I support the troops in the sense that, if they are to stay in Iraq, I would rather that they succeed than that they fail. (By succeed I mean that they accomplish goals that protect American interests).
However, I am against the war because I believe that it is an inefficient use of our troops and will more likely fail than succeed and that leaving Iraq will protect our interests more than staying.
That being said, if the only way to "support the troops" is to tongue-kiss Bush's rectum, then screw the troops.
Moreover, if any U.S. soldier tells me (of his own volition) that he wants me to support the President, and that he doesn't feel supported if I don't kiss the President's heinie, that soldier can go to Hell.
That is all.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Monday, April 14, 2008
Sunday, April 13, 2008
An Excellent Rejoinder to Obama
Patrick Deneen (Thanx and a tip o' the hat to John Savage:
Someone should advise him to go to Latrobe and say the following instead:
“You go to these big liberal cities in California, and like a lot of cosmopolitan centers of libertarian lifestyle individualism, they have benefited from the wrenching displacements you’ve experienced. They benefited immensely from free-trade and globalizing policies of previous Administrations - Democratic and Republican alike - and they’ve been told that they have earned their status and they owe nothing to anyone.
“And it’s not surprising that they get optimistic, they believe that they can dispense with religion or borders or community as a way to remake the world in exactly their image.”
Right on.
Someone should advise him to go to Latrobe and say the following instead:
“You go to these big liberal cities in California, and like a lot of cosmopolitan centers of libertarian lifestyle individualism, they have benefited from the wrenching displacements you’ve experienced. They benefited immensely from free-trade and globalizing policies of previous Administrations - Democratic and Republican alike - and they’ve been told that they have earned their status and they owe nothing to anyone.
“And it’s not surprising that they get optimistic, they believe that they can dispense with religion or borders or community as a way to remake the world in exactly their image.”
Right on.
Murray Rothbard on Malcolm X
While Rothbard is, in my opinion, a little hard on blacks in general, I like his piece on the general interpretation of Malcolm X, in part because it cuts through all of the garbage that we tend to hear the PC crowd tell us about how we need to understand muderous rage and need to acknowledge the legitimacy of the desire of many black people to externinate us.
I must admit that I am somewhat ambivalent about Malcolm X due to his apparent alteration in his racial thinking after his conversion to orthodox Islam a year or so prior to his death. And certainly some of the most militant blacks are also the most socially conservative in their ideas about how the black community should act.
However, the idea that all of the responsibility for improving race relations lies with whites, orthat we need to shut up and let the minorities dictate all of the terms of the debate - which often seems to be the mood when discussing Mr. X - or the idea that whites are intrinsically racist and htat nothing we can do is ever good enough for blacks - well, I am sick of it and I think that this piece provides a good counterpoint.
That is all.
I must admit that I am somewhat ambivalent about Malcolm X due to his apparent alteration in his racial thinking after his conversion to orthodox Islam a year or so prior to his death. And certainly some of the most militant blacks are also the most socially conservative in their ideas about how the black community should act.
However, the idea that all of the responsibility for improving race relations lies with whites, orthat we need to shut up and let the minorities dictate all of the terms of the debate - which often seems to be the mood when discussing Mr. X - or the idea that whites are intrinsically racist and htat nothing we can do is ever good enough for blacks - well, I am sick of it and I think that this piece provides a good counterpoint.
That is all.
Letter to the Boston Herald Shows Open Borders Fallacies
A woman (I presume) named Mary Hopkins recently wrote a letter that appeared in the Boston Herald:
The “long-established” process for welcoming people to this country has changed drastically in the last 20 years. We are no longer the most welcoming country.
Note that she provides no references here. I was under the impression that U.S. immigration laws were pretty welcoming compared to those of most, perhaps all, other countries. (I will try to get some statistics to publish if I can find any comparative statistics to refer to).
If you don’t have an advanced degree, capital or a relative who already has legal status, then your chances of gaining entry here as a legal immigrant are very small indeed.
And this is a problem why? Why should we let in people who are more likely to become social services parasites?
People don’t come here without documents because it’s a nuisance to fill out the paperwork. They come here that way because it’s the only way open to them
Perhaps if they cannot get in here legally they should take the hint and stay out.
Ms. Hopkins obviously suffers from the delusion that what angers people about illegal immigrants is that they have not filled out proper paperwork. No, what angers us is that they come into the country uninvited, and that they do not allow us to choose who we wish to let in and who we do not.
Ms. Hopkins' argument is akin to saying that if someone crashes a party, the host is at fault for not inviting him.
We must create an orderly, accessible and reasonable process by which people can apply to come here as immigrants.
We do. We just don't have a process that grants everyone's application.
It would also be good to create a process by which undocumented immigrants who had not committed offenses besides being here could regularize their status.
How about by going home, where their status will already be perfectly regular?
People get blamed for not doing their paperwork, but when someone offers a way to make it possible, the shriek of “amnesty” goes up.
No, people get blamed for coming into the country without being invited. And if it is suggested that we mut extend invitations to unwanted "party-crashers," that is indeed amnesty.
Under present law the great majority of the undocumented cannot clear up their status.
Sure they do. It's called "going back to where they came from."
This shows the sickness of the opne borders lobby. The U.S. people have no right to control the borders of thier country, and the interests of the immigrants ought to be the sole determining factor in our immigration policy.
That is all.
The “long-established” process for welcoming people to this country has changed drastically in the last 20 years. We are no longer the most welcoming country.
Note that she provides no references here. I was under the impression that U.S. immigration laws were pretty welcoming compared to those of most, perhaps all, other countries. (I will try to get some statistics to publish if I can find any comparative statistics to refer to).
If you don’t have an advanced degree, capital or a relative who already has legal status, then your chances of gaining entry here as a legal immigrant are very small indeed.
And this is a problem why? Why should we let in people who are more likely to become social services parasites?
People don’t come here without documents because it’s a nuisance to fill out the paperwork. They come here that way because it’s the only way open to them
Perhaps if they cannot get in here legally they should take the hint and stay out.
Ms. Hopkins obviously suffers from the delusion that what angers people about illegal immigrants is that they have not filled out proper paperwork. No, what angers us is that they come into the country uninvited, and that they do not allow us to choose who we wish to let in and who we do not.
Ms. Hopkins' argument is akin to saying that if someone crashes a party, the host is at fault for not inviting him.
We must create an orderly, accessible and reasonable process by which people can apply to come here as immigrants.
We do. We just don't have a process that grants everyone's application.
It would also be good to create a process by which undocumented immigrants who had not committed offenses besides being here could regularize their status.
How about by going home, where their status will already be perfectly regular?
People get blamed for not doing their paperwork, but when someone offers a way to make it possible, the shriek of “amnesty” goes up.
No, people get blamed for coming into the country without being invited. And if it is suggested that we mut extend invitations to unwanted "party-crashers," that is indeed amnesty.
Under present law the great majority of the undocumented cannot clear up their status.
Sure they do. It's called "going back to where they came from."
This shows the sickness of the opne borders lobby. The U.S. people have no right to control the borders of thier country, and the interests of the immigrants ought to be the sole determining factor in our immigration policy.
That is all.
Wednesday, April 09, 2008
Tom Tancredo, Go to Hell
Tom Tancredo endorses John McCain*, not just because he feels that McCain is the lesser of two evils:
Tancredo... said Thursday he'll go ahead and back his longtime immigration-reform foe, McCain, because he thinks either of the Democratic alternatives would be worse.
"Sometimes I say to myself, 'Can I really do this?' " Tancredo said of supporting McCain. "And then you listen to Obama or Hillary and say, 'Yeah, I have to.' "
but also because he rejects possible alternatives for not wanting to kill Muslims badly enough:
Despite Barr's immigration stands, Tancredo said he could not support him because of his foreign policy stands, including "a blind spot on radical Islam."
As Daniel Larison points out, this generally simply means that Barr isn't supportive of the unitary executive or the gutting of civil liberties (or, I would add, that Barr isn't gung-ho enough about "killing all them ragheads over there").
He does give pragmatic reasons for opposing Barr, which again amounts to "whatever it takes to stop Obama or Clinton," which is at least an argument not based on murderous bloodthirstiness, but which is also based on the sort of gutless cowardice that is going to destroy the GOP and give the country over to the socialists if it is not jettisoned in favor of principle and courage:
He added that he believes Barr's candidacy is a serious threat to Republican chances in November, because it could siphon off conservative voters who are skeptical of McCain.
If Tancredo doesn't have any courage, he can go to Hell.
*Supporting him is endorsing him Tancredo's playing little Clinton-esque word games.
That is all.
Tancredo... said Thursday he'll go ahead and back his longtime immigration-reform foe, McCain, because he thinks either of the Democratic alternatives would be worse.
"Sometimes I say to myself, 'Can I really do this?' " Tancredo said of supporting McCain. "And then you listen to Obama or Hillary and say, 'Yeah, I have to.' "
but also because he rejects possible alternatives for not wanting to kill Muslims badly enough:
Despite Barr's immigration stands, Tancredo said he could not support him because of his foreign policy stands, including "a blind spot on radical Islam."
As Daniel Larison points out, this generally simply means that Barr isn't supportive of the unitary executive or the gutting of civil liberties (or, I would add, that Barr isn't gung-ho enough about "killing all them ragheads over there").
He does give pragmatic reasons for opposing Barr, which again amounts to "whatever it takes to stop Obama or Clinton," which is at least an argument not based on murderous bloodthirstiness, but which is also based on the sort of gutless cowardice that is going to destroy the GOP and give the country over to the socialists if it is not jettisoned in favor of principle and courage:
He added that he believes Barr's candidacy is a serious threat to Republican chances in November, because it could siphon off conservative voters who are skeptical of McCain.
If Tancredo doesn't have any courage, he can go to Hell.
*Supporting him is endorsing him Tancredo's playing little Clinton-esque word games.
That is all.
Tuesday, April 08, 2008
Sunday, April 06, 2008
Another Incomplete Rally to the "War on Islamic Extremism"
Henry Lamb writes an article exhorting us to continue the war in Iraq because we are the only ones who can "stop Islamic extremism."
I am not impressed for at least two reasons:
First, his understanding of World War II is off:
When Hitler set out to conquer the world, it was American blood, treasure and determination that stopped him.
No, it was mostly Soviet blood, treasure, and determination that stopped him. Something like 3/4 of German deaths were at Soviet hands.
He also doesn't seem to have any idea what to do about Islamic extremism except for "stay in Iraq and Afghanistan." What he hopes to accomplish there is not made clear.
That's a big problem with a lot of the pro-warriors. They assert the evilness of Islam (or Islamic extremism) or somesuch as the reason to stay in Iraq, but they don't exactly make clear how we are going to make vertian htat Iraq stays in moderate Muslim hands, or, if they see Islam as irredeemably destructive to our interests, how they plan to prevent Muslims from eventually ruling a Muslim country.
That is all.
I am not impressed for at least two reasons:
First, his understanding of World War II is off:
When Hitler set out to conquer the world, it was American blood, treasure and determination that stopped him.
No, it was mostly Soviet blood, treasure, and determination that stopped him. Something like 3/4 of German deaths were at Soviet hands.
He also doesn't seem to have any idea what to do about Islamic extremism except for "stay in Iraq and Afghanistan." What he hopes to accomplish there is not made clear.
That's a big problem with a lot of the pro-warriors. They assert the evilness of Islam (or Islamic extremism) or somesuch as the reason to stay in Iraq, but they don't exactly make clear how we are going to make vertian htat Iraq stays in moderate Muslim hands, or, if they see Islam as irredeemably destructive to our interests, how they plan to prevent Muslims from eventually ruling a Muslim country.
That is all.
Thursday, April 03, 2008
I Hate Mighty Mouse
I love my flat-screen Imac.
But Apple's obsession with single button mouses is stupid. I finally threw my mighty mouse against the wall and broke it today after the umpteenth time that it could not distinguish between a right-click and a left-click. (I am currently using the older PC mouse that I use with my older Mac). The "cool design" of having one button that you control by where you click it is functionally inferior to having a mouse with multiple buttons with definite, easy-to-see boundaries between them. I am going to see if I can get a wireless, Mac-compatible PC mouse tomorrow, Friday, or over the weekend.
That is all.
But Apple's obsession with single button mouses is stupid. I finally threw my mighty mouse against the wall and broke it today after the umpteenth time that it could not distinguish between a right-click and a left-click. (I am currently using the older PC mouse that I use with my older Mac). The "cool design" of having one button that you control by where you click it is functionally inferior to having a mouse with multiple buttons with definite, easy-to-see boundaries between them. I am going to see if I can get a wireless, Mac-compatible PC mouse tomorrow, Friday, or over the weekend.
That is all.
Wednesday, April 02, 2008
March 2008 Constitution Party Ballot Access (2008 Presidential Race)
This is the status of the Constitution Party ballot access campaign as of late February 2008:
Click on this link to be taken to ballot access maps for the major third parties.
I made these maps using photoshop, and they are based on the March issue of Ballot Access News (I received it on February 28 or 29). [Because I based the map on the hardcopy newsletter, and have not proofread it against the online version, it may not match the statistics at the link if anything has been corrected or altered prior to posting the issue online].
At some point, I will try to organize all of my previous maps so that a person can see the progress of the campaign over time.
That is all.
Click on this link to be taken to ballot access maps for the major third parties.
I made these maps using photoshop, and they are based on the March issue of Ballot Access News (I received it on February 28 or 29). [Because I based the map on the hardcopy newsletter, and have not proofread it against the online version, it may not match the statistics at the link if anything has been corrected or altered prior to posting the issue online].
At some point, I will try to organize all of my previous maps so that a person can see the progress of the campaign over time.
That is all.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Saturday, March 22, 2008
Separation of Church and Faith
If this report is acurate, it is a disturbing look into the results and goals of hate-crimes" legislation.
That is all.
That is all.
Friday, March 21, 2008
Gender-Bender
Via Sully, I find this article about a "man" who is pregnant.
You know, if my wife goes crazy and thinks she is a dog, it does not mean that if we have a kid it is a puppy. The person is obviously still anatomically and biologically a woman.
This quote from the third page, is, I find, in some ways the most humorous:
On successfully getting pregnant a second time, we are proud to announce that this pregnancy is free of complications and our baby girl has a clean bill of health.
Really? How do we know that it is a baby girl? Maybe it's a baby boy with a vagina - you know, like his "father."
That is all.
You know, if my wife goes crazy and thinks she is a dog, it does not mean that if we have a kid it is a puppy. The person is obviously still anatomically and biologically a woman.
This quote from the third page, is, I find, in some ways the most humorous:
On successfully getting pregnant a second time, we are proud to announce that this pregnancy is free of complications and our baby girl has a clean bill of health.
Really? How do we know that it is a baby girl? Maybe it's a baby boy with a vagina - you know, like his "father."
That is all.
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Separation of Church and State
To understand the battles of the Religious Right and anti-Religious Left better (both of which are only part of the Right and Left, respectively), you need to understand that the battle is not just between right-wing theocrats and left-wing believers in religious freedom. While some of it may be that, much of it is between right-wingers who believe in religious freedom and left-wingers who want to effectively establish secular humanism as the official state religion.
This was brought to mind during this exchange.
That is all.
This was brought to mind during this exchange.
That is all.
Continuing the Revolution
In one of the comments to this post, I was directed toward this website, specifically to its list of candidates who apparently believe in Paul-esque standards of liberty (I am not yet sure of the criteria to get on the list).
More on this as I know more about it.
In any case, if you are interested in continuing the fight that the Ron Paul for President campaign started, and in expanding it to Congressional races, then this is probably where to begin. Visit the site and get familiar with it.
That is all.
More on this as I know more about it.
In any case, if you are interested in continuing the fight that the Ron Paul for President campaign started, and in expanding it to Congressional races, then this is probably where to begin. Visit the site and get familiar with it.
That is all.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
On the Cuban Embargo
George Will argues for caution about ending the embargo on Cuba on the basis that trade with China has not brought freedom to that country.
I am unconvinced, though. Two things to consider: while politically China may be no closer to democracy than it was thirty years ago, almost certainly the degree of economic freedom has increased. Secondly, we must remember that China is a very large country, and that even a middle class that, in absolute numbers, seems large to us is only a small fraction of the overall population. Huge portions of its population (I think a majority) still live in rural poverty and virtually no amount of realistic economic growth is going to change this fact for at least a decade, probably two or three.
Change of this sort takes a long time in a country as large as China, and I don't see why we need to be pessimistic about the results of opening up the Chinese market in the 70s, or about what the results would be of lifting the Cuban embargo. It wouldn't clean up all of Cuba's problems, but it would be a lot better for everyone than what we have now.
That is all.
I am unconvinced, though. Two things to consider: while politically China may be no closer to democracy than it was thirty years ago, almost certainly the degree of economic freedom has increased. Secondly, we must remember that China is a very large country, and that even a middle class that, in absolute numbers, seems large to us is only a small fraction of the overall population. Huge portions of its population (I think a majority) still live in rural poverty and virtually no amount of realistic economic growth is going to change this fact for at least a decade, probably two or three.
Change of this sort takes a long time in a country as large as China, and I don't see why we need to be pessimistic about the results of opening up the Chinese market in the 70s, or about what the results would be of lifting the Cuban embargo. It wouldn't clean up all of Cuba's problems, but it would be a lot better for everyone than what we have now.
That is all.
The Revolution Continues
For those of you who wish to campaign for Ron Paul-esque House and Senate candidates, here's a list of "Revolutionary" candidates:
Murray Sabrin
B. J. Lawson
With luck, the list will grow.
That is all.
Murray Sabrin
B. J. Lawson
With luck, the list will grow.
That is all.
Monday, March 10, 2008
Paul of Powerline: Please, McCain, Let Me Stick My Tongue Up Your Rectum
Tells you all you need to know about the SOBs at Powerline.
Oh, and about this comment?
If there are conservatives who sincerely believe that it makes little difference whether the Executive Branch is run by John McCain or Barack Obama, they are entitled to sit out the election. And if they’re going to sit it out, I’d appreciate it if they would sit it out entirely; in other words, stop attacking McCain for his “impurities.”
Go screw yourself.
That is all.
Oh, and about this comment?
If there are conservatives who sincerely believe that it makes little difference whether the Executive Branch is run by John McCain or Barack Obama, they are entitled to sit out the election. And if they’re going to sit it out, I’d appreciate it if they would sit it out entirely; in other words, stop attacking McCain for his “impurities.”
Go screw yourself.
That is all.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)