Wednesday, September 17, 2014

This makes sense because the Obama administration has a firm policy of not dealing with terrorists...

...unless it involves a pro-terrorist deserter.

Obama administration bullies Sotloff family.

Rules are Rules.


The nice thing about having a Democrat in the White House is that there is never any bad news...

...such as constant reports about boring subjects like how inflation is destroying the middle class.

//HOW’S THAT HOPEY-CHANGEY STUFF WORKIN’ OUT FOR YA? (CONT’D): New Record: Pound of Ground Beef Tops $4 for First Time. “Just five years ago, in August 2009, the average price for a pound of ground beef was $2.134, according to the BLS. The price has since climbed by $1.879 per pound—or 88.1 percent.”

Inflation is basically nonexistent, though, so long as you don’t eat, drive, or heat and cool your home.//


If only female nurses could marry...

There is a lot more of this kind of thing in the news lately.

//Lawsuit: Female Nurse Had Sex With Medicated Patient

MAN SAYS HE WAS AWAITING HEART TRANSPLANT SURGERY AT THE TIME//


Historians as Whores.

Sure it's misinformation, but it fits the politically correct narrative.

In a post titled "We need to talk about Cosmos...," historian of scienceJoseph Martin (pictured at left), who teaches at Colby College, refers to the falsehoods promoted by Cosmos about the history of science.Cosmos, as our readers will know, has persistently offered a false version of history where religion never positively influences the development of science. Martin writes:
I've been watching with interest as the history of science community, particularly on Twitter, has reacted with consternation to the historical components of Neil deGrasse Tyson's Cosmos reboot. To a large extent I agree with these criticisms. It is troubling that the forums in which the public gets the most exposure to history of science also tend to be those in which it is the least responsibly represented.
But part of me also wants to play devil's advocate. First, Cosmos is a fantastic artifact of scientific myth making and as such provides a superb teaching tool when paired with more responsible historical presentations and perhaps some anthropological treatments of similar issues like Sharon Traweek's Beamtimes and Lifetimes.
Second, I don't know that we, as a community, have adequately made the case that the scholarly view of history we advance is, in fact, more useful for current cultural and political discourse than the naïve view scientists advance. One thing we often see in our research, and parallel work in philosophy of science, is that "right" is often not the same thing as "useful." I'm interested in generating some discussion in why and how, if at all, we can make the case that "useful" and "right" are and should be the same thing in this case for reasons other than internal professional ones.
Let me translate. First, he acknowledges that Cosmos has been legitimately criticized for itsinaccurate portrayal of the history of science. But he wants to defend Cosmos, playing the "devil's advocate." Why? Because the "naïve view scientists advance" -- that science is always good, and religion is always getting in the way -- might be more "useful" when talking to the public, even if it isn't "right." But what does he mean by "useful"? And is he really suggesting it might be OK to lie in the service of defending the prestige of science? Yes he is, and that becomes clear in his next comment:


There has been a lot of this "selling out the principles of scholarship for political reasons" thing going on recently.


The nice thing about having a Democrat in the White House is that there is never any bad news...

...such as the re-assembly of the Russian Empire and the defeat of a pro-Western country.

//Make no mistake about this. The settlement is a deeply damaging blow to our values, to our prestige and to our geopolitical interests. The foolish and distracted Western policies that encouraged Ukraine into a confrontation with Russia in which the West was unwilling to back it; the shameful and feckless mix of triumphalist rhetoric and minimalist action; the cluelessness in the face of Putin’s skillful mastery of Western psychology and divisions; the miserable consequences of all this for the Ukrainian state: every country, every leader in the world has been paying close attention.

Historians, by the way, will also pay attention; the Obama legacy has been permanently tarnished. Unless some real changes take place, neither this President nor his close associates will cut an impressive figure when the accounts are drawn up.

The West may yet get its act together and come up with a coherent response to a war of naked aggression by an ugly despotism on its doorstep, but it would take more determination and imagination than is currently on display.

In the meantime, the Ukrainians are doing the only thing they can; like Hitler’s victims in the 1930s they are signing away territory and rights that they cannot defend and reflecting on the value of all those inspiring promises of support they received from their Western friends back when times were good and the bear was far away.//

But, you know, apres 2016, le deluge.



Tuesday, September 16, 2014

Neil deGrasse Tyson is a lying jackass.

Tyson claims that George W Bush uttered a phrase in a speech in the days immediately after 9/11 in order to distance American religion from that practiced by radical Muslims that demonstrated his scientific illiteracy.

The problem is that none of what Tyson says is true.

He's entitled to his opinion, but not to his facts, and not to spread lies under the name of education.

Thanks to this kind of jackassery, I'm going to have to be rebutting this lie for the next 40 years.
Bottom line - people are going to bully because it creates esprit de corps...

...and if society says that one group is off-limits, then a new group will be nominated for the role of common people we can feel superior to. 

//Older people will tell you that anti-ginger malice is a strange and new thing in Britain, or that in Italy, for instance, having red hair is considered rather attractive. Perhaps it’s because the prejudices of older generations – racism and sexism – have become unfashionable and strictly penalised that these new ‘prejudices’ have emerged. Teasing gingers is possibly the new means of establishing a pecking order in schools, of establishing group cohesion among bullies. Unfair prejudice is indeed hydra-headed.//


Monday, September 15, 2014

Scandals - Not as much fun when they involve your people....

...and the joys of balkanized victim group politics keeps on giving.

//What has gone wrong in Rotherham, and what is wrong with its Pakistani community, are questions much asked in recent weeks: How could this small, run-down town in northern England have been the center of sexual abuse of children on such an epic and horrifying scale?

According to the official report published in August, there were an estimated 1,400 victims. And they were, in the main, poor and vulnerable white girls, while the great majority of perpetrators were men, mainly young men, from the town’s Pakistani community. Shaun Wright, the police commissioner who was responsible for children’s services in Rotherham, appeared before Parliament after his refusal to resign over the scandal. The scandal has cost both the chief executive and the leader of the council their jobs, and four Labour Party town councilors have been suspended.

A popular explanation for what Home Secretary Theresa May has described as “a complete dereliction of duty” by Rotherham’s public officials is that the Labour-controlled council was, for reasons of political expediency and ideology, unwilling to confront the fact that the abusers were of Pakistani heritage. Proper investigation, it is said, was obstructed by political correctness — or, in the words of a former local M.P., a culture of “not wanting to rock the multicultural boat.”//

And:

//The Pakistani community in Rotherham, and elsewhere in Britain, has not followed the usual immigrant narrative arc of intermarriage and integration. The custom of first-cousin marriages to spouses from back home in Pakistan meant that the patriarchal village mentality was continually refreshed.

Britain’s Pakistani community often seems frozen in time; it has progressed little and remains strikingly impoverished. The unemployment rate for the least educated young Muslims is close to 40 percent, and more than two-thirds of Pakistani households are below the poverty line.//

Sounds like Detroit or Washington D.C.


Sunday, September 14, 2014

Saturday, September 13, 2014

America - Now with more Hope and Change...

...China v. Japan inevitable with America weakened.

/
Watch the video.
The cop is a servant to the citizen.
And demanding that the citizen move here and do that is nonsense.



Brit Libertarians notice something important.

From Spiked:


//There are various reasons for this move from decriminalising homosexuality, which was a very good thing, to the sanctification of homosexuality, which is just weird. But the main one is that over the past two decades, the gay issue has evolved as the perfect way for the new elites to distance themselves from values that have fallen out of their favour. We have seen the weaponisation of homosexuality, the transformation of it by sections of the political and media classes into the focal point for the expression of hostility to the straight world – which means not just people who are sexually straight, but also so-called straight culture and straight values, straightlacedness itself, ways of life that are based on commitment, privacy, familial sovereignty, things that tend to be viewed by the modern cultural clerisy as outdated or, worse, dangerous and destructive. The sacralisation of homosexuality corresponds precisely with the growing denigration by the state and others of the sphere of the family and the ideals of lifelong commitment, because celebrating gayness has become the main and most PC means through which traditional values might be dented and traditional identities called into question, even thrown open to heightened official scrutiny.

This is what explains both the peculiarly speedy and strikingly authoritarian way in which gay marriage has been adopted by governments across the West who otherwise care little for freedom and choice - because officials recognise in it the opportunity to push further their instinctive hostility towards traditional communal and familial ideals that to a large extent exist outside of the purview of the state. Understanding the impulse behind Western officialdom’s feverish adoption of gay marriage is key to understanding what makes this new institution so illiberal and intolerant. Its great driving force is not any commitment to civil rights but rather an urge to coerce, a desire to reshape the views and ideals and habits of the public, to enforce a new morality that elevates individuation over family life, risk-awareness over commitment, and an openness to being guided through life by experts over loyalty to one’s family unit or community.

So when you criticise gay marriage, you’re not just criticising gay marriage, you’re challenging a new moral framework carved out by those who apparently know better than us what our private lives and relationships should and shouldn’t look like. You’re not just an opponent of gay marriage - you’re a moral heretic whose very thoughts and behaviour are seen as deviant, as running counter to a new, apparently better kind of morality. And that, as Eich’s treatment and everything else that preceded it has shown us, simply will not be tolerated.//


Friday, September 12, 2014

The long 17th century gradually draws to a close...

...Ian Paisley is dead.


It sure is a good thing that we have a Nobel Peace Prize Winning Constitutional Scholar rather than that Cowboy...

...or else liberal constitutional scholars writing in the New York Times might be saying that the President is violating the Constitution.

BERLIN — PRESIDENT OBAMA’s declaration of war against the terrorist group known as the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria marks a decisive break in the American constitutional tradition. Nothing attempted by his predecessor, George W. Bush, remotely compares in imperial hubris.

Mr. Bush gained explicit congressional consent for his invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq. In contrast, the Obama administration has not even published a legal opinion attempting to justify the president’s assertion of unilateral war-making authority. This is because no serious opinion can be written.

This became clear when White House officials briefed reporters before Mr. Obama’s speech to the nation on Wednesday evening. They said a war against ISIS was justified by Congress’s authorization of force against Al Qaeda after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and that no new approval was needed.//


Thursday, September 11, 2014

WTF?

Two Christians beheaded in New Jersey by Muslim - media silent.

First, it would be wrong to think that this says anything about Islam or Muslims in general.

Second, I'm more concerned by the fact that this isn't a news story. This is a horrific, bizarre crime that parallels news out of Iraq. There is no reason to spike this story, except for the fact that the media seems to think that Americans can't be trusted to be anything but blood-crazed bigots.

Three, if so, screw the media.




Mockery of Gay marriage.

New Zealand Heterosexual males get married.

If procreation isn't the essential purpose of marriage, then why should sex be essential?

Marriage - It's a piece of paper and a tax break.
Well, then, how do you say...

..."Screw them" in Stupid?

//LIFE IN OBAMA’S AMERICA: Army officer is told not to enter his daughter’s high school because he’s wearing his uniform. “Before he was allowed in, the security guard stopped him and said sorry you’re not allowed in the school. Security told him men and women in uniform weren’t allowed because it may offend another student.”//


 
Who links to me?