There was an error in this gadget

Tuesday, December 22, 2015

It's because I'm black, isn't it?

Kevin Williamson writes the best paragraph on the internet today:

The sage marketing wisdom is: “Under-promise and over-deliver.” That was hardly an option for Obama, who promised, quite literally (literally, Mr. Vice President!), a sea change. When you are billing yourself as the fulfillment of Hegelian capital-H history, as not only a redeemer of nations but a healer of planets, it gets a little awkward when you have to spend most of your administration explaining why the economy still kind of sucks and the secretary of state feels the need to lie about everything from the murder of diplomatic personnel to the fact that she’s storing state secrets in the crapper. If you had bought shares in Obama As Advertised and then had to sell them at the price of Obama In Fact, you’d know what it felt like to be running a mortgage-derivative fund back in 2008.

Read the whole thing here.

Friday, December 11, 2015

Trump vs. Krauthammer. Forget it Doc; you can't win.

At National Review, Charles Krauthammer excoriates the absurdity of Donald Trump’s call to ban Muslims from entry into the United States:

“I decline to join the chorus denouncing the Trump proposal as offensive and un-American. That’s too obvious. What I can’t get over is its sheer absurdity.”

Leave alone the somewhat dodgy assumption the proposal is "un-American".  Is it important that the proposal is absurd?  It may be - may be - absurd.  But there are any number of non-absurd reasons to for Trump to have made the proposal.  To roll just a few off the top of my head, by making this proposal, Trump is at one stroke:

… channeling the outrage of a population that is being told to stop being bigots, when they are not in fact bigots and they are in fact the ones under attack.

… moving the entire range of debate terms onto ground that a few days ago was untouchable, sacred territory.  Territory where Trump dominates and all the others fear to tread.  We will now – finally - be discussing exactly which people we ought to be excluding from entry and we all know damn well they will be Muslims.

… trolling his opponents into making very stupid comments that signal to the public that Trump’s opponents have no real intention of addressing the public’s concerns.  That it is un-American to try to keep jihadis out of America is tough sale to make for Presidential candidates.  I look forward to hearing some of them try to make it.


Why does Trump do stuff like this?  Seriously?  If he wants to win this election, why would he ever stop?

Sunday, November 15, 2015

Paris, Coulter, and Trump

Last Friday night Ann Coulter reacted to the vicious razzia against Paris by declaring that Donald Trump had just won the U.S. Presidential election, which doesn’t actually take place for almost another year.  I think I understand what she means, she has a very good point, and she may well be correct.

Consider:  The Obama administration is actually accelerating the immigration to America of thousands of Syrian men, and the President is allowing the word to go out he may unilaterally close the prison at Guantanamo and, contrary to law, move a bunch of Islamic terrorists from the offshore military prison to places here on the U.S. mainland.  Immediately after the Paris attack, Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission, declared the EU would make no change to its current policy of letting unidentified young Muslims simply walk into Europe by the hundreds of thousands.  Twenty four hours after the Islamist carnage in Paris, the three politicians running for the Democratic nomination for President reportedly made it through an entire two hour debate without a single one uttering the word Islamist.


What people in the West are witnessing is an increasingly shocking divide between what we see with our own eyes, and what our so-called leaders tell us is happening.  Islamist forces have been making jihad against us for decades now, and have inflicted thousands upon thousands of casualties, yet the Western world is still led by people who refuse to acknowledge we are being attacked in a religious war.  This cannot go on forever and it won’t.  And as Mark Steyn has pointed out, if respectable politicians refuse to discuss what must be discussed, then unrespectable politicians will fill the gap.  The more the Western political class repeats nonsense such as that Islam is a “religion of peace”, or that we have no choice but to allow millions of “migrants” to come into our lands just because they demand it, the more certain it becomes that a Donald Trump will become President of the United States.

Friday, October 23, 2015

Planned Parenthood, Benghazi, and our Fourth Estate

The Planned Parenthood videos and the Hillary Clinton testimony in front of the Congressional committee investigating the debacle at Benghazi have things in common and those things are depressing.  In both cases the wrong-doing is inarguable.  The ghouls at Planned Parenthood were negotiating prices for pieces of aborted humans.  They were haggling over the sale of baby parts.  Hillary Clinton knew at the time our ambassador was killed that he was killed in an organized terrorist attack, yet she helped to hide that fact from the American public for as long as possible. 

A second commonality is that in both cases the perpetrating parties continue to deny what is plainly obvious from evidence available to virtually anyone on the planet.  It’s literally (Literally, Mr. Vice President!) right there on video.

The depression starts in the next couple things the cases have in common.  One of those things is that what we have come to call the mainstream media – also known as the place where most voters probably get their news – is helping the perpetrating parties get away with it.  Executives, former employees, and business partners of Planned Parenthood were caught on tape in sales negotiations for pieces of aborted babies.  But CNN, ABC, CBS, the New York Times, etc., allow their customers to believe that if anything happened at all, it was that some sneaky conservatives are trying to frame Planned Parenthood with “highly edited” videos in order to defund “women’s health”.  Those same “news” organs are today in full-throated, lock-stepping, lip-syncing mode with the breaking news that Hillary Clinton has survived the “partisan” Republican attack made on her over the unfortunate events in Libya a few years ago that the GOP just keeps banging on about.


The really, really depressing part is that in both cases, it may well work.

Friday, October 2, 2015

Putin prowls, so Obama seeks a safe place to pee. It figures.

Labor force participation is the lowest it’s been since Carter was president.  Vladimir Putin publicly humiliated Barack Obama and the United States, both at a major United Nations gathering, and, viciously (and absolutely brilliantly), in our own, yuuuge, white elephant embassy in the heart of the Middle East.  Cities are falling to the Taliban as we lose Obama’s 'good war' in Afghanistan.  

So until some nut shot up a community college in Oregon, what was the top White House priority yesterday?  Naturally, like a laser-beam, it was focused on the burning issue of public transgender urination.

We are doomed.

Thursday, October 1, 2015

“Suppose they gave a war and nobody came?”

There was an “anti-war” poster in the 1960’s that read:  “Suppose they gave a war and nobody came?”

On the long list of deeply stupid, Communist-approved, academically encouraged, hippie bullshit from the Vietnam era, this one really stands out for its full-frontal mental retardation.  The point of the poster is that if nobody shows up to fight, you can’t have a war.  Deep man, pass me the joint.  The problem of course comes if you think about it even a little bit.  What can it possibly mean that somebody “gave a war”?  Doesn’t it mean that somebody has started fighting somebody.  Somebody has invaded somebody else?  Somebody has started shooting somebody else?  Somebody has started bombing somebody else?  That is, if somebody “(gives) a war” there will be other somebodies who don’t have the option to not come.  They are already there.  Being shot at.  Being invaded


This is so obvious one wonders show much dope people had to smoke in the 60’s for that poster to become popular?  “Suppose they gave a war and nobody came?”  The answer is simple: The invader wins.  Ask ISIS.  Ask Russia.  But don’t ask Barack Obama or the U.S. State Department.  Evidently they’re still rolling doobies in the dorm, talking deep talk.


Friday, July 10, 2015

CNN: Just Another Day at the Hack Factory

You may be aware it is believed that Chinese Communists hacked the US government's Office of Personnel Management's files and and copied personal background and security information on what is currently estimated to be 21 million people.  These seem to be mostly people who work for, or did work for, or even who frick'n applied to work for, the U.S. government.

The woman in charge of the agency responsible for not allowing that to happen has finally resigned today.  She had no qualifications for the job other than that she is a Latina and she worked hard for the Democratic party, and perhaps Barrack Obama, in various political roles.  Got that?  Barrack Obama put a completely unqualified affirmative-action political hack in charge of safeguarding the personal information of every single man and woman who has applied for a government security clearance since Bush the Elder was Vice President.

How does CNN cover this nuclear-grade incompetence by this serially-incompetent Democratic administration?



Exactly. By claiming it's the GOP's fault.  Truly stunning.

Tuesday, May 5, 2015

One does not...




Sunday, March 1, 2015

Unicorny Nuclear Deals

Jeffrey Goldberg posts at the Atlantic Danger Ahead for Obama on Iran:
“The perverse genius of Benjamin Netanyahu and his aides (and their Republican handmaidens) is that they have managed to turn a moment in which President Obama should have been busy defending his pursuit of a nuclear agreement with a dangerous adversary into a stress test of the U.S.-Israel relationship.”
He asserts that American Republicans, Israeli hawks, and Benjamin Netanyahu are willfully distracting Obama from the hard work in which he is honorably engaged: “defending his pursuit of a nuclear agreement”.  Got all that?  Our president is not, nor does Mr. Goldberg seem to believe he should be, defending a good agreement.  Nor, according to Mr. Goldberg, should he be pursuing a good agreement, or even, come to think of it, should he be trying to figure out whether a good agreement can even be had at this time.  No, what our President is currently doing and, according to Mr. Goldberg, what he should be doing, is “defending the idea that he is pursuing” an agreement.  There is so much wrong here it is hard to know where to begin.  How does Mr. Goldberg know any agreement being pursued here is or even could be defensible?  He himself concedes the agreement – as far as any of us know from reports – evidently  will involve allowing Iran to enrich uranium and, after a while, build nuclear warheads.

Indeed, Mr. Goldberg immediately admits the following:

“Netanyahu has a credible case to make. Any nuclear agreement that allows Iran to maintain a native uranium-enrichment capability is a dicey proposition; in fact, any agreement at all with an empire-building, Assad-sponsoring, Yemen-conquering, Israel-loathing, theocratic terror regime is a dicey proposition.”


Just so.  In fact, there is actually no agreement that can be made with Iran under the current circumstances.  They want to make nukes and we don’t want them to.  Somebody wins, somebody loses.  Benjamin Netanyahu didn’t make up those rules.  It’s the way the situation happens to be.  Which is I suppose rhetorically convenient for Mr. Goldberg’s case since as far as I can tell, his closer argument ( which he refers to as “dispositive”) is that Netanyahu doesn’t have a better idea for an agreement than Obama does.  No kidding.  Mr. Netanyahu doesn’t have a better idea for a deal with Iran for the good and obvious reason that Iran will accept no deal that doesn’t allow them to develop nukes, and we are theoretically opposed to them doing that.  Exactly what sort of deal is possible here?  Unfortunately, only one sort: an imaginary one.  This seems to suit the purposes of our President just fine, but I for one think it’s forgivable Mr. Netanyahu disagrees quite strongly.

Thursday, February 19, 2015

Sure it's photo-shopped. But it's perfect.

The stupidities in our time are starting to cross like the energy streams in 'Ghostbusters'.




Monday, February 16, 2015

Kingsman, 50 Shades, and Acedia

It being Valentine’s Day this weekend, and not coincidentally the opening of the movie Fifty Shades of Greyit’s also not coincidental our pastor at church mentioned the movie in this week’s sermon.  He guessed that many in the congregation had already read the books, and many more would see the movie.  The congregation laughed because it was of course true.  Then he mentioned something called acedia.  I had never heard the term. According to one definition I found, acedia is ‘a state of languor or torpor, of unconcern or dissatisfaction with one's condition or action in the world’.  The pastor pointed out that some of the reason we get excited about things like the weird S&M in '50 Shades' is that we are, well, bored.  Spiritually, experientially, emotionally.  We want more.  And then still more.  And we want it because we’ve forgotten the basics like God, right, wrong, love; the list goes on…  When we no longer know what the basics are, when we don’t know where we’re supposed to be going or what we’re supposed to be doing, we can fall into the trap of continually searching for novelty.  Continually hotter peppers (big in the 90’s), more hops in the beer, more jolt in the espresso, more sea salt in the chocolate.  Novelty and more novelty.  And when you’ve got it floored in the fast lane on Novelty Highway, you just might miss the sign that says “Welcome to Frick’n Depraved. Population Growing.”  I quote the pastor from memory and Jack certainly didn’t say this last part in his sermon.  But that’s where my thinking went.

Because I didn’t see '50 Shades' this weekend (and doubt I ever will).  I saw a different stupid move: Kingsman: The Secret Service.  Apparently it’s based on comic books, which I think we’re supposed to call graphic novels now, but give me a break.  Campy.  Over-the-top.  Dumb but fun.  And then, ten minutes from the end of the movie, two characters who were both stand-up, ethical, rock-solid good guys make a completely gratuitous and raunchy sexual agreement.  Out of nowhere.  The plot didn’t require it.  The specific act didn’t need to be mentioned.  It was just thrown in.  Novelty.  More.

And it made me rethink the movie.  I had been mostly enjoying it.  I was perfectly okay with it being just a CGI-dominated hodgepodge of plots, gags, and gear stolen from 007 movies and The Avengers  (the old TV series)  I was okay with Samuel L. Jackson overacting in the usual way.  Hey, it’s why we go see Samuel L. Jackson.  I was okay with the fawning emphasis on sharp threads ( I think it’s about time more people moved away from pants hanging down below their ass, and bespoke suits are fine with me.  I want to be able to get one, one day.).  I knew what most of the movie would be like when I bought the ticket.  But I didn’t expect the punchline from a Hustler cartoon as the payoff for the hero.  Novelty.  When you’re a Kingsman but it’s no longer fashionable to fight for God & King, how do you wrap up your movie?  With the basics gone, all you’ve got left is novelty, and apparently novelty has now become the damsel and the woodsman working out their deal the way I imagine it’s done in discount trailer-park bordellos in Nevada.


We’re bored. Give us more.  We need another shot of the juice.  Acedia.