Archive for April, 2009

Sabres & Hawt Chicks

Wednesday, April 8th, 2009

Barack’s Bow: Weak

Wednesday, April 8th, 2009

Obama BowYou might’ve missed the goings-on last week when our new Hopey-Changey internationalist world-community-citizen President got a little bit too caught up in the diplomatic festivities and salutations, and bowed before King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.

And the Nine Inch Nails broke out in song: Bow down before the one you serve, you’re going to get what you deserve.

The new internationalist fervor has exacted yet another ugly price.

Consider the ramifications. Not only is He a more evolved Higher Being and Lightworker than the rest of us…but the Constitutions says He is also our President. If He’s underneath a foreign nation’s King, then so are we all. This is one among many reasons why United States Presidents do not bow before Kings. They simply don’t.

Greg Cotharn, addressing the incident in The End Zone:

Conservatives look at Barack and see someone who doesn’t fully get what makes America great. Barack would not faux pas over the symbolism of a black man bowing to a white man; would understand the symbolism of a woman bowing to a man; yet lightly forgets the blood which has been shed – is being shed at this very moment – so an American need not bow to anyone’s King? It’s not that Barack doesn’t understand the symbolism. It is, rather, the symbolism appears further down his priority list (so far down that he momentarily forgot about it) than it would have been for almost any other POTUS in history. Even writing this, I notice myself becoming angry about the apparent casualness regarding American sacrifice and principle.

It’s not that the bow will have any immediate practical effect. It is, rather, sort of like a filthy bathroom in a restaurant: what ELSE about America’s greatness is Barack casual about? If Barack doesn’t understand — deep in his bones — what makes America great, what principles is Barack basing his decisions upon?

The Dyslexia Lable

Tuesday, April 7th, 2009

We have a sketpic:

Tens of thousands of pupils are being falsely diagnosed with dyslexia because parents and schools failed to teach them to read properly, according to a leading academic.

Professor Joe Elliott, of Durham University, said parents whose children have trouble with reading often push for the dyslexic ‘label’ simply to secure extra help for them.

But in fact there are many children who simply struggle to read and require help at an early age.

He voiced his concerns as figures suggested a steep rise in the number of children being termed dyslexic.

Your Cat is Plotting to Kill You

Tuesday, April 7th, 2009

Read all about it here.

Hat tip to Ace of Spades, via Rachel.

D’JEver Notice? XXVI

Tuesday, April 7th, 2009

One Revolution AwayBack when conservatives were in power and liberals were out of power, the conservatives looked at the liberals with a mixture of scorn and distress, regarding the content of the liberal ideas. George Bush and Dick Cheney should be tried in the Hague for war crimes, 9/11 was an inside job, the Jews are making all the decisions about military operations, the President was going to invoke martial law and ban elections, et cetera, et cetera…all that stuff.

Now that the liberals are in power and the conservatives are out of power, the liberals look upon the conservatives with dread…with an urgency that Something Must Be Done, because the conservatives have too much power (still) to make their thoughts heard.

Now, what are these thoughts, exactly? You don’t have to say much to convince the nearest good liberal that you need to be shut-up or shut down. Skepticism that the new President’s stimulus plan is constitutional…is supported by history…will be effective. Old-fashioned dissent, in other words. It isn’t too much about the content. President Obama’s ideas for reviving the economy are uncertain, untried and untested; even the most enthusiastic Obama fan is entertaining some doubts about whether or not they’ll work. (Why else, all the hubbub about Rush Limbaugh hoping Obama fails?) No, it isn’t the content of the message, it’s the ability to get it out there. The conservative cause has not yet been gutterballed enough.

Perhaps this is of interest to us outside of the realm of politics. There seems to be an intrinsic, perhaps subconscious, knowledge that these methods we’re invoking to revive our economy — they’re ineffective if the last residues of audible dissent are still reverberating somewhere. That they require complete buy-in, with unanimity…or virtual unanimity. Kinda like Tinkerbell, she won’t come back to life unless everyone claps their hands.

Or maybe they understand their ideas only look good when nobody is around to articulate what might be wrong with them.

Either way, it’s obvious they still need (or want) some more change.

Doctor Frankenstein

Tuesday, April 7th, 2009

Did he create the monster that is rampaging through our economic village?

In 1985, aged 30, Mr. [Michael] Osinski and the woman who was now his wife moved to New York, and he landed his first job on Wall St with Salomon Bros as a programmer. “In the pecking order, the computer guys were slight above the typing pool, figuratively and literally,” he said. “We were a necessary annoyance for the traders.”

But that was all about to change. Just two years earlier, finance firms had started experimenting with “securitisation”, the process of turning mortgages into securities designed to spread the risk to lenders and investors.

When Mr Osinski asked his manager how these securities worked, he was told: “You put chicken into the grinder and out comes sirloin.” His boss added perceptively that the bonds were also a guarantee of employment for computer programmers.
:
Mr Osinski bounced around various Wall St firms and ended up in 1995 with the company that supplied the software for nearly all the big finance houses. It was also around now that a client asked him to enhance his software to include a new ingredient – “subprime” debt. Mr Osinski’s reaction was excitement at the prospect of both new customers and new challenges.

The loans were so-called because they were made to people who failed to meet standard, or prime, borrowing requirements, presenting a higher risk that was covered by charging much higher interest rates than for borrowers with good credit histories.

With house prices rising year after year, the theory was that people could simply refinance their properties at higher values and take out new loans as their repayments increased. The laws of house price cycles were collectively forgotten or ignored, and lenders and borrowers alike were caught up in the wave of hubris, greed and naivety.

It’s a fascinating story. Perhaps I’m biased…but it seems to me the guilt Mr. Osinski bears for our financial crisis, is on par with the guilt shouldered by a gun manufacturer in the wake of a murder/suicide. He built the freakin’ tool. Just like Shane said about the sidearm — it’s as good or as evil as the man that carries it.

“It is certainly unnerving when you see the world crumbling around you and you have an intimate knowledge about how that process came about,” he said.

He has regrets every day, but they are tempered with the belief that others misused, sometimes fraudulently, his work. “One thing, don’t portray me as a monster,” he said, before going back to emptying the oyster cages he had just recovered from the sea-floor.

You know what we used to call this in my first job? GIGO. Garbage In, Garbage Out.

Like Everyone Else, I’m Wondering…

Tuesday, April 7th, 2009

…do I have to pay for all these stimulus packages and bailout programs Obama-self?

The Daily Bikini: Christina Milian

Monday, April 6th, 2009

From here.

Let’s Get Rid of…

Monday, April 6th, 2009

…that’s the name of a continuing miniseries over at Dipso Chronicles, run by blogger friend and Seattle denizen Andy Havens.

1. Pit bulls
2. Mangoes
3. Movies about how uncool/stupid white people are

Mmmm, hmmm…I thought I was the King of Lists, but I’m a-missing this one. Should I shamelessly steal Andy’s idea and start my own, or admit that I have met my superior and humbly submit some proposals for him to add to his own?

I don’t know what to do about that one. I do like to have the creative juices sloshing around in the list-making department, but I like to recognize a unique idea when the credit is duly deserved. I’m leaning toward the latter of those two.

Either way, I’ve got some ideas percolating for #4, #5, #6 and onward. Hey, how about posting your own in the comments below? You’ll feel better.

An Obvious Connection, but Maybe I’m the First to See It?

Monday, April 6th, 2009

Mister Bossy Himself…

…and that little shit from The Twilight Zone (Original Series): It’s a Good Life. You know, the all-powerful little boy that was wishing people out to the cornfield.

This is not a constitutional separation-of-powers rant. Forget congressional oversight. Think, instead, about subordinates. Or forget about Obama’s subordinates…think about His casual acquaintances. Other than that bigoted asshole preacher of His, I don’t know of anybody who’s given Him any knowledge…or opinions, that’ve managed to sink in…or advice…or anything. Anybody. That means His sainted grandmother, mother, and Michelle.

What He knows, it would seem, is limited to what’s germinated in His cranium.

He is supposed to be heaven-sent to replace His predecessor, His poorly-read Texas-hick predecessor, who is supposed to have been a remarkably incurious man.

As far as curious savants go that are supposed to be taking the place of, and providing a contrast to, incurious village idiots…President Obama does not seem to have learned anything, from anything. And His is the brand of arrogance that can blossom only after a lifetime of having none of His ideas seriously challenged by anybody. He’s the answer to President Bush, who aroused all this anger and angst by casually referring to himself as “The Decider”?

Would you be able to explain that one to a cherubim or seraphim, or to God Himself, or any other cosmic kismet?

I don’t think I would. Like they say, if you want to make the angels laugh, tell ’em your plans.

President Bush is Wildly Cheered…

Monday, April 6th, 2009

…as he throws out the first ball for the Texas Rangers.

Lots of folks miss him and are willing to say so.

A whole lot more, miss him and are not willing to say so.

Hat tip: Ace.

Obama Has Delivered Positive Change That George W. Bush Never Could…

Monday, April 6th, 2009

…Jimmy Carter has been exceptionally quiet.

Man Detained at Airport For Carrying Cash

Monday, April 6th, 2009

This…

…was enough to make blogger friend Duffy ashamed of our country.

Krauthammer Nails It

Monday, April 6th, 2009

Hat tip: Rick.

What I Know About People Minus What I Was Told When I Was A Child, Item #21: People who won’t take the initiative to see what needs doing and do it, don’t want anyone else to take the initiative either.

That’s a more decent summary of European peevishness toward the United States, than anything you’ll ever hear out of the current administration.

Best Sentence LIX

Monday, April 6th, 2009

This morning’s award for the Best Sentence I’ve Heard Or Read Lately (BSIHORL) goes out to Mark Steyn…for this nugget

The G20 wants international regulation that will export their mistakes to the entire planet.

And as I skim over the first few paragraphs of Steyn’s piece, regarding this misadventure with wrong telephone numbers given out — I can’t help but wonder.

Would we be talking about it too much if Sarah Palin accidentally handed out a telephone number to a sex-chat line?

If Barack Obama Directed Raiders of the Lost Ark

Monday, April 6th, 2009

Enjoy.

Requiem for Jewels

Sunday, April 5th, 2009

PeekabooFigurative:

Gerard’s latest find that surely heralds the end of civilized society as we know it today, is a deplorable peekaboo garment for your papoose. In response, commenter Rob De Witt brings to our attention a whole page of attire for men to wear to show off that they’re “pregnant.” Or recently have been. Baby carriers; “bump” tee shirts; macho looking diaper bags. “Men who change diapers RULE!”

Yup, I’ll just bet, Sugar. You’ve been fantasizing about men who change diapers since you were twelve.

Literal:

Get ready to squirm.

The woman who allegedly killed her husband by setting his genitals alight told neighbours that she was justified because “his penis should belong to me”, a court has heard.

According to News Ltd reports, the Adelaide Magistrates Court has heard 44-year-old Rajini Narayan told people next door she set her huband’s penis on fire after discovering he was having an affair.

“She told neighbours ‘my husband loves another woman, he hugs her’,” she said.

“(She said) ‘I’m a jealous wife, his penis should belong to me, I just wanted to burn his penis so it belongs to me and no one else.

“(She said) ‘It’s just his penis I wanted to burn, I didn’t mean this to happen.”

Prosecutors allege Narayan doused her husband’s genitals with methylated spirits while he slept, before setting them alight.

A house fire was sparked when he leapt out of bed and knocked over the bottle, causing over a million dollars worth of damage to their property and the neighbours’.

It’s been revealed the charges against Narayan have now been upgraded to murder.

[T]o call me [an Englishman] without those rights is like calling an ox a bull. He’s thankful for the honor, but he’d much rather have restored what’s rightfully his.Benjamin Franklin (apocr.)

Mecca Mosques “Wrongly Aligned”

Sunday, April 5th, 2009

Oopsie.

Some 200 mosques in Islam’s holiest city, Mecca, point the wrong way for prayers, reports from Saudi Arabia say.

All mosques have a niche showing the direction of the most sacred Islamic site, the Kaaba, an ancient cube-like building in Mecca’s Grand Mosque.

But people looking down from recently built high-rises in Mecca found the niches in many older mosques were not pointing directly towards the Kaaba.

Some worshippers are said to be anxious about the validity of their prayers.

There have been suggestions that laser beams could be used to make an exact measurement.

Yeah, y’know, I’m really not quite up to speed on this. Some worshippers are “said to be anxious”? Which worshippers are those? Wouldn’t this be fairly categorized as a medium-poor-at-best citation? As in, “some say 9/11 was an inside job” or “some say the moon is made out of cheese.”

Some people eat their own feces. You can find someone who thinks — anything you want to say someone thinks.

Isn’t there some kind of “It’s the thought that counts” thing going on? I noticed once, in my daily routine, there was a Muslim lady who seemed to be making a daily ritual out of praying North. Was that intentional? It could make sense if we’re on the other side of the world, and we, and Mecca, are both in the northern hemisphere. But how picky is this tradition supposed to be, anyway? There has to be a limit to it, because last I checked they hadn’t invented lasers in 632 AD.

Tawfik al-Sudairy, Islamic affairs ministry deputy secretary, downplayed the problem in remarks quoted by the pan-Arab newspaper al-Hayat.

“There are no major errors but corrections have been made for some old mosques, thanks to modern techniques,” he said.

“In any case, it does not affect the prayers.”

I see Dilbert, today, is making fun of the “executive stakeholder” who never answers his phone when the project manager comes calling. (I spent some of my technology years in project management…so this gave me reason to laugh my ass off.) The executive leaves a message on his answering machine, “I do not check e-mail or return phone calls. Like the horizon, I am more of a concept than a corporeal being.”

I think that applies to the angsty Islamic guy who’s frantically worried about his prayers being off by a few angular degrees. Like manna from heaven during those slow news days. But more a concept than a corporeal being.

“I Want, I Want, I Want; and by God, I Expect To Get”

Sunday, April 5th, 2009

I Think ^(Link) is admiring the work of Victor Davis Hanson

Victor Davis Hanson does it again.

If anyone wished to know what the baby-boomer generation would do when, in its full maturity, it hit its first self-created, big-time recession, I think we are seeing the hysterical results.

Baby boomers. I’m one and when we want something, we expect to get it. Forget about consequences. Forget about the future. It’s all about me, right now.

I want a house, but I can’t afford one. That’s ok, bank A will get me into one. Bank A wants money for my mortgage but who would buy it? No problem, we’ll package it and sell it to bank B. Bank B needs money for those mortgages, but I’m not paying the mortgage. No problem, the government will handle it.

Same story, different want. I want a vacation, but I can’t afford one. That’s ok, I can use the equity in my house ……..

I want, I want, I want. And by God, I expect to get.

VDH himself, after putting together an admirably simplistic list of things that really are simple when all’s said and done, concludes…

At some point in all this serial hysteria, we are beginning to see the problem is not in the stars of the economy or of the war, but in ourselves—a weird generation that, when it finally came of age, proved to be just about what we could expect of it from what we saw in its youth.

It’s really quite sad, when inspect the wreckage. For all these decades, working hard and living in an apartment instead of a home, is a crisis…an intolerable crisis…you’ve just gotta have a house. And then when you have kids, a three-bedroom home is a crisis because you have to have five rooms plus a bonus. The car must be big, to make you feel safe, and you have to have two of ’em.

Once the baby-boom wave has come and gone, the nation will be financially weak. Ironic, because while they were here, most of them spent much of that lifespan babbling away something about drinking out of recycled-cardboard cups, unplugging your cell phone, and participating in Earth Hour…all to leave “mother earth” in better shape than when you found her.

But the bill is coming due for this entire generation’s entire lifetime of saying “I want I want I want” — and the solution is debt on top of the debt, so that their kids have to clean up the mess.

Try to do some fixing in the here-and-now? To actually produce something, to create real wealth as opposed to simply shuffling it around? Just find a way to do that — without someone calling you “greedy.” We aren’t contending with the ghostly disease of an ancient and deceased mindset; we’re battling demons that are consuming us right in the here-and-now. And losing.

Ten Cars That Sank Detroit

Sunday, April 5th, 2009

Interesting take on things. Bound to arouse some passionate feelings somewhere, one way or t’other.

Here, I’ll go ahead and spoil the highlights.

1. Ford Pinto.
2. Chevrolet Cavalier.
3. Chevrolet Astro.
4. Ford Taurus.
5. Ford Explorer.
6. Jaguar X-Type.
7. Hummer H2.
8. Toyota Prius.
9. Chrysler Sebring.
10. Jeep Compass.

Women’s Refuges Must Help Men or Lose Funding

Sunday, April 5th, 2009

Our friends across the pond are having a little bit of a spat over whether equality really does mean equality, when such a literal, dogmatic interpretation might possibly benefit men:

Many charities have been told that they must extend their counselling and outreach services to men because of new equality laws which require local authorities to ensure that services do not discriminate on grounds of sex.

Fiona Mactaggart, the former Home Office minister, said an “unintended consequence” of the law has meant some domestic violence services have lost grants or contracts for refusing to do so.
:
She said: “There are some local authorities who interpret equalities to mean that a refuge has to provide for men, not only for women.

“There are some stupidnesses developing in the system that nobody intended.”
:
The new Gender Equality Duty, created under The Equality Act 2006, requires that “public bodies must promote and take action to bring about gender equality, which involves: looking at issues for men and women.”

There we go again. “Everybody” intended this to be a one-sided thing. Well, everybody whose opinion Mactaggart thinks is worth something, thought that way.

As we’ve noted in these parts, many times: The word “everyone” (“nobody,” in this case) very seldom is deployed to describe what it has classically meant.

Nicola Harwin, chief executive of Women’s Aid, which counts the Prime Minister’s wife Sarah Brown among its patrons, said the charity is still allowed to exclude men from refuges.

However, when council contracts came up for tender, many branches are being told that they must provide services such as advice and counselling to men or lose their funding.

Miss Harwin said: “Women do appreciate being engaged in women-only organisations. When you have been disempowered and had no control of your life it’s important for a lot of women to see that this is an organisation run by women for women.”

My sympathy for this point of view is running out by the second. I’d like to know more about this process of healing, during which time some mindset is maintained that men are not, and cannot be, contributing toward anything good. How debilitating that must be! Do these abused women eventually learn to re-assimilate with a society that has some men in it? Or is that object lesson saved for much further down the road, after some scars have healed?

Because it sounds, to me, like a man-basher’s club. And I don’t see what that has to do with getting past something. Think, for example, about a man who loses his life’s savings in a short, bad marriage. How would you react to someone saying “when you have been disempowered and had no control of your life it’s important for a lot of men to see that this is an organization run by men for men.” That isn’t how we typically respond to a situation like that, I’ve noticed; instead it’s the ineffectual and irrelevant “All Women Aren’t Like That” defense, repeated ad nauseum. Great importance, in other words, is placed on stopping that wounded male from forming an unflattering stereotype in his individual noggin…for the benefit of the opportunities of the women he may meet later, after he has accumulated some more assets.

Fair enough. How come that doesn’t work on this side of the fence, Ms. Harwin? In fact, from what pocket of the universe do you ladies arrive, in which you fully expect phrases like “gender equality” to be tossed around like pudding and refried beans at a food fight…and then it comes as such a surprise to you when it’s interpreted bidirectionally? How could that be unexpected? To whom would it be unexpected? What kind of mindset does it take?

FARK commenter lewismarktwo speaks for me:

Yeah, cause all men are the same and those men (all 12 of them) who were abused just can’t wait to pay the abuse forward to the first women they come across.

Or maybe it’s a good idea to expose abused women to non abusive men who might understand what they were going through so, you know, the abused women realize that all men aren’t scum?

The harpies in this article have some knowledge, or else an agenda, that stands in contradiction to this. I’m really not entirely sure which it is…but I’m leaning away from knowledge, and toward an agenda. Leanin’ hard.

Touching MoveOn Ad Re-Edited by Red State

Saturday, April 4th, 2009

So let’s see…if you’re all out of money, the thing to do is spend more money you don’t have. We add that one to the list that says when there’s an energy crisis because gas and oil are getting expensive, you need to keep the oil in the ground and burn food to make the cars go. When America faces an economic crisis from a bunch of companies failing you give the companies a whole lot of money other people have earned from doing other things…and if you find a tenth of a percent of it has gone toward bonuses, be sure and get the word out that nobody can personally benefit too much from saving these companies whose failure would surely be devastating to our economy.

This is way beyond Orwell. It’s a Bizarro world just like out of Superman comics. Recklessness is frugal, frugality is reckless, perverts are normal, normal people are perverts, spending money is saving it, saving it is wasting it, the way to “lead” a nation that is depressed is to talk some smack about it every chance you get (on foreign soil); and the solution to every single problem involving scarcity is to make it more difficult and expensive to produce whatever is scarce.

Update: I was out playing the seventh hole in frisbee golf when I suddenly realized I didn’t give a hat tip on this one. A belated thank you to Dr. Melissa Clouthier, and a shame on me.

Not In It For The Attention, Mind You… XXIX

Saturday, April 4th, 2009

…but House of Eratosthenes is behind the Quote of the Day at Michelle Malkin’s Hot Air.

“I’ve met a lot of women who’ve achieved remarkable things in a man’s world. I have admiration for all of them. But I have a lot more admiration for the ones who managed to get it done, without becoming bitter. Such an extraordinary thing, in ordinary women.

But for the woman who aspires to lead us all? Lead us all, in that way we keep talking about? It seems like so little to ask. And Palin’s got it.

The ones who don’t have that…can’t stand it.”

As I was typing it in, I was thinking “I hope to God Becky never sees this.” (I think our respect was mutual, though neither of us would’ve admitted it…and holy cats, that woman was bitter, although she lost her bite as time wore on.) How ironic that because of that one occasional nice thing said about the fairer sex, The Blog That Nobody Reads is hit thousands of times in the space of an hour.

Now the world thinks I’m some super-polite, sweater-wearing politically-correct guy, rather being a somewhat-lovable somewhat-sexist jerk — “My favorite male chauvinist pig in the whole world,” in Daphne‘s words. Oh, dear. How damaging to my rep. How embarrassing.

We’re probably going to break an all-time traffic record over the weekend…possibly Monday as well…and all these thousands of people see us for the very first time, and form a mental image that looks something like…

You know, if there was a way to admire the awesomeness that is Sarah Palin and remain a decent sexist jerk at exactly the same time…I’d not only be doing it, I’d find a way to patent it. It does not seem the laws of physics, in this universe, will allow such a thing. So I’m gonna have to buy a whole fistful of these

Also linked by Free Republic, and Ace. Gerard got the ball rolling.

The Tax Cheat Thinks You Make Too Much (Maybe)

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

Hat tip to Neal Boortz.

It scares the daylights out of me to think a sitting Congressman would display himself as incapable of comprehending the simple concept of a law possibly being regrettable, because of what it leaves undefined. What is scarier, Congressman Grayson pretending to see things the way he’s pretending to see ’em, or really presenting himself honestly and accurately here? Nevermind the point about Constitutional authority; just stick to framework, here.

What would Congressman Grayson have to say about a local ordinance that says “don’t you dare drive somewhat fast down this here road”? What if the local Sheriff was a Republican? Would he be able to understand the potential for abuse then?

Hmmm…I need to get a list started, in case someone comes askin’. Palin-Petraeus, Palin-Hannan, Palin-Boortz, Palin-Cavuto?

Why They Hate Sarah Palin So Much

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

As Barack Obama continues to serve out Jimmy Carter’s second term, the nation has over three years to figure out what it really thinks about Sarah Palin. As of now, I think it’s fair to say nobody feels lukewarm about her. At all. You love her or you hate her.

Much has been said about why people like her. Especially here. Perhaps it’s time to jot down the reasons why she inspires so much resentment…so much hate.

The people who really feel it, I think, for the most part don’t understand themselves why they feel it. This seems to me to be a great tragedy. If you’re nurturing such hostile passions, you ought to at least know why.

So this is just a list to keep in hand, throughout 2012. Toward the end, as the GOP heads into its convention, I would hope the Republican officials will be somewhat sincere in wanting to learn what plain, ordinary, humdrum voters really think about things. At that point, it’s really up to you. Support Huckabee or Romney, by all means, if you think they do a better job of representing conservative values. Or, if you don’t, and simply hate Alaska’s Governor on a personal level. My suggestion is simply that you get your thoughts straight in your own little head, first & foremost.

People feel threatened by Palin because she reminds us that…

1. There is room at the top, not just for women, but for pretty women

Like any energized populist movement, feminism achieved glory by playing to the wishes of ankle-biters. By “ankle-biters” I mean people who want to shake up a power structure, not quite so much for the purpose of improving anything, but just for the sake of saying they did it. People to whom it comes so easily to criticize what’s being done, but leave all that dry, boring, propose-a-better-solution stuff to someone else.

Palin Rocks!It played to the passions of strong women who were tired of watching male politicians screw things up, and to the passions of weak, passive, wallflower women who craved that security blanket of anonymity. That’s why we’ve had so many women serving in Congress by now, but we still haven’t had a female President — nor, I would argue, have we had a viable female candidate for same. A Congresswoman can safely and effectively clone herself from the next Congresswoman. Presidents stand by themselves and they are ritually abused for this, no matter what. Even Barack Obama. Fact is, many among us don’t see this job as a good fit for the ladies…it’s too degrading…and those are not all white men.

In playing to the weak, wallflower women who don’t want to distinguish themselves in any way, feminism has become an advocacy group for those who lack appeal. With time, it has become an advocacy group for those women who work at not having any appeal. And I’m not talking sex appeal. I mean, being ready to engage in dialogues instead of monologues; talking to people in some way other than as a cross stepmother; motivating your man to come home instead of go out somewhere else, when he’s in the mood for some sex; acting like that’s important to you. We’ve seen the incremental rise of a counterculture of females who are in a great hurry not to have any appeal to anyone else, or to be beholden to anyone else — except other females who don’t have any appeal to anyone else and aren’t beholden to anyone else. They’re a grown-up version of those chubby goth chicks you knew in high school who didn’t know how to behave in public, didn’t care to learn, were horribly out of shape, and kept to their own at all times.

Most of our female politicians seem to think that’s their constituency. This is a sensitive paradigm, and the prospect of shifting it makes a lot of people uncomfortable.

2. There’s a difference between following protocol and being boring

I’ve heard an awful lot of chatter since last fall about Sarah Palin being a dumbass and a klutz and a dimwit. The picture to be painted, is one of some redneck yokel raised up in some backwoods hick town in the most remote areas of Alaska. But isn’t it funny — the time comes to present the evidence, and what can they show me: A couple of awkward moments with Katie and Charlie, making names for themselves by ambushing Palin with Trivial Pursuit questions. After that, it’s time to really scrape the bottom of the barrel, they have to go on Saturday Night Live and invent some Palin quotes about seeing Russia from her house.

Yeah, well where’s the inbred hick from upstate? Anyone got footage of Palin spitting tobacco in the middle of an interview, or maybe picking her nose?

No, from what I’ve seen, Palin is at least as adept as following the details of protocol as any refined lady. I don’t think she’d hug the Queen of Great Britain, or give Gordon Brown a set of DVDs that won’t even play on the equipment back in his home.

Now, take a good look at your typical politician — conservative, liberal, white, not, male, female, gay, straight. They’re all good at following protocol too, right? Of course; you’d have to be. Now listen to them speak…and John Conyers, I’m looking right at you. Imagine yourself being offered a job where you’d have to listen to that for twelve hours every single day. What would your salary have to be? A lot, right? It’s like Ferris Bueller’s math teacher…at half-speed.

An occasional “you betcha” suddenly doesn’t sound that awful, now does it.

3. Conservatives, when all’s said and done, aren’t really committed to keeping women in the kitchen…

Palin Signing AutographsQuite to the contrary, that Palin fan club seems to be bursting at the seams with men, men and more men. These generation-spanning memes, leitmotifs, hymns and dirges about men working overtime to keep women oppressed and powerless, seem to have been vastly overstated.

A great blow has been dealt to that companion theme, and don’t believe for a minute that nobody’s sensitive to it — because people are, in a bad way. And that companion theme is that when the lady of a household sees fit to rise up to more eminent and prestigious responsibilities than vacuuming the carpets and washing the dishes, the household must become more leftward-leaning. We’re exorcising the spirit of Archie Bunker, after all. Well, it turns out that isn’t necessarily true.

Conservative households are, quite plain and simply, sick to death of watching normal people treated like sick, weird degenerates, and sick, weird degenerates treated like normal people. Men who are fatigued by that, tend to match up with women who are fatigued by that; and once we build a household with them, we don’t need to keep them shackled in the kitchen. Our women tend to share our values. That’s why we tend to like them, and they tend to like us.

4. …and liberals aren’t that committed to truly liberating them

What goes on on the liberal side of the fence, when it comes to putting a household together and showing each other mutual respect across that gender barrier? If a guy figures out he can meet up with the above-mentioned chubby-goth-chick by mumbling all the right catchphrases about “make love, not war” and “womens’ right to choose”…and things work out, and they actually get hitched and start a life together…can it be truthfully said they have mutual respect for each other?

Back in my younger and dumber days, I dated some liberal women. I doubt that mutual-respect thing very, very much.

Every day we’re reminded that on Planet Liberal, the worthiness of an idea is not determined by its content, but by who authored it. And if you’re a white male, they really don’t have a place for you; not unless you get yourself elected to a high public office, and do some big things to advance the liberal agenda. So you can be a Kennedy or a Kerry or a Schumer or a Durbin or a Frank…or a Bill Clinton…otherwise, they really don’t want to hear anything out of you.

Which means — nothing new out of one of those hated white males, no matter what. After all, what comes out of the white-male-liberal gentlemen listed immediately above, that strays outside of the liberal plantation? Not a blessed thing. The gift those intellectuals have given the liberal movement, is not a gift of new ideas, but new ways to package up old ideas so new suckers can be found who will buy them.

Do they have any place for the non-white non-straight non-male, then? It does not seem to be the case. Hillary hasn’t had the courage to venture past the liberal plantation, either; she did vote for the authorization of the use of military force in Iraq, of course. How did that work out for her? Has her leadership as a strong woman motivated the liberal power-structure to open up to these new ideas? No, she’s been paying for it ever since.

No, liberalism really doesn’t have to do with liberating women, or liberating anyone else for that matter. With liberalism, the agenda always comes first. That’s Rule #1. Rule #2 is that when you’re in doubt, refer back to Rule #1.

5. Running a city is not a liberal thing

This is an issue that isn’t discussed very much…except maybe in these pages, and here only once in a great while.

It’s got to do with the running of a city. Our nation has, at this moment, a long list of large metropolitan canyons — great, expansive, hulking things one hesitates to call “cities” — that have been under solid liberal governance for generations. Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, DC, Seattle, Baltimore. Many, many others.

How they doin’?

Not so hot. Finances, crime rate, construction, blight…pretty much any way they can possibly suck, they suck. And why is that? Liberalism, I have noticed, is really less of an ideological position than a lifetime pursuit. A good liberal has to show his liberalism all the time, with every little thing he does. It’s like some kind of “employee of the month” award that keeps getting taken away. Prometheus’ gizzard in reverse.

And so a traffic intersection is deemed worthy of a new traffic light control…or a business park needs a new dumpster collection site…perhaps a new housing development needs a water supply. In liberal cities, the unstated goal is to find the most left-wing way to get it done. This demands some creativity, because there really isn’t a liberal way to collect garbage. And it also calls for some relaxation in the drive to get the job effectively and economically done…because…again, there really isn’t a liberal way to collect garbage.

Sarah Palin’s experience working her own way up, organizational layer by organizational layer, through the mayoral office and into state and national politics, really hits a nerve with people who are invested in the status quo. She did this as a life-loving conservative. And it would seem she’s done a pretty good job of it. There are no stories about Wasilla’s crime rate exploding during her tenure as Mayor, no stories about the unemployment rate spiraling out of control…and don’t you believe for a second that there hasn’t been any diligent search for such stories.

6. Remember what feminists were telling women about “having it all”? They didn’t mean it

Damn straight they didn’t. Signs indicate that Palin is a forceful, benevolent, fortifying and fulfilled wife and mother. And, word has it she does some other stuff too.

The nastiness and pettiness this has brought out in people. It isn’t just acrid. It is…history-making. Unprecedented.

Our society has some dark demons in it, not all of them ancient.

7. In these modern times, there is room for hunting, fishing, target shooting, dogsled races and flying airplanes

There is a significant, indeed a mighty, backlash against Sarah Palin that has nothing at all to do with her public life or her electoral ambitions. It isn’t that she’s supposed to be some redneck backwoods hick from Alaska who doesn’t know how to do anything; quite to the contrary, it has to do with the things she does.

Dangerous GamesThe riding motorcycles and ATVs. The handling and firing of guns. Not so much doing manly things, but fun things.

A lot of people haven’t been doing those fun things. Except when they see other people doing fun things, they’re suddenly energized — not to start doing those fun things themselves — but to stop others from doing them. For the last several decades, our nation has been in a state of decline, with fewer and fewer people doing things that take some know-how. And I’m not talking about fixing your car or your kitchen sink (although there is an issue there, too); I’m talking about recreating.

Deep down, I think people understand that when they use the video game console as an electronic babysitter for their own kids, weekend after weekend after weekend, this is a bad thing…unless everyone else within line-of-sight is doing the same thing with their kids, and then it’s alright. This is a subtle phenomenon that is playing out in the very fabric of our culture. For example, how many kids live in a “divided” household now? More do than don’t, right? Something like that?

If you’re a single-dad living in a cold climate, and your weekends consist of holing up and watching teevee, but mommy and her new boyfriend spend those same weekends going skiing…you will be hearing about it. And you should. But people tend to be more contagious with their dilatory behaviors than with their productive and beneficial behaviors. Contagious — and nasty. Nothing ticks people off like someone doing something they themselves damn well know they should be doing. Especially when it comes to having fun with one’s own kids, and teaching them about the adventures and pleasantries life really has to offer.

8. If you look outside the beltway for your leadership, you might find someone who’s effective and not neck-deep in scandal

We saw it with President Obama’s first appointments, at least, the ones that didn’t get in trouble for their back-taxes. Oh look, a Clinton toady…and another one…and another one…and another one. It’s just the same crowd over and over again.

What’s Bill Clinton all about? Well, he can’t keep his pants zipped, but it’s okay because he’s such a wonderful leader and we really need to keep our leaders public service separate from their private lives. Hasn’t that become the Clinton motto?

Well, there’s a problem with that: They don’t keep those things separate. Try this. Research five or six or so, Clinton lieutenants. White House officials, cabinet level positions, administrative folks…whoever. Were those the “most qualified” people in those jobs? No, they weren’t. They were friends. And there’s nothing unique about the Clintons here. It’s that old game of “It isn’t what you know, it’s who you know.”

Every four years we make a big show out of scouring from coast to coast, to find the “best” people for the presidential race. That’s a sham. It’s pretty much the same crowd…all the time. Barack Obama managed to break in to the circle by offering some sales skills, at a time when the democrat party needed those skills the most. Which is a damning indictment when you think about it — because when you’re selling a decent product you really don’t need a fresh face every few years to get it sold. But that’s another story.

The grim reminder here is that these little hiccups we keep hearing about…they aren’t the product of a merciless rectal exam that would bring embarrassment down upon even the most innocent among us. That isn’t the case at all. I’m a real flesh-and-blood guy; I haven’t been perfect; there’s things from my past that would embarrass me, I think. But I haven’t been getting my genitals sucked by an intern while I was on the phone with a congressman. You’re probably a flesh-and-blood person too. I’ll bet you haven’t been attending church services led by an America-hating bigot.

Fact is, our leaders have been just-plain-bad because we’ve been in a stupor. Just like the battered wife rationalizing away about how wonderful her husband is when he isn’t drunk.

We’ve been settling. It’s self-explanatory how there are people around with a vested interest in our continuing to settle.

Sarah Palin is a reminder that we don’t have to. If we’re willing to look beyond the same old crowd, searching for the skills and talents we keep telling ourselves we want to find, we’re apt to discover a lot of the embarrassment we’ve been enduring has been entirely unnecessary.

If we’re just going to look at the same old names, only pretending to look for some real talent…we’re apt to just keep wallowing in the same old filth. You always do whatcha always done, you’ll always get whatcha always got.

9. Success-by-Rolodex is an outdated notion — blend determination together with optimism, and having the right friends will follow

Now this is scary. Imagine that Sarah Palin’s success is due, not quite so much to John McCain choosing her last year, but rather to technology that wasn’t here ten years ago but is bound to stick around from here on out.

It’s not so far-fetched. Half a century ago, you couldn’t “Google” someone’s name and find out about them…or go looking for something else, and trip across their name. And so people did what they had been doing for centuries before that: They exchanged introductions by word-of-mouth.

Well, that worked out pretty well, as long as it was mutually understood that when people “vouched,” they did so for the newcomer’s character. Problem: In politics, it seems people don’t do their vouching for that, or anything like it. Once favors are involved, the vouching takes on a treacherous discoloration of quid-pro-quo. It works like this: You are A. You know B and you don’t know C. If B wants to vouch for C but you don’t owe B anything, then B has to explain some good things about C. Maybe C is a good salesman like Barack Obama; maybe C sticks to his convictions like George W. Bush; maybe C is just a cutthroat sonofabitch like Rahm Emmanuel. Whichever one it is, maybe you’ll go for it. But you’ve got to know why. B has to explain why. B has to give details on what, exactly, is being supported on the buttress and foundation of your good name.

If you do owe B something, then it’s all different. B just gives C the thumbs-up. You comply.

And so, throughout the centuries, politics has become a dirtier and dirtier business. People talk over and over again about so-and-so being “just a great guy”; nobody says anything about what’s so great. In that sense, ironically, President Obama is not a new kind of candidate — he represents not only an ancient class of candidate, but a doomed one. Yes, more people approve of him right now, than approve of Sarah Palin. There was a lot of money spent to make things turn out that way.

But that’s also the nature of transparency. A lot of people don’t have the maturity to be ready for it. Their time will come…as soon as they realize there are real decisions they can be making about things, and these decisions are more important than a vote on American Idol.

Say what you will about Palin’s weaknesses…and her strengths. At least she’s transparent. We knew, from Day One, what she was all about. We were never deceived about her, one way or another, except for those among us who chose to be.

Obama, on the other hand, being yesterday’s type of politician — is just “wonderful,” that’s all. We were never permitted, by his handlers, to know exactly what was so wonderful about him.

10. It really isn’t a good idea to let Charlie Gibson, Katie Couric and Alec Baldwin choose our leaders

The power to get together with your buddies in downtown Manhattan, and write a list of interview questions, or a variety show skit, that will eventually change the world — it has to be an intoxicating thing. And an addictive one.

But sooner or later, it’ll have to be a former addiction. People will get tired of the whole process. It’s an abuse of trust, this hoodwinking of millions of people into thinking Sarah Palin’s a dimwit, just because that’s what you want them to think.

And as this realization sinks in…the realization that Obama was elected, just because some sheltered, spoiled media stars wanted it to work out that way…please understand, the realization is going to sink in silently. It’s a humbling thing to have to admit you made a mistake, just because someone wanted you to make it, and you did some obeying when you really should have been doing some thinking.

People aren’t that vocal about their humbling experiences.

And I don’t think all their buyers’ remorse over Obama is going to immediately translate into goodwill for Palin. Far from it. But I do think there will be more than a few second thoughts about the qualifications of the morning talk show celebrities to make our decisions for us, about who’s a genius and who’s a dumbass. I don’t think anyone objects to the notion that Couric, Gibson, et al carried an energized agenda to make Palin look like a dimwit. I don’t think anyone contests the idea that the plan worked, exactly as it was intended to. What I think people are divided about, is whether they should carry some resentment about what was done, and how easy it was.

And I think that’s going to shift, over time, in a single direction…as people gradually figure out they were manipulated.

I expect Palin will be refining her techniques, as well. You don’t get to be Governor of Alaska without demonstrating some capabilities at learning new things, especially about how to relate to people. She’s young and energetic enough to still be learning, and she’s shown some signs of doing this learning. It’s learning she needs to do, in order to reach out to an audience bigger than, and culturally different from, the audience to which she’s accustomed.

That’s exactly where Bill Clinton was his first year out of Arkansas. By the time Clinton was in the national limelight as long as Palin has been by now, it was…lessee…seven months? He was still campaigning, right? The whole Travel Office scandal, Vince Foster, Hillary Healthcare, Quota Queen — months and years away. Public relations boondoggles, every single one. And not just “oopsies”; they were products of inexperience in performing on a national stage.

So Sarah Palin will do her learning. Of that, I have no doubt. The real question is whether the rest of us will get ours done.

11. Chicks can say stuff

Why do you think John McCain wasn’t out there, like Sarah Palin was, reminding people that Obama had been “palling around with terrorists”? Is that because, like the Generals who were losing the Civil War before the genius of Ulysses Grant was realized, he comes from a more civilized age? Because he wants to be everybody’s “friend”? Because he’s hoping to keep some comaraderie alive with the Manhattan blue-blood crowd, that may be helpful to McCain but is anything-but to the Republican party?

Yes, yes and oh hell yes.

But it’s also because John McCain is an old-white-guy. And there’s such a seething resentment against old-white-guys, a layered, cumulative one…rather like a stalagmite in a cave made entirely of guano. It’s been decades in the making. It comes from Watergate; the national mood that set in after Watergate; and most of all, from the television shows and movies that were made after Watergate.

When rich old white guys attack, it’s to keep a power structure in place and to keep the rest of us down. Blacks, Asians, women, homosexuals, secularists, poor people. And liberals. The last of which, explains why you can be as white and as male and as straight and as wealthy and as corrupt as anybody else, and still lash out with all the nastiness and venom that suits you, so long as you’re a liberal. You’ll live to fight another day. Because a liberal rich old white guy going on the attack, is just not part of the stereotype.

Rush Limbaugh — still! — won’t apologize for saying he wants Barack Obama to fail. Rush is still standing…but that’s only because there is no height from which he can fall. He hasn’t been elected to anything. If he could be taken down a peg, they’d be getting to him. Look at that fat, cigar-smoking, golf-playing, rich old white guy, attacking our Magical President, and refusing to apologize. You don’t really want to vote for this guy, do you? Rush would apologize. He’d have to. Apologize, or get ready for a real ass-whipping.

Any man who’s worked in an office with some resourceful, intelligent, determined or just-plain-pushy women, knows: Women can say stuff men can’t say. Aw hell, any man who’s been to a wedding, or roped into “helping” to organize one, knows this.

This is a huge spoiler for the entrentched liberal power structure. An important systemic belief that has helped them to get where they are, says that if nobody’s talking about Jeremiah Wright and the President’s other America-bashing asshole friends, there must not be anything worth discussing over there. But the truth is, it is only through negligence that we avoid talking about it. We just put someone in charge who has a long and rich history of associating with people who would do the country harm. And we did it to be politically correct.

Wonder Palin!Guys can’t point this out, especially if they’re rich, straight, white, and over 50. A woman who is known for seeking out positive relationships with people, when & where they can be positive, but is capable of speaking her mind nevertheless — certainly can.

And that’s a big point against Huck, Mitt and the rest of the gang. It isn’t that they’re rich white men. It’s that, if they go after this stuff, they’ll do it with kid gloves on because they will have to. I’m going to call this one early: The incumbent President, seeking re-election, won’t be playing with kid gloves.

12. Celebrating our similarities and not our differences: We talk a good game, but we’re not doing it

Sarah Palin does it. Class-wise, she is by herself. But she shares the interests of men…women who happen to be ugly…people who are not elected officials…people who don’t have seaplanes moored by docks in front of their houses…people who can’t fire guns and have no desire to learn…mothers who don’t have sons serving in Iraq, or giving birth to babies with special needs.

She represents a unique kind of politician. The representative who will establish and maintain a symbiotic relationship with you, as a constituent, without having anything demographically in common with you. She’s there to represent values. Not women, not mothers, not black people, not gays, not bigots. In short, she’s what we say we want to be getting when we vote for our Presidents. “He must be the President of all of us!” …how easily it rolls off our tongues.

But the President we did end up getting, is starting to resemble Hillary Clinton in one key way: Every little subject addressed, once the glittering bromides and platitudes have been exhausted, has to be eventually confronted with the illusion of a villain. Iraq, the crappy economy, the environment, the oil market, hiring and lending discrimination, abortions, crime, capital punishment…sooner or later, he has to veer off into that tired, toxic territory. You know why we’ve got a problem in the first place? Because of this individual…or that class. Please join me in a two-minute hate. Help me hate that guy over there.

This is the rhetoric of a President that does not represent all of us, and doesn’t try to. It’s the rhetoric of a public official who is accustomed to receiving automatic support and praise, from whoever shares his class memberships. Who is accustomed to obligatory adulation, and therefore enjoying the latitude to make enemies just for the sake of making enemies.

If we can simply recognize some of the problems we have, are due not so much to the machinations of some alien, unfamiliar villain…but rather, to our own historical neglect…a lot of them would vanish in a heartbeat. If we place power in the hands of someone who volunteers, simply to unite us the way we want to be united, some of these problems would disappear overnight. This is why — just as an example — we had a crippling energy crisis and inflation crisis in 1980. And, just a short time after that, we did not. It’s got to do with pulling our minds out of that toxic gutter.

I’ve met a lot of women who’ve achieved remarkable things in a man’s world. I have admiration for all of them. But I have a lot more admiration for the ones who managed to get it done, without becoming bitter. Such an extraordinary thing, in ordinary women.

But for the woman who aspires to lead us all? Lead us all, in that way we keep talking about? It seems like so little to ask. And Palin’s got it.

The ones who don’t have that…can’t stand it.

Cross-posted at Right Wing News.

Update: Aiigggh!! The Blog That Nobody Reads is highlighted for the Quote of the Day over at Michelle Malkin’s Hot Air…and we’ve been posted at Free Republic as well…caught saying something nice about women. Oh, the shame of it. We’ll have to rudely demand a cold beer from the fridge a hundred times in a row, without saying “please,” just to start work on restoring that coveted knuckle-dragging sexist rep.

Welcome, folks. Have a look around. Take off the hat & coat and stay awhile.

Update 4/4/09: Also linked at Ace, who zooms in on our “flame-baity fun” about feminists (way up in Bullet Point #1). Ah…now we’re magnificent sexist bastards again. Much better.

Ace also has a thoughtful treatise up on how Palin would be treated as a candidate. I have mixed feelings about evaluating the conservative prospects this way. It’s an unavoidable exercise, I suppose; but on the other hand, it seems every time we go down that road we end up with a milquetoast as the champion of the cause. A milquetoast who is then mercilessly attacked with a full-frontal assault from Manhattan, Hollywood, and every inch of lefty turf in between…the avoidance of which was the entire point of the exercise.

The turbulent years that delivered me to middle age, have had a chiseling effect on the once-complicated machinery by which I used to perceive the word “futility.” My midsection is bloated, my face is craggy, my hair is gray, and nowadays I’m simplistic and pragmatic about the idea that something might be futile. To me, if you were supposed to get something out of it, and you didn’t, and there was no “gosh darn it” moment along the way fomenting an unusually negative outcome, it was futile. So I didn’t need any warnings from anybody about that Nigerian asshole who wanted to use my bank account. Where my wisdom would’ve otherwise failed me, my cynicism took care of the rest.

And that goes for finding a non-offensive, P.C., lovable, exactly-six-foot-tall guy-smiley “I can be moderate too!” super-bland straight white dude. The Left clearly fears Palin, just as the Nazis feared General Patton. It’s completely freaking obvious. They fear her, they fear nobody else, and they’re bending over backwards to get her stigmatized because social stigma is how they do their thinking. It’s Item #2 on the list of How To Motivate Large Numbers of People To Do a Dumb Thing, Without Anyone Associating the Dumb Thing With Your Name Later On.

Sorry, that’s kind of a whole new topic and perhaps would’ve justified a post of its own. It was a ramble and a rant. I’ll shut up now.

Rich White A-Holes Going Galt

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

I had to highlight it even though it’s nothing more than just another racist pinhead spewing bile.

It’s part of a big social phenomenon, and a powerful one. Even though it’s wrong.

Our “friend” gets going, on the news of an Atlas Shrugged movie that is increasingly likely to begin filming next year.

I can’t wait for all these rich white assholes to go “Galt.” ‘Galt’ is my word for “go fark yourselves.” Please do it, oh please. Give up tens of thousands in income because you’re too farking stupid to understand progressive taxation. I love it. Let me grab my popcorn.

I hope this movie gets tremendous distribution and does bonkers box office. Everyone should know how utterly shallow, greedy and morally bankrupt this bullshiat is. Then we can bury the skeevy, skanky corpse of that wretched bulldyke Rand for once and for all.

Well, the “rich” part is a relative thing, but I’m a white asshole, and I’m too farking stupid to understand progressive taxation. Someone please explain it to me. But seriously. Nobody gives a rat’s ass if I go Galt. Nevertheless…here’s a news flash…going Galt? It can easily be a passive thing, you know. It doesn’t begin and end with some chatty guy climbing on a soapbox, jabbing his finger in the air, speaking truth to power…et cetera. None of that.

Going Galt is simply a process of deciding something is too much of a pain in the ass and not doing it anymore. Like starting your Saturday morning a little different because Starbucks is a thousand yards away instead of five hundred…and the weather sucks. None of this makes too much sense to the salaried, middle-class wage slave. It’s the folks on the high end and on the low end. The ones thinking about investing in something that would create jobs for others, or simply getting a job. Naw…why bother. Too much of a pain in the ass.

It isn’t an all-or-nothing thing, either. It can be…and is…an incremental thing.

Wake up, folks. The rich white assholes aren’t thinking about going Galt, or contemplating it, or cogitating on it, or hemming-and-hawing about it. We’re there right farking now.

So toss that popcorn baggie in the microwave. Right now. It’s time.

Crowder on Biden

Thursday, April 2nd, 2009

The current administration is being given special treatment?

Say it ain’t so, Joe.

Frank Battles the House Republicans

Thursday, April 2nd, 2009

Wow, did you see how Congressman Barney Frank, the guy who bears more individual responsibility for the financial mess than any living human, handled those House Republicans? Huffington Post is just all leg-tingly about it.

“This is really extraordinary,” he said. “What you have just heard is a denunciation of something the Congress did a few weeks ago and a refusal to undo it. I’ve never seen people, Mr. Chairman, so attached to something they hate. This is presumably a psychological disorder which I am not equipped to diagnose. The objection of the gentleman from Texas was that when the recovery bill was passed, it was passed too quickly [and it] included a provision that shouldn’t have been in there. This bill takes it out.”

“It is undone by this. And speaking of being undone, my Republican colleagues are being undone by the loss of their whipping boy,” Frank said, arguing that Republicans enjoyed scoring political points over the AIG bonuses but didn’t want to cap executive compensation generally.

“Truly, all I ask is transparency and for the taxpayers and the people of America to have time to read the bill,” responded [Texas Republican Congressman John] Culberson.

“The bill under consideration is five-and-a-half pages,” Frank said. “I believe even the gentleman from Texas could have read it by now. And if the gentleman from Texas has not been able to read this five-and-a-half page bill, I’ll talk long and even if he reads slow, he’ll get it done. The point is that this bill undoes what he is complaining about. Note the refusal to address the subject.”

Frank then offered some free psychoanalysis. “My colleagues on the other side, it’s kind of like kids who have had a toy bear or a blanket and this security blanket means a lot to them. Their security blanket is being able to complain about something that happened before the break,” he said.

The Huffington Post crowd is much more interested in the delivery of an idea than the idea itself, but for me, it’s not the idea itself that captures my fascination, so much as the other ideas that must support it.

House Republicans had criticism for the democrat leadership when the bailout legislation allowed the bonuses to take place. They aren’t obediently following along as the democrat leadership tries to close this loophole. That, on Planet Frank, deserves all kinds of commentary…and an offer of “free psychoanalysis.”

On the about-face the democrat leadership did…this Homer Simpson slap-own-forehead-and-yell-“D’Oh!” move…there is no occasion for comment whatsoever.

No allowance made for the possibility that maybe, just maybe, Republicans are opposed on principle to the government dictating bonuses — and spoke out a few weeks ago because hey, they still know incompetence when they see it.

Hey. Did ya hear the one about the Tooth Fairy, the Easter Bunny, the democrat that was able to accept responsibility and the democrat that was not…walking down the sidewalk and seeing $850 billion lying there? Which one picked it up?

The democrat incapable of accepting responsibility, of course. The other three don’t exist!

Consensual Living

Thursday, April 2nd, 2009

That’s the name of a new way to raise your kid. Cassy calls it just-plain-lazy parenting. Looks like just another way to mass-produce liberals without realizing it, to me.

In the consensual living model, father doesn’t know best. Neither does mom. Instead, parents and children are equal partners in family life, according to the principles laid out at consensual-living.com.

Founded in 2006 by a group of families in North Carolina, consensual living is gaining ground in alternative parenting communities and online, including a Yahoo group with about 900 members.
:
Lindsay Hollett of Nanaimo, B.C., says that she began to snap less with her husband, Craig, and her 18-month-old daughter, Kahlan, after she adopted the consensual-living mindset about a year ago.

Her days became more relaxed when she focused more on Kahlan’s needs, she says. If she had a doctor’s appointment but her daughter was feeling grumpy, for example, Ms. Hollett would not force Kahlan to wait with her to see the doctor. Instead, Ms. Hollett might cancel the appointment or arrange alternative child care, she says.

Listening to her child’s feelings doesn’t mean that every last thing is negotiable, such as being strapped in a car seat, she says. But if they have to go somewhere, she adds, “I’ll do everything I can to make the car-seat ride more comfortable.”

For now, Ms. Hollett says, the onus is on her to be a role model for consensual living principles such as empathy and mutual respect for her daughter. As Kahlan grows older, though, “it won’t just be me empathizing with her.”

Understanding a child’s developmental stage is a crucial aspect of parenting, according to Alyson Schafer, a Toronto-based psychotherapist and author of Breaking the Good Mom Myth and the recently released Honey, I Wrecked the Kids.

But, she adds, children must be taught to respect a higher authority, such as social expectations. Cancelling an appointment because of a child’s mood sends the wrong message, Ms. Schafer says. “It’s a parent’s job to socialize a child.”

I was going to enter a comment to the effect that Cassy was being way too premature in her judgment, that I disagreed with her emphatically. It was April 1, after all. But I quickly figured out that I wouldn’t be fooling anyone.

I’d have a great deal more affection and sympathy for this newest method of child-spoilage if it was pure anarchy. As it is…what the hell? Mom and Dad don’t know best, but you have to “respect a higher authority, such as social expectations”?

Isn’t that a rather simplified version of — you don’t know right from wrong, but you need to depend on complete strangers to tell you what it is? From where does all this wisdom known as “social expectations” arrive? From people, right? Who raised those people? Didn’t they have mothers and fathers…who also didn’t know best? So from what terrace does this wonderful knowledge of do-this-don’t-do-that trickle down? Do we just single out whoever among us has the most wonderful hopey-changey gift of gab, and elect that guy President?

Can I be blunt here? Waitaminnit…it’s my blog…of course I can. This universe doesn’t give two shits about your “feelings” or your “needs” — not at any instant in time, not at any moment from cradle-to-grave. It doesn’t care. Hierarchies of human authority, they care. But only in one direction.

When it comes time to get real work done, you have to get your plowing done in the springtime or you can’t plant. You have to get your irrigating done in the summer or nothing will grow, and you have to get your harvesting done in the fall or your product will rot. That’s true of all levels of technology. The compiler doesn’t care if you find the error messages to be discouraging.

It seems to me the real danger of a parenting method like this, is that it will work a portion of the time. It will work when your child is raised to become an adult who is only fit to engage a subset of the experiences that life has to offer. You would have to send such a young adult to college; a good one. You would have to do this, because the life for which you’ve prepared them would be one in which they get to give the orders — using authority they may have, but didn’t really earn with any genuine experience — and then the orders would be carried out by better men than they. Real grown-ups who were raised under a mindset that work, where it exists, is non-sentient, and uncaring about the worker’s emotional state. Guys who can fire guns, sharpen knives and tie knots.

The military has a saying for situations like this: “If you want to know how the war should be going, ask the General; if you want to know how it really is going, ask a Private.” Except that’s different. You have to do a lot of things, grapple with some situations that aren’t under your control, to achieve a pre-defined outcome, to become a General.

Tracy Miller Quinn, owner and operator of a laudable blog in her own right, and mother of two, objects to childless Cassy’s condemnation of the consensual-living model. This leads to a lively and occasionally entertaining exchange. Well, I’m the father of one, who will be turning twelve this summer…so my experience falls short of Quinn’s in some ways, and exceeds hers in others. I think she’s demonstrated here how a point can deliver some merit while remaining devoid of applicability. If Cassy really doesn’t know what she’s talking about (and I’ve been reading her for awhile; trust me, she does), then, in this situation, she’s the stopped clock that happens to be right.

Kids, at the age under discussion, are amazing things. Their brains do not work the same way our adult brains do. They have been designed, and constructed, to do most of their thinking with the orbito-frontal cortex, in a way we can’t match. To do their thinking with the word “no.” This is how they stay alive, when they don’t yet understand the more complicated and involved cause-and-effect thinking, and haven’t yet accumulated the experience necessary to break down abstract ideas according to those terms.

It is…to coin a phrase…an intelligent design. A complex design. A design that incorporates an organism, a maturing process for the organism, and — parents. This consensual parenting, from what I’ve been able to learn about it, is the abjuration of a crucial learning process that must necessarily be achieved in full somewhere around age five, so that the child is ready to build on this knowledge of “no” and absorb more complex lessons later on. If they don’t lay this critical foundation, they can’t be prepared for what’s built on top.

And then what would have to happen is we get more of what we’ve already got, up to our eyeballs: People who aren’t fit to take on real work. Non-sentient work. Work that doesn’t give a flying fig how happy or sad they are at the time they’re expected to take it on. People who are supremely aware of their own emotions, but uncaring about those of others. Because they didn’t learn about that when they were supposed to: At ages one-and-a-half, to five. There never was a need to develop such a skill, at that critical bracket. They would then have to be coddled, their emotions pandered-to, from womb to tomb.

They would be crippled. Severely. If you took a hammer to their kneecaps and put them in a wheelchair for life, you wouldn’t be limiting their prospects nearly as much. Sorry if that comes off as a shocker…but that’s not an exaggeration at all.

Best case scenario is, they will then somehow end up in command of others, who can do the work that has to be done — so they can take the credit for it.

Save up that college fund if you raise your kids this way. Save, hope, and pray. Your kids would have to achieve authority without demonstrating they’re worthy of it, and then cross paths with a prospective employer maintaining high standards for hiring just the right people. But enforcing them only occasionally.

Of course, who am I kidding. American business is being re-defined as I write this…so maybe I’m just another old curmudgeon reciting boring old stories from his rocking chair about the way the world used to work.

It All Begins With an Investment…

Thursday, April 2nd, 2009

…and from there things spiral down.

Two Wheels on my Wagoner
[Mark Steyn]

Incidentally, the government “overhaul” of GM is a useful shorthand for where we’re heading:

The first quid pro quo for the government giving you money (or “investing”, as President Obama and David Brooks say) is that it gets to regulate your behavior. Not just who sits on your board or (see Sarkozy last week) where your factory has to be. When the government “pays” for your health care, it reserves the right to deny (as in parts of Britain) heart disease treatment for smokers or hip replacement for the obese. Why be surprised? When the state’s “paying” for your health, your lifestyle directly impacts its “investment.”

The next stage is that, having gotten you used to having your behavior regulated, the state advances to approving not just what you do but what you’re allowed to read, see, hear, think: See the “Canadian Content” regulations up north, and the enforcers of the “human rights” commissions. Or Britain’s recent criminalization of “homophobic jokes.”

You’d be surprised how painlessly and smoothly once-free peoples slip from government “investing” to government control.

Blogger friend Buck found, I think, the perfect cartoon about this, and the best article I’ve yet seen to go along with it…

You're Fired, I'll DrivePresident Obama said Monday, “my team will be working closely with GM to produce a better business plan.”

To that confident assertion he added these stern sentiments:

“They must ask themselves: Have they consolidated enough unprofitable brands? Have they cleaned up their balance sheets, or are they still saddled with so much debt that they can’t make future investments? Above all, have they created a credible model for how not only to survive, but to succeed in this competitive global market?”

Who is in a better position to know the answers to these questions? Rick Wagoner, the GM CEO for nine years and former GM chief financial officer who has been with the automaker since the late 1970s, even running one of its foreign affiliates in Brazil, and who holds a Harvard Business School MBA?

Or President Obama, a former community activist from the south side of Chicago with a great rhetorical gift?

The president answered that question this week by ordering Wagoner’s firing.
:
It should now be clear: Federal bailout funds are a corporate narcotic. Once a company starts taking them, a chemicallike dependence develops. The addict does whatever will bring in more of the drug. Ultimately, like heroin, the short-term euphoria gives way to decreased function for the recipient, even destruction.

Being a wild-eyed right-wing blogger in his underwear, and therefore an extremist, I see two distinctly separate issues here. (God willing, the typical “moderate” voter and taxpayer sees at least one.) There is the issue, first of all, of federalism and traditional restraint. How long do we have before GM employees are somehow forbidden from taking their personal salaries, which after all were made possible with taxpayer funded bailout money, and using them to send their precious curtain-critters to parochial schools? Or signing ’em up with that “hate group” known as the Boy Scouts? This is the issue Steyn brings to our attention from across the pond in jolly ol’ Great Britain.

And then, secondarily, there is the issue of effectiveness. IBD contrasts the experiences and talents of ex-chief Wagoner, against our Messiah in the White House. I perceive it to be more like Wagoner against Congressman Barney Frank, and it’s a scenario straight out of Atlas Shrugged — tough, ambitious, dedicated and experienced men are isolated from the decisions that matter, and the baton is passed to slick, glib shysters whose rolodexes are packed full of just the right names. Men who’ve built the careers not on building things, but destroying things. Not on coming up with a formula for a better brand of steel, or on saving a company from insolvency, or on marketing, or on finding a revolutionary new way to extract oil from shale rock…but on walking away from disasters without absorbing any of the blame.

How is this new class of decision-maker, whose occasional episodes of honesty can happen only by the purest type of accident, to supply the judgment and talent needed?

If you think that has a good shot at happening, with the private-sector specialists such as Wagoner gracelessly tossed over the side, you’ll probably gain a new sense of perspective after you get done watching this.