Thursday, July 29, 2010

What Sharron Angle REALLY Said About The 2nd Amendment

Here is the statement by the Nevada Republican Senate candidate, Sharron Angle, whom her opponent, Democratic incumbent and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, claims is "out of the mainstream"-

‘Our Founding Fathers, they put that Second Amendment in there for a good reason, and that was for the people to protect themselves against a tyrannical government,’ Angle told conservative talk show host Lars Larson in January. ‘In fact, Thomas Jefferson said it’s good for a country to have a revolution every 20 years. I hope that’s not where we’re going, but you know, if this Congress keeps going the way it is, people are really looking toward those Second Amendment remedies.’

Out of the mainstream? This would come as shocking news to the Founding Fathers, compared to many of whom-Jefferson for one-Angle would appear quite moderate.

I know its fashionable nowadays for Democrats to want to focus on the "regulation" and "militia" clause of the 2nd Amendment, but the fact is, if you are a law-abiding citizen of the United States, you are automatically a member of that state militia, according to the constitution, and you are duty bound to supply your own weapons, including standard rifles and/or sidearms-in other words, handguns. In order for you to have them at the ready, you must do just that-have them where they are immediately available at a moments notice. That would be your home, place of business, etc.

What is the reason for this? Let's put it this way-it doesn't have a damn thing to do with duck hunting. We fought a rebellion against the British for a reason. Actually, for quite a number of reasons. We won, and in our constitution, the urge for us and our elected representatives (you know, what Democrats and Liberals call "leaders")to guard against "all enemies, foreign and domestic" actually means something. In other words, exactly what it says.

If our elected politicians put themselves in the position where they can legitimately be viewed as a domestic enemy of the people, then up to a point, yes, that is the fault of the people who voted for them, but more to the point, the onus is on them, once they are in office, to uphold and defend the constitution of the United States. If they fall short of their duties, and they become tyrants along the lines of King George and the old British Empire-or worse-then they have only themselves to blame for the potential consequences.

I don't know everything about Sharron Angle. Perhaps in some regards, she is as radical as her opponents claim she is, although I tend to think that what you are hearing about are examples of Democrats twisting words and taking them out of context. For example, I don't believe for one minute that Sharron Angle wants to impose a new kind of Prohibition on alcohol.

I should also point out that, as someone recently told me, the NRA is supporting Reid, who has actually prevented gun control legislation from reaching the floor of the Senate. This is something that neither Dick Durbin nor Charles Schumer would be likely to do should Harry Reid lose his re=election bid, and yet the Democrats manage to maintain their majority status in the Senate.

This is all something that is worthy of consideration. But one thing is a definite fact. Sharron Angle's views on the 2nd Amendment might be, in our modern era, "out of the mainstream". If so, that's a shame, because her views on the 2nd Amendment are exactly what the founding fathers intended.


The Democrats have cooked up a new strategy, if you want to dignify it with that term, that seems like its based on two-thirds perspiration and one third desperation. If they would wipe the sweat out of their eyes, they might see that the Tea Party is more popular with more people than either the Democratic or the Republican Party. Once they saw that clearly, they might realize it might not be the best idea in the world to pursue a strategy of identifying the Tea Party as part and parcel of the Republican Party. I mean, most of the people who are planning to vote are, judging by most polls, planning to vote Republican anyway. All this tactic will accomplish is allow more people to vote Republican without holding their noses. The ones that will still hold their noses and vote will possibly be slightly disappointed in the Tea Party, or maybe not-they'll still vote GOP, just not because they love the party.

The real target of this strategy independent voters, and the goal is not to convince them to vote Democratic. It's to make them want to stay home. That just goes to show you that Democrats are expecting a shellacking at the polls this November.

It's going to take more than pointing to a few questionable statements from candidates like Sharon Angle and Rand Paul to tar the GOP, or for that matter the Tea Party, with the same broad brush. But the Democrats are welcome to try anyway. Hopefully they will only make matters worse for them.

Wednesday, July 28, 2010

The Obama Agenda

Don't believe the lies. Just because Obama is not going to attend the Boy Scouts 100th anniversary Jamboree doesn't mean he is dissing the Scouts. He has a speech on the economy to give before he appears on The View, but in the meantime, he will be addressing the Scouts via teleconference.

In fact, he's already met with the Scouts. Here's a picture of the meeting that occurred earlier this year.

I guess you know what this means, don't you? Don't look now, but here comes another Cabinet Department.

Tuesday, July 27, 2010

A Dish Of Excrement Even JournoList Wouldn't Touch

The JournoList scandal is still unfolding even as we speak, and who knows what revelations are yet ahead. The Daily Caller, which broke this story, is doing Yeoman's work putting all the pieces together, and you can keep abreast of all past and future developments here.

Not all the journalists on JournoList was involved with the attempt to subvert the electoral process in order to aid in the election of their favored candidate, Barak Hussein Obama. They considered it unethical. Many other mainstream journalists and commentators feel the same, and the ones who were involved in the controversy have been greatly criticized. One of their critics has been The Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan, who recently blogged about it at The Daily Dish.

Unfortunately, in Sullivan's case, the criticism isn't based on the ethics of the endeavor. He is pissed off because they didn't go far enough. He is incensed, in fact, that they did not devote any time to the Sarah-Trig Palin controversy. Oh, they discussed it at some length. What has Sullivan so angry is they seem to at least have had enough sense to know such dirty, underhanded tactics might actually have backfired on them-or more importantly, on Obama.

Andrew Sullivan's obsession with the birth of Trig Palin is obviously based on Palin's politics. She has stated her opposition to gay marriage for one thing, and she has a long-standing affiliation with an evangelical, apostolic Christian Church. She is obviously a social conservative. In Sullivan's world view, this leaves her automatically unfit and unqualified for any high office, especially a high national office, and most especially the Presidency. Had she been elected Vice-President, she would only be a heartbeat away from the highest office in the land, the most powerful position in the world. Sullivan could not abide by that, so he went to work, and promptly rolled in the gutter. The stench of that experience is still with him, and he can't seem to shake it. But then, he doesn't want to. He is now securely on the same level as the Alaskan blogger Gryphen, who seems to have been the originator of the story of how Palin's oldest daughter, presumably, gave birth to Trig, whereupon Sarah, for some inexplicable reason, claimed him as her own. This was done apparently to avoid the scandal of a daughter who had given birth to one illegitimate child, giving birth to yet another illegitimate child, this one afflicted with Down's Syndrome.

Since there might be a time disparity involved in the two births, it was soon posited that Trig may have been premature. Also, Sarah didn't look pregnant enough at seven months, and besides, what kind of woman would get on a plane while pregnant and close to going into labor. Then there were the ears. Trigs ears were gnarled in one old photo, but seem to have underwent a drastic, noticeable improvement in later photos. Something strange is going on here. Maybe there have actually been two, or three Trigs.

Whatever the case, Sarah Palin could not have given birth to the child, so somebody else must have. If not the oldest daughter, then maybe the middle one. But since Palin seems unconcerned enough about the other illegitimate child that she didn't try to hide its birth to her unwed daughter, why would she go out of her way to hide this one by claiming maternity of the child when she obviously is not and could not be the mother?

What this is all leading up to is of course blatantly obvious, and in fact it has even been stated, albeit in the closed circles of Gryphen's blog. Palin's husband is the father of Trig-by his own daughter. They just don't know which one yet. Once they figure that out, then they can go on from there to determine how culpable Palin was. When did she learn the truth about the pregnancy, and did she know about the alleged relationship of father to daughter. Was it a one time thing, the act of a drunken Todd acting out in frustration after a period of marital discord, or was it an on-going act. And was Sarah a willing enabler of all this?

These are the kinds of people who swim in the cesspool of the American political left. This is the kind of thing they dream up. They will go to any lengths to damage, and hopefully destroy, a political opponent.

It's nothing new. It's been on-going since the earliest days of the Republic, with both sides aligned with their advocates among the special interest groups, and among the news professionals. Adams, Hamilton, Burr, and Jefferson all had their supporters amongst the press who doled out propaganda. But at least then, there were no pretenses as to objectivity. We've almost come full circle, with only the slightest facades of that pretension of objectivity, with the lions share of the support of "objective" journalists going to the left.

The JournoList people excoriated George Stephanopolis for daring to question Obama, during the debates, for his associations with the Reverend Wright and Bill Ayers. It should be pointed out of course that Stephanopolis worked in the Clinton White House, and may not have been entirely objective himself during the primary contest between Obama and Clinton.

But the JournoList members had no such compunctions about the unfair allegations against Palin-except in this one brief instance, where even the people who made up JournoList knew that such allegations might result in a popular uprising at the polls in favor of the GOP ticket. In other words, the concerns were not ethical, but pragmatic ones.

On most other given days, the journalistic profession in general comprises the largest collection of garbage, and in some cases raw sewage in the entirety of the public sphere.

Sometimes one can find Andrew Sullivan clawing his way to the top of the heap. But at other times, he is to be found happily swimming at the bottom of the cesspool.

Hat Tip to Jenn Q Pulic-on Twitter

Sunday, July 25, 2010

The Beakerkin Group And Our Anti-Yeagleyist Agenda

We were hoping to keep it a secret for a while longer, but the cat's out of the bag, so it looks like we have no other choice-The Beakerkin Group is henceforth going public. I guess its only right. We have worked behind the scenes for years now in our attempts to subvert the Constitution of the United States in order to bring about an irrevocable end to, and total destruction of, the white race. In the past, we have sought to achieve our goal in this regard by way of the promotion of the process of miscegenation. We have generally used the media as our main tool in this endeavor, but we have also used political advocacy as well.

We have done this in the background of course, trying to stay hidden, keeping our true natures concealed while we publicly have always adopted a hypocritical persona of supposed adherence to the values of conservatism, liberty, and the constitution. Ours is, after all, a secret society, and as such, our public faces have concealed a diabolical set of priorities revolving around eventual world domination.

You see, we understand full well that a mixed race of humans would be intellectually inferior, and easy to lead and control. We are also well aware that blacks in particular have a savage nature, being more or less straight out of the jungle. They are sexual beasts, whom most white women secretly desire to be ravaged by. Over time, this would be an important tool by which our eventual goal of a muddled and mixed race of humans would be achieved. It would by no means be our only strategy. There would be others, such as encouragement of the crushing burden of white guilt and liberal angst. We have also promoted acceptance of homosexuality, abortion, lax moral living in a variety of ways, such as drug and alcohol abuse, all in an attempt to undermine the family structure of society and the underpinnings of the Judaeo-Christian values that have been the bedrock of its strength.

Our most deliciously evil tactic, however, has been in persuading gullible Americans that competent consenting adults have the right to engage in romantic, sexual, and marital relationships with whomever they want so long as it is by mutual consent. Some of the biggest laughs we get when we are having our secret meetings is when we see pictures and videos of mixed race couples, obviously deceived by our propaganda. And when we see the mixed race product of one of these unions, we laugh and howl with demonic glee.

Naturally, we could not be open about such beliefs, about our true feelings and actual agenda. It cannot be stressed too often, we are-or we were-a secret cabal bent on world domination. But then it happened-Dr. David Yeagley exposed The Beakerkin Group.

I'm glad its over. I can breathe a sigh of relief now. In a way, I owe Doctor David Yeagley a debt of gratitude for revealing our secret, nefarious agenda to none other than Monica Crowley. I guess I went a little too far. I had assumed that Ms. Crowley would be easy to subvert to our cause, so I have been working on her. Unfortunately, Yeagley seems to have targeted her for conversion to his own philosophy, to his devotion to what he and his followers, the Yeagleyists, would tell you are the truly conservative American values of segregation and racial purity.

I overreacted to his propaganda, and in so warning the other denizens of Ms Crowley's blog as to his intentions, by trying to play off their sense of white guilt as I have so often successfully done with countless other naive and gullible white Americans, I inadvertently enabled Yeagley to expose our existence, and our agenda.

But while this battle has been lost, the war is by no means over. In fact, The Beakerkin Group will emerge from this defeat stronger than ever. Now, we have no reason to hide, and can openly and forthrightly stand against the Yeagleyist forces wherever we might find them.

No matter how long it takes, we will stand forever strong against Yeagley. And if he dares use his rights of free speech to oppose our goals of unlimited racial mixing and hybridization of the human species, we will do everything within our power to deny him his rights of freedom of speech and expression, and the rights of others to free association with him. We will do this by way of the deceitful, hateful, insidious and diabolical tactic known as "disagreement".

The Beakerkin Group will-we must-prevail.

Our new slogan must now be-


I'm just glad now we can be open, and that the Beakerkin Group can now be made known to all-including Beakerkin.

Saturday, July 24, 2010

The Homespun Humor Of Fred Thompson-Via Twitter

If I didn't know better-and really, I don't-I would swear Fred Thompson is toying with the idea of making another run for the Presidency, or possibly entering the political sphere in a different capacity. If not, he must just be bored, or maybe angry, and he's using Twitter as a release. But his tweets aren't boring, and they really don't come across as angry in a petulant, hateful kind of way-but Thompson sure does have a gift for the sarcastic jibe. Most politicians that Twitter put out kind of run-of-the-mill observations, or announcements of appearances, sometimes you'll get a link to a news story, etc. In other words, to most politicians, Twitter is a tool.

Fred Thompson, by contrast, looks as though he's actually having fun with Twitter.

Some examples-

Obama's recovery plan: taking money from people who create jobs, then giving it to people who can't find work.

Geithner: economic crisis due to people "living beyond their means". Yup, that's why those people won't get re-elected in 2010.

Biden: Pelosi is "the mother of health care". If that's true, then we need to report her to Child Protective Services.

Black USDA employee fired for not helping white farmer. Outrageous! All colors deserve equal level of surly, resentful govt help

Pelosi: Bush tax cuts "did not create jobs". Sure. Low unemployment rate was from all those temporary census workers Bush hired

Geithner: "every business better off now than 18 months ago." Wonder if that includes the ones that aren't in business any more?

Rangel charged w/ violating House ethics rules. No doubt accusing him of not having enough violations to meet his quota.

Greens say spill clean-up efforts hurt environment. Guys, go holler that in front of a windmill & make some clean energy

Navy uses laser to shoot down drone. Obama to only authorize its use on terrorists for corrective eye surgery.

Biden fined $219K for 2008 campaign violations. He probably figures it's worth that much just to not be President right now.

Gingrich: Obama like a "teenager with a credit card". Yup. And the 2010 elections are going to be like a big pair of scissors

Russia to spend $800M on new space center. Maybe we should sell them Cape Kennedy. Not like Obama plans to use it for anything

3.6-magnitude earthquake hit DC. President Obama said it was due to 8 years of Bush failing to regulate plate tectonics

Obama: fin ref bill would end "era of irresponsibility". Huh... I didn't know it moved election day up to July

Poll: 73 % oppose Obama's offshore drilling ban. Other 27% think oil should only come from quart bottles marked Quaker State.

Axelrod: Medicare Czar "not coming to implement the British system". Good. Obama would look silly wearing a dress and a crown.

Biden to visit flood damage in TN. I'll bet the first thing he says is "great clean-up job. I don't see a single tar ball!"

Cuomo: Ground Zero mosque opponents Islamophobic. Yeah, should be grateful. If not for radical Islam there'd BE no Ground Zero.

Hezbollah: CNN firing editor for terrorist-praising is "intellectual terrorism". Guess he's offended by the "intellectual" part

There's much more, some of it going back some time before I discovered he even had a Twitter account. One things for sure, if Thompson isn't planning on returning to politics, he would sure make one hell of a great speech writer

Friday, July 23, 2010

Fair Game

The Guardian has a story of Arab-Jewish relations that has a bit of a twist. An Israeli Jewish woman filed charges against a Palestinian Arab of East Jerusalem, who seduced her after claiming that he, too, was a Jew.

I hope that was some good pussy, because he's been sentenced to eighteen months in jail for rape by deception. Originally he was charged with rape by coercion and indecent assault, but the charges were downgraded in the course of a plea bargain.

According to the judge who tried the case, he has an obligation to protect the innocent from coercion by such smooth talking rakes, implying that he hoped to send a message that such behavior would not be tolerated or greeted with a mere slap on the wrist.

A liberal Jewish attorney, however, pondered whether the judge would have levied such a harsh sentence had the woman been an Arab and the offending male a Jew.

I'm going to be criticized by certain people no matter what I say. I will be accused of Islamophobia or sexism, one of the two, so I might as well opt for both.

On the one hand, I have to point out that, in the example given by the liberal attorney, were this to happen in an Arab or Muslim country, I can assure him the offending Jewish male would not only be sent to prison, he would be there for the rest of his life, which would be a brief one. He would soon be executed and, by the way, so would the Arab or Muslim woman.

Having said that, now allow me to doff my Islamophobic hat and don my sexist one. This woman is an obvious slut who will seemingly sleep with any male she finds attractive or in some manner desirable, provided he tells her what she wants to hear. She further displays a remarkable lack of dignity and self-respect by advertising her whorish behavior in public by filing a criminal charge.

This could set a dangerous precedent anywhere it might be adopted. Like it or not, the average male has within his DNA the genetic coding of the hunter-gatherer. In this particular case, the man in question didn't have to do a lot of hunting, she just lay down and he gathered the goods. No, its not admirable behavior, but it is entirely human. Any time a woman is faced with such potential seduction, she owes it to herself to take the time to consider the prospect that all people, male and female, present themselves with a public face designed to help them best achieve their goals, however worthy or unworthy they might be.

The onus is on her to take the time to check out the man's story. Bear in mind, this incident took place over the course of one day-the day she met him in downtown Jerusalem, where he worked as a construction worker and told her he was a Jew who was interested in a serious, long-term relationship. They went that day to the nearest hotel.

A cruel person would assert that she got exactly what she deserved-so I will assert just that. A smart person would learn from the experience and consider that maybe, just maybe, she should be a little more careful about spreading her legs for any good looking guy with a gift for gab.

Maybe the judge of this case should consider that as well, as this does not seem to me to be a case fit for any court docket anywhere. If a pregnancy resulted, or the man made unwarranted promises of marriage, or acted in such a way that proved an intent to humiliate (and no doubt he bragged to all his friends of his conquest of a "Jewish slut", but that's beside the point), then the woman might have a case, depending on the circumstances as demonstrated and proven. But so far as I know, none of that transpired. He didn't even promise her a long-term relationship. He merely claimed he was interested in one.

This is nothing but the case of a woman who is far too easy to fuck, and a man who fucked her. End of story.

Hat tip to Sonia Belle, who is having one hell of a hard time believing me when I tell her, with all the sincerity I can muster, that I, too, am a lesbian.

Thursday, July 22, 2010

Avengers Assembe!

It seems that every time you turn around there's a Comic-Con going on somewhere, but the latest one produced a bit of news that will have millions of comics fan boys the world over masturbating frantically as they gaze at their newest Robert Downey Jr as Iron Man poster.

Are you ready? Joss Whedon is set to direct the up-coming Avengers movie. Who said so? Why, Joss himself, in what seems to be a bit of a high pressure power play. He's calling dibs on the project, even though Marvel Studios has yet to issue a press release.

I think Whedon's talents are wasted here, frankly, but I can understand how this might be a dream job for Joss. Although I never bothered with Buffy, Angel, or Firefly, I did enjoy Dollhouse to the extent it made me sorry that I never bothered to tune in to these earlier offerings. But the Avengers? Unfortunately, Whedon is a little bit too suited for the project.

One of the things about Dollhouse that I disliked, that drove me nuts about it-in fact it was the only thing that marred what was otherwise a great series-is Joss's penchant to have his characters engage in snappy repartee'-whilst in the midst of combat. Can you spell C-O-R-N-Y? We're talking Adam West and Burt Ward Batman and Robin style camp. It ruined some episodes of Firefly as much as George Harrison Hindu mysticism songs ruined some Beatles albums for many people. You still loved the albums, you just wished you could forget about that annoying sitar and whiny vocal.

Well, maybe Joss will reign in that tendency in the Avengers, but I wouldn't count on it. He is just now in the process of outlining the script. He claims he sees the Avengers as a kind of family. He then goes on to explain that to him, a family is made up of people that probably shouldn't be together under the same roof.

Such is extent of Whedon's bona-fides with the realm of nerddom, he might be the only one that can hold that comics fan world together long enough to pull in big numbers for this probably ill-advised venture. But if anyone can pull it off, he can.

Whedon's challenge will be to produce a script and direct it in such a way as to maintain an expanded audience over the course of weeks, while hoping for a big enough opening weekend to more than offset any disappointing follow-up.

Big, muscular men in tight-fitting costumes are sure-fire crowd pleasers on any day, so there's already a ready-made base audience of comic books fans. If they pick the right actors, they might pull in a respectable number of female viewers as well.

Of course, I'll be going to see The Wasp.

Some Of My Best Friends Are Colored People

And the same with Rand Paul, the Republican nominee for the US Senate from Kentucky, who is maintaining a lead in the polls over Democrat Jeff Conway by a margin of 49% to 41%. That's up about three percent from the last poll taken, which had Paul up 47% to 42%. Looks like one percent of the undecideds went firmly into the decided column for Paul, while another one percent of Conway's weak support abandoned him for the Republican candidate.

Thank you National Association For The "Advancement" Of Colored People.

Wednesday, July 21, 2010


Wiseguy is in my opinion one of the greatest series in the history of network television. If you have time to watch this episode, you are in for a treat. It's the story of Vinnie Terranova, an undercover agent for the OCB (Organized Crime Bureau) working undercover to investigate the Mafia family run by Sonny Steelgrave.

Vinnie is conflicted. He had to spend a number of months in a federal prison in order to establish his cover as a mob thug. He can't reveal his cover to anyone, not even his beloved mother, who has at this point all but disowned him, and who is suffering from an incurable progressive heart condition.

The is the premiere episode of the series, in its entirety, divided up into four segments/ Courtesy of New Video Digital.

Monday, July 19, 2010

Mark Williams-Kicked Out Of Tea Party-But Why Again?

The Tea Party Federation has kicked out Mark Williams, and since his group the Tea Party Express will not follow suit, they are out of the federation as well. The stated reason has to do with a satirical post Williams posted on his blog which he has since removed. The real reason might not be so apparent, obvious though it is to some insiders. I'll go into that at the end. But first-

The Tea Party Federation is a loose organization of groups of individuals who are against increased taxes, burdensome government regulations, and further growth of big government. Their main focus is on spending deficits and the national debt, though your mileage may vary thanks to other additives, be it Christian Conservatives, Libertarians, or national defense hawks.

How do you fight something like that? Well, if you're the NAACP, you accuse them of racism, of course. It's a tried and true tactic that has worked well in the past, and unfortunately, this time is no different. Last Sunday, on Face The Nation, David Webb, spokesman for the Tea Party Federation, played defense against the accusations of Benjamin Jealous, Chairman of the NAACP, over accusations which conservative pundit George Will has described as "left-wing McCarthyism".

Webb in the course of his appearance announced that Tea Party Express leader Mark Williams would no longer be a part of the movement, and further stated it would disassociate from the Tea Party Express.


With this move, the Tea-Party Federation has proven beyond any shadow of a doubt one charge that is constantly hurled at them. They are, after all, a Republican organization. It's impossible to find a bigger wuss than people who cave in to unmerited charges of racism by firing a leader for expressing, however clumsily, what is after all a pretty prevalent attitude among not just the Tea Party, but a broad segment of Americans, including Independents. Yet, Webb seems willing to go along with a vague plan to appear with Jealous in a series of Town-Hall meetings. Of course, Jealous congratulated Webb on removing those racists from their ranks, and encouraged Webb to "keep up the good work" in what has to be seen as a purge almost worthy of Stalin.

In the meantime, Ben Jealous ignores the rants of New Black Panther leaders who express such sentiments as "crackers should be killed" and that they should "kill cracker babies". Cracker, of course, is a pejorative term for white people. Yet Jealous justifies this lapse due to the Black Panthers not being members of his group. So then, the Tea-Party is? Bullshit! If a group of fourteen whites, of any affiliation or none, expressed the desire to "kill niggers" and "jigaboo babies", all hell would break loose, and Jealous would be at the forefront of demanding some kind of prosecution for terrorist threats. incitement to violence, possible civil rights violations, and God knows what else. Yet, such threats uttered by the New Black Panthers are none of his concern? Incredible!

Meanwhile, as the media jumped at the opportunity to engage in the public humiliation of the Tea Party at the hands of the NAACP, it blatantly ignores the Justice Departments alleged memo to refrain from investigating and prosecuting African Americans like the New Black Panther Party accused of poll tampering and voter intimidation. When Bob Schieffer had Eric Holder also on a different segment of Face The Nation, he refused to ask him anything pertaining to this charge, later having the chutzpah to claim that he knew nothing about it. I have this strange idea the real reason might be Schieffer is just another one of those cowards Holder was talking about some months back. Or maybe this is one of those conversations about race Holder isn't quite courageous enough to hold himself. Why do I feel this point was made clear to Schieffer prior to the segment?

The Tea Party has lost the opportunity to score a big touchdown. David Webb, as the designated quarterback of the movement, had the opportunity to lob a thirty yard pass but while he had wide receivers down field, open and waiting, he spiked the ball unnecessarily. Twenty yard penalty. Second down and thirty. Most of the Tea-Party leaders are on the defensive about these ridiculous allegations. Mark Williams has been one of the few exceptions to this rule, the response of most of the rest being tepid at best.

The irony is, Williams has been made a scapegoat in a sacrifice to the demons of political correctness, by a federation of groups that outwardly oppose the stifling atmosphere of that political hell. And what is even worse, they do so with a black man, David Webb, who is probably now being derided in leftist circles as the "house Negro" of the Tea Party movement, much as Michael Steele is considered more or less the lawn jockey of the Republican Party, unfortunately for valid reason. The GOP doesn't get it, and that's understandable. I had hoped the Tea Party would know better than to play such a transparent game. "Oh, we're not prejudiced, look we have some black members, and one of them is one of our leaders, and he'll tell it like it is."

Could anything possibly be more humiliating that to trot out a black person to reassure people that you're not prejudiced, only to have him act as club bouncer to somebody who allegedly is. And for what?

Here's the piece Williams wrote on his blog, which has now been taken down, though thankfully copied and pasted by Gawker, which did so as an attack on Williams and on the Tea-Party. It's a satire, based on what Ben Jealous might have written to President Abraham Lincoln concerning the Emancipation Proclamation, had he been alive and the head of the NAACP at the time.

Dear Mr. Lincoln

We Colored People have taken a vote and decided that we don't cotton to that whole emancipation thing. Freedom means having to work for real, think for ourselves, and take consequences along with the rewards. That is just far too much to ask of us Colored People and we demand that it stop!

In fact we held a big meeting and took a vote in Kansas City this week. We voted to condemn a political revival of that old abolitionist spirit called the 'tea party movement'.

The tea party position to "end the bailouts" for example is just silly. Bailouts are just big money welfare and isn't that what we want all Coloreds to strive for? What kind of racist would want to end big money welfare? What they need to do is start handing the bail outs directly to us coloreds! Of course, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is the only responsible party that should be granted the right to disperse the funds.

And the ridiculous idea of "reduce[ing] the size and intrusiveness of government." What kind of massa would ever not want to control my life? As Coloreds we must have somebody care for us otherwise we would be on our own, have to think for ourselves and make decisions!

The racist tea parties also demand that the government "stop the out of control spending." Again, they directly target Colored People. That means we Colored People would have to compete for jobs like everybody else and that is just not right.

Perhaps the most racist point of all in the tea parties is their demand that government "stop raising our taxes." That is outrageous! How will we Colored People ever get a wide screen TV in every room if non-coloreds get to keep what they earn? Totally racist! The tea party expects coloreds to be productive members of society?

Mr. Lincoln, you were the greatest racist ever. We had a great gig. Three squares, room and board, all our decisions made by the massa in the house. Please repeal the 13th and 14th Amendments and let us get back to where we belong.


Precious Ben Jealous, Tom's Nephew National Association for the Advancement of Colored People Head Colored Person

So there you have it. Like I said, clumsily written and not really that funny as a piece of satire, perhaps somewhat over the top. Yet, perfectly illustrative of the mind-set of the "leaders" of many liberal black citizen's advocate groups, including but by no means limited to the NAACP, who tend to support the big government and entitlement policies of the Democratic Party.

I reproduced it not to disparage Williams, but because its right on. Ben Jealous is nothing more nor less than a would-be Democratic Party Plantation straw boss protecting his own position and personal interests. And while it might be clumsily expressed, and a bit over-the-top, that makes it no less relevant. Bear in mind, Williams wrote this as though Jealous on behalf of the NAACP organization might have written it-not as how black people as a whole might have felt. To ignore that misses the whole point.

So was this the real reason Williams was kicked out of the movement? I doubt it, though it did provide the perfect excuse many have been looking for. The Tea Party Express is actually an arm of a Republican Party PAC called Our Country Deserves Better, and as such, has been at the forefront of trying to bring the Tea Party and all its disparate groups into the political mainstream. As in any such situation, it has attracted rivals who have their own ideas as to who should set the pace and control the Tea Party agenda, and all the power that might ultimately bring. Those ideas, of course, chiefly revolve around themselves to no less an extent than Williams or Robert Kaloogian, founder of Our Country Deserves Better, might like to see themselves as the movement leaders.

There might be valid reason to remove the Tea Party Express, and Williams, I don't know. I can see where there are other ways in which he can be and has been a divisive influence. When Williams makes statements to the effect that his purpose is to jump in front of the parade and say follow me, on the grounds that somebody needs to lead what amounts to a herd of cats, it becomes pretty clear that he wants a leadership role. It becomes pretty disingenuous then for him to claim that there are no Tea Party leaders, that they are merely concerned citizens who are all their own leaders, to paraphrase him.

But if the Tea Party Federation has a valid reason to remove Williams and the Express, they should do it for those reasons, and do so openly, without opting for the appearance of placating a group of race hustlers like the NAACP and their made up controversy in which, thus far, even Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson has avoided entangling themselves.

The best response thus far to the NAACP charges of racism, that I have heard, was the response by Andrew Breitbart to NAACP head Ben Jealous. It was brief, and to the point.

"You can go to hell" he told Jealous.

That's really all that needs to be said.

Friday, July 16, 2010

All Right, If You Won't Listen To Me-

Maybe you'll listen to Charles Krauthammer.

The short version-Even if the GOP wins big this year, if they aren't careful Obama could win re-election in 2012 and pick up seats, maybe regain or retain his majority in one or both Houses of Congress, and go on from there to fundamentally change America, for conceivably far into the future.

Krauthammer goes me one better though. According to him, Obama and his inner circle are counting on it, and are not at all blind to the coming election loss for their party that this year seems to portend. For them, it might well be an acceptable trade off.

In other words, Obama is looking at the long-term and couldn't really care less about short term losses.

It's actually scary, sobering reading, and I would advise all libertarian, conservative, federalist, and independent minded Americans-and even some honest, well-meaning liberals (deluded however they might be) to read the article linked above.

If conservative Republicans take the House, and/or the Senate, they need to be very careful. They need to be more than just obstinate opponents of the Obama leftist agenda. They need to offer worthy, compelling alternatives, and they need to set the tone of the debate, not let the Democrats define it, or especially not define them. They need to be combative, but reasoned. They need to be passionate, but rational.

They need to, like Obama, think of the long term.

Thanks to Sarah Palin for this article.

McCain-Hayworth Debates

Tonight and tomorrow night will be the only scheduled debates between John McCain and JD Hayworth. Hayworth, a former House member, is running against McCain in the GOP primary for the Arizona Senate seat McCain currently holds.

I have mixed feelings here. My hope would be Hayworth would win the primary, but only if I was dead sure he would go on to win the general election. That I'm not so sure about, but its probably a moot point anyway. In most polls, McCain is holding a ten point plus lead over Hayworth, who lost his House seat some years earlier over his propensity to support bills that were considered by many to be examples of bloated government spending. Since then, Hayworth has worked as a right-wing talk radio host. He is supported by the Tea Party, although interestingly enough, McCain has the backing of former VP running mate Sarah Palin. I chalk this up to gratitude on her part, but it could also be she thinks she sees the writing on the wall. Without McCain, the seat will go Democratic.

If that's true, then I guess its worth putting up with the old RINO, to a point. And I have always been at the forefront about this. If the Tea-Party expects to wrest control of the GOP they can probably do that in incremental stages, but if they expect to do so and at the same time make and keep the Republicans the majority party, then they have to accept that some of their members, by virtue of their constituencies, are going to be RINOs. That's just the world we live in. Nobody ever said it was easy.

Texas-Number One

The number one state in the Union for business is Texas, according to CNBC, which ranked all the states according to the following criterion-

cost of doing business, workforce, economy, education, quality of life, technology and innovation, transportation, cost of living, business friendliness, and access to capital.

Governor Rick Perry credits "low taxes, reasonable and predictable regulations, and a skilled workforce" with Texas's success.

Last year, Texas ranked number two, behind Virginia. This year, the two states have traded places. But the most surprising thing about the top ten states in the list?

Massachusetts is number five, and Minnesota is number eight. I'm guessing it must have something to do with availability of capital and tax incentives, along with a skilled workforce. I wouldn't count on any of that lasting long. Here's the complete list-

* Texas
* Virginia
* Colorado
* North Carolina
* Massachusetts
* Iowa
* South Dakota
* Minnesota
* Utah
* Georgia

UPDATE-I just got a comment from Quimbob, who provided a link to a different survey which relates a slightly different survey which, while still ranking Texas number one, ranks North Carolina, not Virginia, at number two behind Texas and, more importantly in contrast to the CNBC survey, puts Massachusetts in the bottom five. I tend to believe this survey over CNBC.

It also goes into some striking detail regarding the problems in California, which according to one respondent is so bad that, according to him, if they could grow their crops in Reno, they'd move their plants there tomorrow. He goes on to say that businesses have completely opted out of doing business with Sacramento, so bad is the anti-business environment there. And of course, when they leave, the jobs go with them.

This serves to verify my feelings that, before long, California will be the American Greece. Actually, it already is. It just hasn't gotten around to asking for a bail-out. Give it time, because as I said before, California will be considered "too big to fail".

This also goes a long way towards explaining Scott Brown's recent vote in favor of the Financial Reform bill. If California is the American Greece, Massachusetts is probably in line to be the American Portugal. Brown's vote makes sense in the context of laying the groundwork for federal aid, and even if the GOP takes over both houses of Congress in 2010 (unlikely as far as the Senate goes), the infrastructure will be in place, and the onus will be on the new Republican House and possibly Senate majorities to accede or deny to any such aid. Such a scenario is unlikely before this November, but between then and November 2012, it becomes a near probability, and will provide the Democrats a hammer with which to hit Republicans. And it might well work, as the majority of people in dire straights by that time will be, shall we say, not looking at the long term, but living in the moment.

In the meantime, I have to wonder how Massachusetts could end up in such wildly different positions in two different polls. Bear in mind that CNBC is a sister network to NBC and MSNBC, and they might have a reason to paint Massachusetts in a more flattering light than what it really deserves. I was so stunned by the first poll it was hard to let it pass without comment. Consider the "Big Dig" which lasted for years longer than anticipated at staggeringly high cost overruns. It is a state where bureaucracy and inefficiency is the normal cost of doing business, where labor unions are a malignant influence, and state regulations are on the one hand a drain and an obstacle, and at the same time a cash cow for crooked regulators and for contractors looking for kick-backs.

If you really want to know why the business community is holding onto 1.4 trillion dollars of assets, and why many others want to outsource production to more friendly business climates, look no further than the current state of affairs, and try to understand that its probably only going to get worse-much worse-because of it.

And the liberals still don't get it. They never will understand that the business community is under no obligation to invest their money-and the operative term is THEIR MONEY-in what they can't help but see as a losing proposition, one that if they play along with, will only result in even more massive business failures down the line.

Government make-work is not the answer. That is just temporary relief for a relative few, at best. At worse, it just adds to the tax burden. Nor can the private business sector be expected to invest their money in what would amount to a charitable enterprise that would leave their companies in danger of collapse.

There has to be a better way, but it will require some more pain, and more sacrifice, before people get it.

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

Alvin Greene's Job Creation Program

UPDATE-Alvin Greene now has his own Twitter account, GreeneForSenate. You can also access it and others from my new Twitter Sidebar, The Twitterbug Corral.

UPDATE UPDATE-Well, its probably not him after all, but its a pretty damn good satire site if its not him. Not too much over the top. Well, unless you discount the bit about giving the keynote address at the next NAACP meeting. DAMN!

Unemployment is now somewhere around ten percent, more than that if you include the people who've stopped looking for work. We've got to put people back to work in this country, but how remains elusive, or at least it has until-well, it might actually hinge on the outcome of the up-coming South Carolina Senate race.

South Carolina Democratic Senate candidate Alvin Greene has a solution. It's so brilliant I have to wonder if he thought it up all by himself, or rather some, er, genius, maybe an unnamed adviser, gave him this plan over a couple of six-packs and a reefer or two.

Alvin's plan, in his own words-

“ Another thing we can do for jobs is make toys of me, especially for the holidays. Little dolls. Me. Like maybe little action dolls. Me in an army uniform, air force uniform, and me in my suit. They can make toys of me and my vehicle, especially for the holidays and Christmas for the kids. That’s something that would create jobs. So you see I think out of the box like that. It’s not something a typical person would bring up. That’s something that could happen, that makes sense. It’s not a joke. ”

Of course, Alvin is by no means a "typical person". And you know what? I'm starting to think he's going to win. I'll go you one better. I would almost be willing to bet good money he will be the one Senate candidate who will keep the Democrats in the Senate majority.

Because, let's face it, the Universe hates all of us, and I think it might have a special degree of loathing for South Carolina-especially the no-count Upcountry.

Hat Tip-Rusty of The Jawa Report.

Black Gold-Texas Tea

Venezuela might have more oil than Saudi Arabia, huh? That settles it. What say we pull ourselves up by our boot straps. Let's kick Chavez's ass out of there and take dat shit. Muahahahahahahaaaaaaaa

Camelot's Round Table Found-Or So They Say

At first glance, the reports out of England make a lot of sense. According to some archaeologists, the Round Table of King Arthur was not a piece of furniture after all. It was, instead, an abandoned Roman amphitheater (pictured in the above drawing at bottom left corner of town square) that could seat as many as one thousand people. They say this because they think they have discovered it in a town called Chester, sometimes called West Chester. It was abandoned by the Romans after the fall of Rome to Odoacer and the subsequent large scale invasions of Britain by the Saxons. But the native Britons of the day held off the invading hordes until well into the sixth century, when the Saxons and some other Germanic tribes finally overwhelmed the former Roman province. But until that time, Chester might have been a major point of defensive operations. A headquarters, if you will.

According to the archaeologists making these claims, the amphitheater contains an execution stone, and a wooden shrine to Christian martyrs, as detailed long ago by the Christian monk and later canonized Saint Gildas.

There's only one problem. Gildas, who wrote extensively about this era and in fact was at least a near contemporary-never mentioned King Arthur. Or Camelot. Or the Round Table. The closest he came was a mention of a certain Ambrosius, who is said, by later sources, to have been an elder brother of Arthur's father Uther, and father to Merlin.

This of course does not prove Arthur didn't exist, as Gildas mentions several kings of the era, though not by name. What it does seem to imply is that, if Arthur did exist, he might not have been that big a deal. He might not have even been a king, but a kind of warlord. And of course we can't discount the possibility that he may have been mentioned under another name, possibly one of the five kings Gildas excoriated, the most important of whom was Maelgyn Gwynned, a Welsh king whose name sounds or looks just enough like Guinevere to grab your attention. In fact, that was the name of his kingdom, and Gildas seems to have hated him for some reason that is not completely known or understood, though I suspect it to be for corruption of the clergy-i.e., bribery. Or, it could have been the opposite. Gwynned might not have been sufficiently impressed by Gildas to have patronized his support. Unfortunately, that is probably something else that will forever remain a mystery.

One of Gwynned's fellow kings, who due to his association also earned Gildas's ire, was judging by his name a seeming descendant of the aforementioned Ambrosius.

A more trustworthy source for information about Arthur, however, might be the bard Taliesin, also a near contemporary of the day, who might have mentioned Arthur, or might not have. That depends on whether the alleged oral history by him in which Arthur is briefly mentioned, as written down in the eleventh century, is an accurate reflection of his work, or whether elements were added. Even if the account is accurate, it is not good for much beyond that, as the account is short both in duration and detail. Still, it would prove Arthur existed, as Taliesin's work is generally considered historical, and more than likely accurate.

My own feelings about the Arthurian legend is mixed. I want to believe it. I'm not meaning by this the more obviously fantastical tales of supernatural fantasy, but just the basic facts, if they exist, that might have provided inspiration for the medieval tales.

My objective feelings, however, are that Arthur, even if he really existed, represents as we have come to know him a symbol more of Medieval ideals transposed onto a period of time called the Dark Ages for a good reason. Nobody knows but very precious little about them. Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table provided a historical facade that served to fill in some much needed blanks, and at the same time imposed on the public imagination of the day an idealized personification of the very sort of medieval ideals of chivalry that could not have possibly existed under such conditions as existed during the Dark Ages.

And if Arthur really did exist, we must also realize that most of those who are listed as his contemporaries did not. Lancelot and his affair with Arthur's Queen, for example, are obvious fictions, as is Merlin, Gawain's battle with the Green Knight, Galahad's search for the Grail, etc.

At most and at best, what we have is a brave king, who might have led a relatively small force of desperate allies in a last ditch effort to save their formerly civilized country from invading hordes of savage barbarians, and who may have been lost to history for all his efforts, save for a few sentences strung together almost as an afterthought, and who was for whatever reason made the central focus of a magnificent legend that would have probably been a source of great mirth to the genuine article and to those who actually knew him.

Perhaps we need our King Arthur's, our Robin Hood's, and all our other heroes, and have needed them since long before there was ever a movie or television medium, or even printing press to help us fulfill our need for such inspirational tales of heroism, back in days when the written medium and a few rare traveling minstrel shows were all that served to fill such needs.

And of course, they also might conceivably help you get funding for your next archaeological project.

Monday, July 12, 2010

World Cup Follies

When I learned a friend of mine was going to attend the World Cup, I knew I might hit the mother-lode, since everybody that was anybody was going to be there. As fate would have it, my friend Mohammed Shahiri, who used to blog quite some time back at Aladdinslad, was lucky enough to get a place in proximity to two of the most recognizable faces to attend the South African event.

Although he was shocked at what transpired, he was good enough to relay the information to me. One should not be too surprised at what I will soon relate.

After all, Mick Jagger has a mouth that practically begs, "Please let me suck your dick." Whereas former President Bill Clinton has a libido that practically begs, "Please suck my dick."

So then it stands to reason that, when these two get together, you know that nothing but hi-jinks could possibly ensue.

And so, without further ado, I present to you the basic transcription of what was said at the time the various following pictures were taken.

As we shall see, Mick was initially reluctant. But, Bill was insistent. And determined.

"Oh come on Mick, you can do it. We've got enough cover down here no one will see it."

Naturally, though, Mick had concerns. After all, forewarned is forearmed.

"Okay Bill, but before I go through with this I have to ask you-is it bigger than this?"

Unfortunately, no matter how many times you go through something, there are some things that are just impossible to prepare for.

"Damn Bill that tasted like rotten death. You need vitamins mate."

But, as it turns out, all was not as it seemed, and Bill wasn't quite as clever as he thought he was. There are always those ready to exploit your weaknesses. But, we suppose Bill will make the best of what might otherwise be a, let us say, embarrassing situation. Because, no sooner had Mick taken his leave than-

"Damn, all right Wolf, Katie, I'll keep you two in the loop whenever something goes down, I promise. Damn that fucking Mick."

Even though Mick seems to have helped set Bill up after all, I'm sure he will make it up to Bill someway. Maybe he'll sing Tumbling Dice at Chelsea's wedding.

Sunday, July 11, 2010

John LeCarre Couldn't Have Made This Up

While many have been fascinated by tales of Russian spies spending years in deep cover while living fairly ordinary lives and pretty much accomplishing nothing of known or revealed importance, another tale of espionage is unfolding, one that might well be considerably more serious and damaging. It is now being alleged that something like 260,000 documents have been pilfered from the State Department.

I want to stress, not a mere 260,000 PAGES of documents, but 260,000 SEPARATE DOCUMENTS!

So what do these documents contain? It is said that they include blistering assessments of foreign leaders, operational details involving covert activities, information regarding foreign policy decisions, and even classified files of meetings with Israeli officials, among many other embarrassing and damaging files of information.

The culprit, supposedly, is U.S. Army Intelligence Analyst Bradley Manning, who was arrested sometime in June of this year in connection with the leaking of an explosive video of attack-helicopter gun camera footage from Iraq. Whether that arrest is what led to the discovery of the leak of these documents is not exactly clear.

The alleged recipient of the documents are, like in the Iraq video case, Wikileaks, a website that specializes in serving as a repository for whistle blowers to leak documents that prove unscrupulous and criminal actions by government agencies and officials.

Manning is currently in jail, and Wikileaks has issued a denial as to its own involvement in the case of the disappearing documents.

Julian Assange, the Australian born founder of Wikileaks, has curiously seemed to disappear over the last few days. No one seems to know where he is.

What I wouldn't give to get to read these documents, if that is they really exist. I guess that's the point. No one knows for sure where they went, or who has them, or how and when they might turn up, or where. But if and when they do, I can almost promise you they would be worth their weight in gold to certain relevant parties.

Hat Tip-Defense Tech

UPDATE-Although it is not really surprising, Bradley Manning has his supporters, and one of them, Mike Gogulski, has started a web-site called Help Bradley Manning, with the tag-line "Because True Heroism Merits No Punishment".

The site seems clearly based only on his status as a whistle-blower related to the release of the aforementioned video. There is no mention on the site, that I have seen, related to the release of the 260,000 documents. I want to be clear, however, that there is no proof Manning himself was involved in this. But if he was, he is obviously going away for a very long time, more than likely for the rest of his life. He might even conceivably face the prospect of execution.

I should also mention that Julian Assange, the co-founder of Wikileaks, is being sought in connection with the leaking of the helicopter-attack video leaked by Manning.

CORRECTION-I stated in the post that Manning was arrested earlier this month, which was incorrect. I have corrected it. He was evidently arrested sometime last month, as the first post in the aforementioned blog Help Bradley Manning is dated June 17th of 2010.

Wednesday, July 07, 2010

Red State-A Sorry State Of Affairs


I said a long time ago, there's a war going on for control of the Republican Party, and at the rate its going, its going to tear the party apart. That is yet another reason why I say its really presumptuous to assume a sure victory for any side, this year or any year.

I was reminded of this today, when my new diary at Red State, that I started under the name Federalist Pagan, was unceremoniously dumped. Well, I assume it was, since I have been barred from the site, thanks to the machinations of a man named Art Chance.

So who is Art Chance? Well, it so happens that he is a retired labor relations thug formerly in the employee of the Administration of former Alaska Governor Frank Murkowski. Yes, as you might have guessed, he has a hard-on for Sarah Palin, but not in a good way. My first, and apparently last post at Red State, was a re-post of this one here in which I mused about her potential as a possible future Chairwoman of the RNC to replace the bumbling Michael Steele.

Chance started trolling my blog, saying nothing of substance, just insulting me, and the Governor, while accusing me of having the hots for her.

Although I did engage him in this dispute, I was incredibly restrained, and avoided engaging in foul language or inordinate name-calling. Amazingly, I was still banned from Red State for stating the obvious, that this outrageous thug was a troll, and evidently for daring to debate the issue with him to begin with. Before they banned me, however, I was deluged with some friends he brought over to my site, assuring me I didn't know what I was talking about, in so many words. One asshole told me I had said quite enough, and that I should leave, and perhaps pray to Zeus for wisdom. He and the others were amazed that I dared to engage in open dispute with the mighty Chance.

Obviously, I was supposed to be impressed by this cretin's credentials. Unfortunately for him and his band of sycophants, who had the unmitigated gall to call me a Palin sycophant, I am not impressed with anyone. I support Palin, but I am not part of any personality cult that might surround her, nor do I have the "hots" for the lady. I just happen to be impressed with her resume as a reformer of Alaska politics who stood up to the good old boys, and the corrupting influence of the oil industry.

Chance, meanwhile, worked for Frank Murkowski. Whoooooo, everybody should bow down, or you might get shot down by a corrupt retired government official who worked for one of the most corrupt Republican Governors in Alaskan history.

I am not the only one who has run afoul of him on Red State, nor am I the first to be banned from the site because of it. Nor are criticisms of him and his tactics the exclusive purview of the left. His victims on Red State, such as myself, are conservatives, anyone who is a Tea-Party member or sympathizer, or most especially it would seem, anyone who is a Palin supporter. A post from the blog Conservatives4Palin goes into some detail about his pervasive influence at Red State, which they claim due to mainly his influence is becoming another Little Green Footballs.

What he did as a labor relations leader in Murkowski's administration was threaten workers who tried to organize. He even brags about it. Mess with him, go against the system, and your livelihood is at stake. That is the attitude he carries with him even today, it seems. He will make an example out of you. There is a special place in hell for people like that. But while he is in this world, he is going to make sure that he has a special place on the payroll of the good old boys of Alaska, and the Republican Party of Frank Murkowski. Anyone who sets out to reform the party and its corruption, or the corruption of the state in general, or Gods willing, the national party, and end the inordinate influence of the oil industry, will earn his special ire.

And that in a nutshell explains his attitude towards Sarah Palin, or anyone who supports her. Amazingly, he calls her ruthless for the way she exposed the corruption and used this as a means to achieve power in Alaska politics.

Yet, for all his talk, this is a guy who works for a system that doesn't mind one whit whether the Republican Party stays in permanent minority status, which in a sense would be the status it would deserve. People outside the party tend not to understand this. These kind of Republicans have no ideology to speak of. They are anti-communist, but that is only for self-serving reasons. They are not concerned with your freedom and liberties, or even your basic human rights. They just don't want their property expropriated.

But at the same time, they are more than willing to compromise on issues that would make it tough on the average person, most especially their smaller, weaker business rivals, so long as they get to maintain a certain status quo, which amounts to a small set of goals-

One-Tax breaks for they and their more important, well-connected contributors. It doesn't have to be enshrined in the tax code, a few well-placed loopholes will do just fine, thank you. In fact, that might even be preferable.

Two-Pork to take home to the folks in their states and districts.

Three-Government contracts for their contributors.

Four-A hefty retirement package with medical care and the ability to use their contacts to gain further enrichment in the private sector once their career in public service, if you really must dignify it with such a term, is over.

There you have it. These people are more than willing to talk shit about religion and patriotism, as long as they don't actually have to walk the walk. The knuckle-dragging base can do that for them. They just better not expect too much in return. They just better get their asses out and vote for what little they do get, if they don't want the Democrats to take away the few crumbs the Republican insiders throw their way in their vast munificence.

And what is really maddening is, they are so cocksure of themselves, they don't even try to hide it anymore. They are aware that the base hates Obama to such an extent, the Republicans are likely to make big gains in the next mid-terms.

They'll be damned if they are going to let Sarah Palin and those Tea-Party nut jobs oust them from their perches of power in the GOP. They got a good thing coming their way, and by God nobody is going to take it away from them. Not Sarah Palin, not the Tea-Party crowd, and most certainly no small-time blogger like me. At least, not as long as they can sew up the bigger conservative blogs, like Red State, to such an extent that anybody who dares speak out against them or for their inter-party rivals, are shut down, shut up, and shut out.


A person affiliated with Red State has made a couple of comments here in which he alleges that I made several provocative statements, inferring that I engaged in name calling and foul language, something which in fact I did not do.

He then went out of his way to inform another commenter that my diary has not been removed from Red State, though I have been banned. I just lately learned of a bizarre tactic utilized by the site's moderators against banned commenters. In effect, they edit their diaries to make them appear to have said things to justify their being banned. If anyone calls them on it, they use the vandalized diary as "evidence" against the banned diarist.

Here's the link to the Wikipedia page.

Here's a specific quote from the text of the article-

While any person may sign up to write blog posts in RedState's diary section, moderators have banned users identifying as conservative due to specific policy disagreements, replacing their signature line and all previous diaries with taunting messages.[3][4]

And here's another paragraph that goes into a bit more detail.

The site's moderators have been criticized for banning some users who disagree or dissent permanently from the site. Responses to any viewpoints deemed unwanted by site moderators have included replacing all of a person's diaries with messages designed to be offensive.[8] Banned users may be accused of being "progressive trolls"[4] or "moby," the latter being a person with over-the-top political positions making conservatives look bad.[9] Banned users may be greeted with an error message reading "601 Database redigestation error." The site moderators' behavior is a topic of discussion among moderate conservatives and internet discussion sites.[10]

Some will point out that this is Wikipedia, but I have no doubt as to the authenticity of the article's claims.

Red State, from my experience with it, might best be compared to a large public school system run by a disorganized, dysfunctional school board made up of high school dropouts, and who are in fact teenagers themselves, either in years or in intellectual and emotional capacity.

Unfortunately, they are a privately run company, owned by Eagle Publishing, which also owns Regnery Publishing and Human Events. As such, the best thing to do is simply stay away from them, and find another source for your political news and conservative commentary. There are certainly more choices out there-bigger ones, better ones, and certainly, one should hope, more ethical ones.

Tuesday, July 06, 2010

NASA-Just Don't Go There

NASA Director Charles Bolden, in an interview with Al-Jazeera English, claims NASA's major goal under Obama is to reach out to the Islamic world. I agree with what Charles Krautheimer had to say on Fox news about that.

"This is a new height in fatuousness," Krauthammer said. "NASA was established to get America into space and to keep is there. This idea to feel good about their past and to make achievements is the worst combination of group therapy, psychobabble, imperial condescension and adolescent diplomacy."

I can't put it any better than that.

The Obama White House, though, claims that Bolden misspoke. Our main mission will always be to boldly go where no man has gone before, its just that as it happens, the moon no longer qualifies. Been there done that. On to Mars and beyond. Some day. And when we do, we will have the cooperation of the Muslim world, and in fact, the whole world. That is the Obama space program, in a nutshell. That's what the outreach to Muslims via NASA is all about.

However, recognition of their contributions in science and math notwithstanding, I'm thinking there might well be a cultural sensitivity issue at work here as well, one that might well go beyond appreciation of the science and math traditions the Muslim world mostly lifted from the Chaldeans and other ancient cultures whom they conquered, many of who have strangely all but disappeared from the face of the earth. No, they did not journey off to another galaxy. Another dimension, perhaps, one somewhat of a spiritual nature, but that's another issue of ethnic and cultural genocide best reserved for a future post.

In fairness, the Islamic world did supposedly make one important contribution, in the invention of Algebra, but that's not exactly what I'm getting at either.

Some of the greatest insults in all Islam involve the lowly shoe-showing the heel, or throwing a shoe, or striking a person or image with a shoe, or walking upon a person's face or image with the soles of one's shoes.

Therefore, it stands to reason that in going to the moon lo, these many moons ago, we committed a grievous insult to Islam by-walking on the moon, which is sacred to their God Allah, for this you see is the sacred boat in which he sails across the heavens.

We Americans are such outrageous and disrespectful infidels. Our tax money sponsored Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin, and more who followed on their insensitive journey to what may well the holiest place in all of Islam. And in so stepping on the surface of the moon, these satanic people thus pressed the accursed soles of their space shoes-in a very real way, mind you-onto the face of Allah himself.

Is it any wonder God-fearing Muslims the world over despise us so much?

Hat Tip-NewsBusters

Monday, July 05, 2010

Who Should Replace Michael Steele As RNC Chairman

Its beginning to look like Michael Steele has said one stupid thing too many, and now almost everybody in the Republican Party wants him to resign or be removed from his position as Chairman of the RNC. Although I'm technically not a Republican, I have to weigh in here and say that I think it would really be better all the way around if he would step down. But if worse comes to worse, he should be removed, if that's the only way to solve this problem. I just can't see him sticking around any longer.

The question then becomes, who to replace him with. I think the answer is obvious.

I can think of a few negatives, of course. The most obvious one is, she is unlikely to gain the approval of the Inside-The Beltway crowd that actually control the GOP. There is also the potential that she would be such a lightning rod she might actually increase Democratic voter turnout. Finally, if she wishes to run for President in 2012, it might hinder her prospects were she to take such a position this relatively close to that next election.

But, on the plus side, the most obvious response to problem number one is if enough people, especially Tea party folks, demand she be appointed as Steel's replacement, we could make it awful difficult for the party apparatchiks to refuse to accede.

For every one Democrat that comes out in force, the Republicans should at least be able to go them half a one better, and probably more than that. But I would take a 3-2 advantage in increased turnout any time, especially since the GOP currently already enjoys an advantage. It would still be a rout in favor of the Republicans. It might even be a massacre.

As for the final point, there's always 2016, which might be better for her anyway. I am not one of these who assumes Obama is sure to go down to defeat in his re-election bid. That assumes a lot of facts that aren't in evidence, nor could they be. A lot can change in a year and a half. Those who are willing to bet the farm that Obama is sure to suffer the fate of Jimmy Carter in 1980 tend to forget the outcome of the 1994 mid-term elections that swept the Democrats out of power in both houses of Congress, and how that led, just two years later, to Bill Clinton easily winning re-election in 1996. One is well-advised to recall that, during those '94 mid-terms, Clinton was probably more unpopular than Obama is now. Obama's approval ratings are still hovering well into the forty percent range. Clinton would have killed for that high a poll rating in '94. Yet, by the time the '96 election rolled around, nobody seriously gave Bob Dole any chance of pulling out what would have been a shocking upset victory.

There are times for cheerleading, and then there are times for serious contemplation and practical considerations.

Sarah Palin brings both qualities as a potential Chairwoman of the RNC. It would be an appointment that would rock the world and I believe it would usher in the worse defeat in the history of the Democratic Party.

I should conclude by pointing out the fact that, although you never heard it trumpeted in the MSM, Sarah Palin was just last month cleared of all ethics charges filed against her. Think of how much fun it would be when Democrats brought up all those bogus complaints, for Brian Williams, for just one example, to have to explain that, "well, she was actually cleared of those charges as of around June 8th of this year-I just forgot to mention it. Must have been the oil spill."

Of course, the news media was out in force in reporting the charges, and investigating them, and probably in some cases filing them. But when it came to reporting that she was cleared, of every single one of them, they suddenly had other things to do.

There couldn't be a better example of poetic justice than Sarah Palin being named as the Chairwoman of the Republican National Committee.

Sunday, July 04, 2010

Independence Day

This fall on the UB Network, there will be yet another in a long line of incarnations of the character Nikita, based on the French film of the same name, which has spawned three remakes and an earlier television series on USA-and all of which managed to miss the point of the original film.

All of the films, and the first series, were targeted at a young demographic, and the newer version will doubtless be unique probably for merely being targeted at an even younger demographic, American teens.

Many of these teens will have a chance to view the series on DirecTV, which lately has been advertising its services as allowing a program or movie to be filmed in one room, to be viewed in a different room at a later date. Many of these teens will doubtless view the film in privacy of their own private bedroom or lounge.

It's a far cry from the days of yesteryear, when our great-grandparents to a large extent walked miles to go to school, often in inclement weather, in clothes stitched together from whatever fabric was available, using hand-me-down books. Over the years, however, these children of the past helped build the America of recent years, ultimately serving to enhance its already considerable reputation as the envy of the world.

Now, children in other parts of the world, in South and Central America, Asia,and Africa, are gladly walking miles to school, and are delighted to have a chance to study out of six year old math and science books and to eat a bowl of rice to see them through their day, while enduring conditions some of our hardiest pioneers might well have balked at, existing in the atmosphere of repressive and often violent murderous regimes, some of them playing soccer to relieve their frustrations, or just for a brief interval of fun and escape.

While they waste their time, our children are lucky enough to get to engage in advanced learning, in subjects such as women's studies, ebonics, sociology, comparative religions, and ethnic studies. Its not that none of them have any problems, to be sure. Why, many of them do not even have their own private bathrooms, believe it or not. And that is the least of it. Many of them will now, this year, face the horror of not being able to travel from the Northeast go to the beach in the Gulf States region this summer, due to the oil spill. Somebody should arrange for therapy to help them deal with this deprivation, but never fear-somebody probably will.

In the meantime, we have lately heard news of a Russian spy ring operating out of New York, New Jersey, and (where else) Massachusetts. They were basically trying to make contacts through social circles, and were engaged in money laundering activities, establishing covers as American citizens, all in an attempt to get next to people from whom they might eventually derive valuable information, or whom they might be able to blackmail into giving them said information, or opening other doors for them.

The most reported aspect of the story thus far is how cute and alluring is Anne Chapman, the name one of them goes by. I swear, the main interest in the story seems to be, judging by media reports-guys might want to do her. Well, hell, why not, she's kind of a real life Nikita, only Russian, not French, and not a heroin addicted assassin, we should hope. That would really make her irresistible.

As for the film and tv series franchise Nikita, a couple of points to the target demographic audience-

When the original film was released in the US, it was given the name La Femme Nikita.

For roughly twenty-seven percent of you, this was so you would not mistakenly think the film was about Nikita Khruschev. As to how these people thought for sure you would know the French term "La Femme" means "the girl" in English, you'll have to take that up with them.

For the remaining roughly seventy-three percent of you, Nikita Khruschev was a former Premiere of the Soviet Union.

I'm seeing and hearing a lot of fireworks this night, but what I'm not seeing is much of a light at the end of the tunnel.

Saturday, July 03, 2010

She Shoulda Said No (1949) Pts. 7 And 8

The final two segments of the film are followed by my own thoughts and reflections on it.

* Alan Baxter - Markey
* Lyle Talbot - Captain Hayes
* Lila Leeds - Ann
* Michael Whelan - Treanor
* Mary Ellen Popel - Rita
* Doug Blackley - Lieutenant Mason
* David Holt - Bob Lester
* Don Harvey - Lieutenant Tyne
* David Gorcey - Ricky
* Jack Elam - Raymond
* Dick Cogan - Edmunds
* Knox Manning - Narrator

Previously-Captain Hayes sends Mason and Tyne out on an undercover assignment to find a lead on the marihuana racket; Anne throws herself into the party life; In no mood for games, Raymond warns Markie that his mouth might get him in trouble; Anne's new lifestyle leads to a tragedy; Markie gets his chance for advancement when Treanor entrusts him with an important job; and an uncooperative Anne spends time in jail.

She Shoulda Said No which was originally titled "Wild Weed", among many other titles, didn't really find success until it was marketed as a release in conjunction with the US Government in an effort to warn about the scourge of "marihuana". This was a blatant lie. The government was in no way connected with its production, distribution, or promotion during any of its stages.

It was actually an attempt to exploit the arrest in late 1948, for marijuana possession, of Robert Mitchum and film starlet Lila Leeds, the latter of whom is featured in the film in the role of Ann Lester. It would be her last film role of any significance. Whereas Mitchum played up on public empathy and used the arrest as a springboard to further enhance his career, Leeds was a hot potato. No one would touch her. This is perhaps a glaring example of the rampant sexism of the times, and Leeds felt she had no choice but to take the role, feeling it might be her one chance to salvage her career. In fact, perhaps the most cumbersome of the movies many titles was "The Story Of Lila Leeds And Her Expose Of The Marijuana Racket".

Ironically, during the period of time when she was in jail, and just prior to the making of the film, Leeds became a heroin user, and was in all likelihood addicted to the drug by the time this film was made.

She disappeared from public view until the mid-fifties, when she named a Chicago Democratic Party leader in a paternity suit. Sometime during this period, she was also arrested in Chicago for soliciting, a charge which she denied, but for which she was fined ten dollars.

In the seventies, she turned up as a minister in a group devoted to helping addicts recover from their addictions. She died in 1999, a virtual unknown, with no mention in any obituaries, her death being discovered almost by accident, through a perusal years later of her Social Security records.

The film featured a motley crew of performers, for the most part, the most significant of whom was Lyle Talbott in the role of Captain Hayes. Talbott had been a union activist for the Screen Artists Guild, and so of late his roles did not come easy. He had been a leading man much in demand up until then, but soon was relegated to B movies and roles in the early years of television, his most notable one perhaps being a recurring role as a neighbor on the Ozzie and Harriet Show.

Alan Baxter, who played Markie, was a well-respected actor who achieved some success on stage and in B movies, but never rose above that level.

David Gorcey, who played Ricky, had been a former Bowery Boy, but though he was in more of these films than any of the others, including his better known brother who was one of the leads in the film series, he was one of the minor characters.

David Holt, who played Ann's sister Bob, lived a life almost as tragic as that of his character in the film. Plagued by health problems and on the outs with his father, he never rose higher than this role, and died soon after.

Mary Ellen Popel, who played Ann's friend Rita, appeared in frequent films, but very seldom was she credited, mainly subsisting as little more than an extra in films where she was mainly one of a group. She was one of the Hebrews, for example, in the Golden Calf scene of The Ten Commandments.

And so it goes for practically every member of the cast, to whom this exploitation flick represented one last lifeline to a very unlikely successful career, or a revival of one that had floundered for whatever reason. Yet another irony was, by the time this film finally found some degree of success-nearly a decade after it was made-it was far too late to make any difference for most of them.

The one fortunate exception to this, of course, was Jack Elam, who appeared here in his first role as the bodyguard and thug named Raymond, and who probably would have just as soon the film never again saw the light of day.

Yet, it is interesting as a reflection of the attitudes of the day.

Friday, July 02, 2010

Gibson-Off The Wall

Gibson's really done it this time. It doesn't really matter that much that his ex-girlfriend and mother of his love-child might well have purposely set him up, and baited him into going off on a rant. She admitted, in fact, recording him for what she claimed was evidence, for her own protection against him, explaining that he had threatened her and even physically assaulted her by knocking out her teeth-a charge he has denied.

But you know, even if that could be conclusively proven to be a lie, and that she did go so far as to bait him into engaging in a rant, perhaps while he was intoxicated, its almost totally irrelevant. He said what he said, and what he said is beyond the pale.

Of course, his detractors are mainly focused on the racial slurs and the misogyny, even though they occurred in what Gibson assumed was the privacy of his own home. True, Gibson is a public figure and so is held to a higher standard, but by the same token you get a distinct impression that many of his detractors, such as Jesse Jackson, and the LA Chapter of the NAACP, would like to use this as an example of the kind of covert racism that is endemic in a large percentage of American households. And then there is the misogynistic nature of Gibson's tirade, which is receiving a great deal of attention as well.

He called her a "cunt" and declared that she deserved to be "raped by a pack of niggers", telling her that "it would be your fault". Yet, as bad as all this is, it actually pales beside a couple of other factors that aren't getting one fourth the coverage as the racist and misogynistic nature of what has been described as a thirty minute "demonic" rant.

One, their child was there, apparently in the same room, while this roughly thirty minute tirade was on-going. She can be heard clearly, crying in the background.

Two, and perhaps more disturbingly, he did threaten her, telling her he would burn down the house, adding "but first you will blow me."

I doubt this tape can be used as evidence in a court of law, or even in a civil suit, but that's almost beside the point as well. Gibson has dug himself a hole now for sure, one that all of the sensitivity training and tear-jerk apologies on all the late night talk shows and cable news channels in the world isn't going to pull him out of. In fact, that might only serve to dig the hole deeper at this point. Perhaps the best thing to do would be to just shut the fuck up and try to work out some kind of arrangement for the good of the kid involved. He has backed himself into a corner now, and the overt publicity, as well as common decency, will demand that he step up and try to make things right as far as his financial obligations to the child and to its future well-being.

His career as he has known it is probably in the crapper at this point. His next best shot at a major role might well be as a WCW wrestling villain-if he's lucky.

Without a doubt, people will go to see his next movie, or would do so if he can find a distributor, and a studio or company to finance it. He certainly can't count on financing it himself and ending up with yet another success on the level of Passion of The Christ. I hate to say it, but maybe he should just think about retiring at this point. Nothing he could ever do is likely to please the vast majority of the people he has offended here. Perhaps that is wrong, but it is probably a fact.

I would go see anything he made, and so would many others, but that is by no means an endorsement. I would buy an original Charles Manson recording, and if a museum featured an exhibit of Hitler's artwork, I would go to see it, if possible. That should not be construed as any kind of agreement or affinity for such people as they. I would simply try to judge the works of both on the basis of their artistic merits, or the lack thereof, but for the most part would view it more as an historical oddity and curiosity.

In that same spirit, while I certainly don't mean to imply that Gibson is anywhere near on the same level of monstrosity as Manson or Hitler, I can't defend this. I'm not sure how it would be possible even if I wanted to, which I do not.