the quantity of wealth in all of existence remains fixed, and always has from time immemorial, so only people in government should decide how it's allocated,

that any attempt to tax successful entrepreneurs at less than 100% of their incomes must be met with horrified screams of "giveaway! giveaway!! giveaway!!!"

that businessmen are parasites, but politicians and bureaucrats are not,

that people who work in the private sector are evil, but people who work in government are saints,

that a contract can mean anything any time anybody wants it to, especially if it's named "The Constitution of the United States",

that private citizens are too stupid to make their own decisions about anything, but people in government are too smart not to give them dictatorial powers over everything,

that the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried, is because "the right people" haven't been in charge,

that the only answer to the millions of problems caused by government -- is always ... ("ta-da!") more government (of course!),

that the only choices Americans are given by the Republicans and Democrats include having to choose between legal abortions and "overkill" security from international terrorists (ignoring the fact that Libertarians support BOTH Constitutional security measures and states' rights to legalize or outlaw abortions),

that contributions to the Democratic Party by the Chinese Communists are in the best interests of the United States,

that both "hard" and "soft"-money contributions to the campaigns of politicans by Americans are not in the best interests of the United States because they are always initiated by the donors as bribes and never by the politicians as a "protection racket,"

that people who get upset about the misuse of the FBI, the military, the BATF and the IRS belong in jail, but that the misusers, liars and Constitution- violators belong in the White House,

that William J. Clinton, as a wonderful president, should not be remembered for any misdeeds at all, but if he is, it should be only for the sexual ones, and not for any of those other things,*

that Hillary Clinton is normal and really a very nice person,
that the death penalty is bad, yet abortion is good

that it would better to see civilization destroyed than to see your cherished beliefs in cultural equivalency and moral ambivalence dismissed,
that you must be a knee-jerk "pass a law!" big-government control-freak in order to get any poor people or any "good" people -- especially the professionally unselfish "saintly" people -- to even like you, let alone to love you,

and last, but definitely not least -- that good intentions are all that are needed to pave the way to utopia, especially if all your friends have the same good intentions.

====================

Thursday, June 29, 2006

commenting and trackback have been added to this blog.

The Psychology of extreme liberalism

All this time I thought they were being dishonest, never realizing they're being just as dishonest with themselves. Dr Sanity offers a look at the inner working of a mind in denial.

Wednesday, June 28, 2006



A brief History of the Arab-Israeli conflict
by
Jun 28, 2006
This brief by shlemazl is worth a read, considering today's events in that area, and knowing many will cirtainly blame those Jews for escalating the violence (we all know how all the Arabs would be tiptoeing thru the tuleps with tiny tim, throwing rose petals at everybody, and living in absolute peace and harmony with everybody, the very embodiment of tolerance, but those blasted Jews force them them to be throat-slashing thugs against their will!)

From America's sweetheart

read this




With Freedom comes Responsibility...
by
Jun 24, 2006
It's a shame the new york times doesn't think so.
You hear the Media spout off about freedom's, but they never want to talk about the responsibility that goes along with them, do they?
Should we have freedom of the press? Absolutely!
Should the press distribute Intelligence to terrorists warring with us? Absolutely NOT!

to the reporters and editors of the NY times drooling for a pulitzer.....


some Images borrowed from michelle malkin, and my vast right wing conspiracy
The esteemed Psychiatrist's view
by
Jun 23, 2006
Dr. Sanity offers a clear view of Islam's abuse of women and the left's obvious support of it, with a star wars analogy.

read all about it
My Digg.com experience
by
Jun 23, 2006
I've been perusing digg.com lately, some of the articles and comments on tech are interesting and informitive, but a word of warning to new visitors there, should the commentary turn to politics, the moonbats will swoop down on you like a flock of seagulls with dysentry, move-on.org and Mike Moore has nothing on these folks, I was actually accused of being a government shill sent there by J Edgar Hoover himself to spread mis-information.
It seems these folks have no doubt the attack on 9/11/01 was an inside job, masterminded by Dick Cheney and Karl Rove who hired these guys to fly planes into buildings and Hired Robert Duvall to play a terrorist kingpin called Osama Bin Ladin. (good make-up, huh?)
I don't know whether to be annoyed or proud of my accomplisment, actually, since I was a complete failure in my attempt to turn these bright young minds from their firmly held conviction, maybe I should be embarrassed and turn my badge back in to Hoover.
the circus of capitol hill, bipartisan support for staying the course
by
Jun 22, 2006
It seems most democrats don't believe their own rhetoric, considering the votes nearly all rejected any schedule or timeline for troop withdrawls from Iraq, that cirtainly doesn't fit with their daily talking points they blab all over the news, that's obviously just for the public they think are too stupid to see how they vote, and maybe they're right.
Barbarity
by
Jun 21, 2006
We had two brave young troops die a horrible death at the hands of our enemy, Islamic terrorists, yet, many on the left can't seem to figure out who to blame for this brutal act, it seems terrorists get a free pass in their minds, they are so busy worrying about how we treat prisoners at gitmo they can't see how prisoners of the terrorists are doing, i think the argument about how we treat POW's can be laid to rest now, if they can't see the difference now they need to have their head examined.
HR861, as passed, — Saturday, 17 June 2006


Here it is, the resolution so vilified by the left as partisan.
as i see it, it's simple, short, contrite, to the point, yet many libs couldn't sign off on it, somebody tell me which of these 7 points the dems don't want to support?



*
*

The Library of Congress > THOMAS Home > Bills, Resolutions > Search Results

THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT GO TO
Next Hit Forward New Bills Search
Prev Hit Back HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Help
Contents Display

Bill 2 of 2
There is 1 other version of this bill.
GPO's PDF Display Congressional Record References Bill Summary & Status Printer Friendly Display - 4,840 bytes.[Help]
Whereas the United States and its allies are engaged in a Global War on Terror, a long and demanding struggle against an adversary that is driven by hatred of American values and that... (Engrossed as Agreed to or Passed by House)

HRES 861 EH

H. Res. 861

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

June 16, 2006.

Whereas the United States and its allies are engaged in a Global War on Terror, a long and demanding struggle against an adversary that is driven by hatred of American values and that is committed to imposing, by the use of terror, its repressive ideology throughout the world;

Whereas for the past two decades, terrorists have used violence in a futile attempt to intimidate the United States;

Whereas it is essential to the security of the American people and to world security that the United States, together with its allies, take the battle to the terrorists and to those who provide them assistance;

Whereas the Taliban, Al Qaeda, and other terrorists failed to stop free elections in Afghanistan and the first popularly-elected President in that nation's history has taken office;

Whereas the continued determination of Afghanistan, the United States, and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization will be required to sustain a sovereign, free, and secure Afghanistan;

Whereas the steadfast resolve of the United States and its partners since September 11, 2001, helped persuade the government of Libya to surrender its weapons of mass destruction;

Whereas by early 2003 Saddam Hussein and his criminal, Ba'athist regime in Iraq, which had supported terrorists, constituted a threat against global peace and security and was in violation of mandatory United Nations Security Council Resolutions;

Whereas the mission of the United States and its Coalition partners, having removed Saddam Hussein and his regime from power, is to establish a sovereign, free, secure, and united Iraq at peace with its neighbors;

Whereas the terrorists have declared Iraq to be the central front in their war against all who oppose their ideology;

Whereas the Iraqi people, with the help of the United States and other Coalition partners, have formed a permanent, representative government under a newly ratified constitution;

Whereas the terrorists seek to destroy the new unity government because it threatens the terrorists' aspirations for Iraq and the broader Middle East;

Whereas United States Armed Forces, in coordination with Iraqi security forces and Coalition and other friendly forces, have scored impressive victories in Iraq including finding and killing the terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi;

Whereas Iraqi security forces are, over time, taking over from United States and Coalition forces a growing proportion of independent operations and increasingly lead the fight to secure Iraq;

Whereas the United States and Coalition servicemembers and civilians and the members of the Iraqi security forces and those assisting them who have made the ultimate sacrifice or been wounded in Iraq have done so nobly, in the cause of freedom; and

Whereas the United States and its Coalition partners will continue to support Iraq as part of the Global War on Terror: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives--

(1) honors all those Americans who have taken an active part in the Global War on Terror, whether as first responders protecting the homeland, as servicemembers overseas, as diplomats and intelligence officers, or in other roles;

(2) honors the sacrifices of the United States Armed Forces and of partners in the Coalition, and of the Iraqis and Afghans who fight alongside them, especially those who have fallen or been wounded in the struggle, and honors as well the sacrifices of their families and of others who risk their lives to help defend freedom;

(3) declares that it is not in the national security interest of the United States to set an arbitrary date for the withdrawal or redeployment of United States Armed Forces from Iraq;

(4) declares that the United States is committed to the completion of the mission to create a sovereign, free, secure, and united Iraq;

(5) congratulates Prime Minister Nuri Al-Maliki and the Iraqi people on the courage they have shown by participating, in increasing millions, in the elections of 2005 and on the formation of the first government under Iraq's new constitution;

(6) calls upon the nations of the world to promote global peace and security by standing with the United States and other Coalition partners to support the efforts of the Iraqi and Afghan people to live in freedom; and

(7) declares that the United States will prevail in the Global War on Terror, the noble struggle to protect freedom from the terrorist adversary.

Attest:

Clerk.

THIS SEARCH THIS DOCUMENT GO TO
Next Hit Forward New Bills Search
Prev Hit Back HomePage
Hit List Best Sections Help
Contents Display

THOMAS Home | Contact | Accessibility | Legal | FirstGov
commenting and trackback have been added to this blog.
political correctness gone bugshit crazy
by
Jun 17, 2006
I'd laugh, if it wasn't so stupid...
Toronto Star Pats Self on Back

The Toronto Star congratulates themselves for their laughably awful coverage of the Toronto terrorism arrests: TheStar.com - A difficult news story well told.

On A3 that day was a story that prompted other letters. “The ties that bind 17 suspects?” was the headline. An introductory paragraph said: “Aside from the fact that virtually all are young men, it’s hard to find a common denominator” and the first paragraph of the story repeated this.

Some readers accused the Star of “political correctness gone crazy” and suggested the obvious link was religion.

After the story broke, reporters spent the next day trying to find out how the accused knew each other. Did they go to the same school, work out at the same gym, live on the same street?
The story did mention an Islamic centre and referred to an unnamed imam.

The Star had reported that the investigation began when police found Internet traffic from local teens “vowing to attack at home, in the name of oppressed Muslims.” But at that early point, reporters had not confirmed that each of the accused was Muslim.




quoted from little green footballs
The public needs to ask questions about this plan
by
Jun 15, 2006
As much as congress likes to have investigations, this issue needs looking at, is this new north american union going to honor our bill of rights? I doubt it.

story
The DNC's biggest benefactor still a convicted felon
by
Jun 14, 2006
The liberal's biggest sugar-daddy, the bankroller of move-on.org is still a felon, fankly, I'm suprised he couldn't afford the French high court.

story
A story for Al Gore fans about global warming
by
Jun 14, 2006
An important read!
Too close to the truth? you tell me
by
Jun 13, 2006
June 9, 2006
Democrats Vow to Fight On After Zarqawi Loss
by Scott Ott

(2006-06-09) — As Blackberry devices and cell phones on Capitol Hill hummed with news of the death of terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi yesterday, Congressional Democrats vowed that despite the loss they would fight on in “the war on the war on terror.”

“Zarqawi will be missed because he put a human face on the futility of the illegal U.S. occupation of Iraq,” said one unnamed lawmaker, who assured a reporter that “Democrats are still optimistic. We’re still looking for the silver lining.”

Rep. John Murtha, D-PA, a former Marine and vocal critic of the military occupation of Iraq, immediately denounced “the Zarqawi massacre” and suggested that the F-16 pilot who dropped the bombs had snapped under pressure and murdered the al Qaeda leader “in cold blood.”

Sen. Arlen Specter, R-PA, demanded an explanation of the secret intelligence gathering techniques and surveillance used to find Mr. Zarqawi.

“I want to give the president an opportunity to explain the program to the Congress and to assure the American people that nobody’s civil rights were violated,” said Sen. Specter.
Meanwhile, Democrat National Committee Chairman Howard Dean and former presidential candidate Al Gore observed a moment of silence as they heard of the passing of Mr. Zarqawi, a fellow Internet pioneer

the above quoted from scrappleface
Reporters investigating facts
by
Jun 13, 2006
Here's pretty much the first reporter I've run across who's read the Quran and reported what he's found. considering recent events, I find that shocking, five years since 9/11 this is the FIRST critique on the Quran by a reporter. (that I've found, anyway, a Canadian, no less) link