So it turns out my therapist's birthday is a day before my own. At the end of this week's session I said to him,
"Happy Birthday. And I rarely mean that."
He laughed out loud. He knew I wasn't trying to be an asshole. It's something I'm already quite good at. It had more to do with the fact that I say what I mean and I mean what I say. I wanted to make it plain to him that I am glad he was born. We had already spent a portion of the session talking about my unwillingness to join in certain insincere social habits.
Things like awkward silences or nervous laughter. I don't feel the need to fill awkward moments with distractions. I may comment that the moment is awkward
but I'm not going to chuckle like a jackass to lubricate human interaction. Social niceties are mostly lost on me. We use them to lubricate social discourse, to keep each other at arm's length. I suspect if everything we say is sincere in public, there would be a lot less to say or a lot more road rage. Luckily for me I couldn't care less if I hurt people's feelings or if my silence unnerves them.
So why do the rest of you do it? Be honest with yourself. How often do you say something you absolutely don't mean because you are expected to or because saying what you really think is assumed to be unacceptable by others around you?
Do you really mean it when you find out someone's birthday is today and you say, "Happy Birthday?" Is there a part of your inner psyche that truly hopes this person's annual celebration of their birth is enjoyable? Or could it just be that you are afraid of what they or others will think if you say, "So?" I mean, we all have a birthday right? In fact, we all have one EVERY FRIGGIN YEAR. Is it really so special? Is it worth you committing social perjury to take notice of something we all have in common? "Yeah, you were born X number of years ago on this day. You wipe your ass when you shit too. Want me to wish you happy wiping?"
Even more disturbing is when we bow down to social norms to wish a happy birthday to someone we'd not piss on if they were set aflame. I've caught myself doing this more than once. It's usually somewhere where the social pressure is enormous like a professional setting or family gathering. The need to be civil outweighs the need to be true to our own feelings for this person. We drum up the happiest "Happy Birthday" we can but can't help tasting the bullshit still on our lips the moment it's received by the a-hole in question. Why not just be honest? "Oh, it's your birthday? I'll have to mark it on my calendar so next year I can remember to wear black." It's not like they're going to buy a smarmy "Happy Birthday" from you anyway. In fact, the shit-eating grin on their face as you approach the subject should betray their premeditated acceptance of your bald-faced wish for their happiness on the very date that God saw fit to crap this asshole on the face of the earth. Perhaps they'd even have more respect for you if you tossed them a cheery, "Die screaming in a fire, you chode." instead of the "Happy Birthday" they were expecting.
No doubt your honesty will both increase the respect those around have for you while lowering your overall popularity but at least then people can trust that when you say something, you mean it.
2/20/2010
2/28/2008
Fight On Prince Harry!
Apparently the token 3rd-place heir to the throne of England has more stones than the whole of Europe. It truly is remarkable that this young man has fought and fought to have the simple right to fight along side the troops of his native land. But the media screwed him.
He tried previously to fulfill the historic duty of a prince and serve in active duty during a time of war, but the UK wouldn't have it. Did that stop Harry? Hell no. A true man of honor, Harry kept at it until he got the nod to deploy, on the front lines, to Afghanistan. And the media so loved itself that they betrayed an agreement with the UK to keep the Afghan deployment secret, no doubt destroying Harry's chances to finish his deployment like all the other active troops he shares the front lines with.
I say screw it, Harry. Finish your tour. No doubt your fellow soldiers would agree that it's an honor and a testament to the strength of the English monarchy that you have fought so hard to serve with them. Yes, you may die in service to Great Britain, as any of your fellow soldiers would, and you may be kidnapped, but your honor and commitment to your troops and your cause will be in tact.
You could have watched the news comfortably from a palace or other comfortable surroundings, and you could have given in to what must have been great pressure to stay out of harms way, but you did neither. You clearly followed your heart and I, for one, admire you for it. Men like you are what the kings of legend were made of, sir. Carry on Harry!!
He tried previously to fulfill the historic duty of a prince and serve in active duty during a time of war, but the UK wouldn't have it. Did that stop Harry? Hell no. A true man of honor, Harry kept at it until he got the nod to deploy, on the front lines, to Afghanistan. And the media so loved itself that they betrayed an agreement with the UK to keep the Afghan deployment secret, no doubt destroying Harry's chances to finish his deployment like all the other active troops he shares the front lines with.
I say screw it, Harry. Finish your tour. No doubt your fellow soldiers would agree that it's an honor and a testament to the strength of the English monarchy that you have fought so hard to serve with them. Yes, you may die in service to Great Britain, as any of your fellow soldiers would, and you may be kidnapped, but your honor and commitment to your troops and your cause will be in tact.
You could have watched the news comfortably from a palace or other comfortable surroundings, and you could have given in to what must have been great pressure to stay out of harms way, but you did neither. You clearly followed your heart and I, for one, admire you for it. Men like you are what the kings of legend were made of, sir. Carry on Harry!!
2/27/2008
Fresh Fish
Well Mr. Cutts, you've got 30 years of pound-you-in-the-ass punishment coming.
State prison for an ex cop is truly a fate worse than death. Judging by the family victim impact statements, he deserves it.
The father of the murdered woman said to the judge, "You won't let me get my hands on him, but I'd love to have some quality time with him." Amen to that. Somehow I don't think the Ohio State prison system will do a half bad job in your stead, Mr. Davis.
Don't drop the soap Cutts.
But wait, the mother of the murder victim, Mrs. Davis has just plead for leniency on behalf of Mr. Cutts. She said that she's forgiven him through her faith and that she prays he can change too through that faith.
And Cutts visibly choked up. Forgiveness was the last thing he expected and it got him. This is like watching birth and death all at once, it's almost too much.
State prison for an ex cop is truly a fate worse than death. Judging by the family victim impact statements, he deserves it.
The father of the murdered woman said to the judge, "You won't let me get my hands on him, but I'd love to have some quality time with him." Amen to that. Somehow I don't think the Ohio State prison system will do a half bad job in your stead, Mr. Davis.
Don't drop the soap Cutts.
But wait, the mother of the murder victim, Mrs. Davis has just plead for leniency on behalf of Mr. Cutts. She said that she's forgiven him through her faith and that she prays he can change too through that faith.
And Cutts visibly choked up. Forgiveness was the last thing he expected and it got him. This is like watching birth and death all at once, it's almost too much.
2/03/2008
Suck It Up You Whiny Jerks
It's exactly this kind of selfish whining and bickering that allows a power-hungry duo like McCain and Huckabee to hijack a GOP primary.
Instead of worrying about where McCain may be taking our party, they worry about who got invited to what call and why. It's this kind of petty bullshit that I always thought separated us from the left.
You wanna play the "what about me" card at a time like this RedState? So be it. I'll never read your blog again.
Instead of worrying about where McCain may be taking our party, they worry about who got invited to what call and why. It's this kind of petty bullshit that I always thought separated us from the left.
You wanna play the "what about me" card at a time like this RedState? So be it. I'll never read your blog again.
2/02/2008
Reap What You Sow
Super Tuesday is about more than who will be the next president, to me. It's about whether there is any hope left for honoring the principles that have made this country the shining light it has always been. My deepest fear is that America no longer knows who or what she is. A McCain nomination will remove all doubt.
A war on terror is secondary to the current war on our constitution. Without the contract that constitutes and establishes the limited powers of our government, what will we have to protect from extremists who want to destroy us? What would make us different than any other western target?
Our constitution is the ONLY founding document in the history of the world to GUARANTEE the pursuit of happiness. Do you realize that? The single most unique thing about our country is it's inherent protection of a man's right to chase his dreams. When McCain and others like him take that away from us, albeit one bill at a time, we lose what Reagan, Goldwater, and all those before them fought so hard to sustain and protect.
If we do nothing, we deserve nothing. Each generation is responsible for paying the price of Freedom. If we lose the affirmative principles that the GOP has stood for since Reagan, we lose the guarantee of pursuit and all the blessings that come with it. We reap what we've sewn.
And don't think McCain or Billary will be there to answer for the great loss when all is said and done. They'll be squirreled away with their millions in some other country, burning dead presidents in their fireplaces and laughing at the selfish and once great nation of America.
A war on terror is secondary to the current war on our constitution. Without the contract that constitutes and establishes the limited powers of our government, what will we have to protect from extremists who want to destroy us? What would make us different than any other western target?
Our constitution is the ONLY founding document in the history of the world to GUARANTEE the pursuit of happiness. Do you realize that? The single most unique thing about our country is it's inherent protection of a man's right to chase his dreams. When McCain and others like him take that away from us, albeit one bill at a time, we lose what Reagan, Goldwater, and all those before them fought so hard to sustain and protect.
If we do nothing, we deserve nothing. Each generation is responsible for paying the price of Freedom. If we lose the affirmative principles that the GOP has stood for since Reagan, we lose the guarantee of pursuit and all the blessings that come with it. We reap what we've sewn.
And don't think McCain or Billary will be there to answer for the great loss when all is said and done. They'll be squirreled away with their millions in some other country, burning dead presidents in their fireplaces and laughing at the selfish and once great nation of America.
2/01/2008
The Deck Is Stacked
There is absolutely no reason that a man like John McCain should win the republican nomination. There is absolutely no merit in his legislative record that suggests he should lead the GOP. He has gone against the party line for nearly his entire career. What's worse is that now he is blatantly lying about his record and that of his biggest opponent: Mitt Romney.
But the republican base is fighting an up-hill battle. The final score was set before the game even began. There are two major factors that are giving McCain the supposed lead he has in the primaries:
1. The media have caught on that they can get a democrat in the White House by filling people's ears, and by extension their minds, with propaganda about McCain's inevitability.
2. Pundits and the RNC are so spitefully against allowing a democrat, especially a Clinton, back in the White House, they'd nominate Satan himself to be the party's candidate so long as he had the (R) next to his name.
So herein lies the gaffe: the RNC can't see beyond nominating "the most electable candidate" for the general election--and the media knows it. In fact, their counting on it. The media could not continue to extol the virtues of McCain unless the republican establishment plays along. They need their sound bites. And McCain knows that he wouldn't be doing as well as he is without the media acting to ignore and omit any reference to his blatant hostility to republican principles. Add to that match made in Hell a dash of Huckabee's thirst for power (no doubt he made a deal with McCain to siphon off conservative votes all the way through super tuesday so he could get the VP slot) and what you end up with is a complete end-run around every conservative in this country.
That's right ladies and gentlemen, and here's what's going to happen:
1. McCain will be nominated.
2. McCain will lose in November after an embarassing (and TV ratings-rich) general election cycle.
3. There will be a socialist (D) in the White House.
4. Conservatives will have been completely alienated from the GOP.
5. American politics as a whole will have taken a sharp turn towards the left.
6. Freedoms will be lost, taxes will be raised.
This can only end one way: the RNC will have been seriously embarrassed, McCain's political career will be over, the media will be emboldened in their quest to make self-fulfilling prophecies, and the socialist elites of this country will have firm control of the wheel. Welcome to a brave new world.
Terrorist attacks are almost guaranteed at that point, but those will be the least of our worries. We will know we messed up when social programs expand and invade and then collapse. The economy will shrink, the government will expand to fill the gaps, and we will all be "equal".
The saddest part of it all? We will have nowhere else to go.
But the republican base is fighting an up-hill battle. The final score was set before the game even began. There are two major factors that are giving McCain the supposed lead he has in the primaries:
1. The media have caught on that they can get a democrat in the White House by filling people's ears, and by extension their minds, with propaganda about McCain's inevitability.
2. Pundits and the RNC are so spitefully against allowing a democrat, especially a Clinton, back in the White House, they'd nominate Satan himself to be the party's candidate so long as he had the (R) next to his name.
So herein lies the gaffe: the RNC can't see beyond nominating "the most electable candidate" for the general election--and the media knows it. In fact, their counting on it. The media could not continue to extol the virtues of McCain unless the republican establishment plays along. They need their sound bites. And McCain knows that he wouldn't be doing as well as he is without the media acting to ignore and omit any reference to his blatant hostility to republican principles. Add to that match made in Hell a dash of Huckabee's thirst for power (no doubt he made a deal with McCain to siphon off conservative votes all the way through super tuesday so he could get the VP slot) and what you end up with is a complete end-run around every conservative in this country.
That's right ladies and gentlemen, and here's what's going to happen:
1. McCain will be nominated.
2. McCain will lose in November after an embarassing (and TV ratings-rich) general election cycle.
3. There will be a socialist (D) in the White House.
4. Conservatives will have been completely alienated from the GOP.
5. American politics as a whole will have taken a sharp turn towards the left.
6. Freedoms will be lost, taxes will be raised.
This can only end one way: the RNC will have been seriously embarrassed, McCain's political career will be over, the media will be emboldened in their quest to make self-fulfilling prophecies, and the socialist elites of this country will have firm control of the wheel. Welcome to a brave new world.
Terrorist attacks are almost guaranteed at that point, but those will be the least of our worries. We will know we messed up when social programs expand and invade and then collapse. The economy will shrink, the government will expand to fill the gaps, and we will all be "equal".
The saddest part of it all? We will have nowhere else to go.
1/21/2008
I might just vote for Obama
If Fred is out and Romney doesn't make it, what choice do I have? I won't vote for McCain or Huckabee. Both men are silver-tongued liberals trying to play the role of conservative. The only thing more disgusting to me than Huck/McCain is Hillary.
I will vote for the candidate in the general election who has lied to us the least.
And don't just react to my political blasphemy. Yeah, I know, how dare I suggest I'd vote for that lib...
Consider that this country appears to be pining for a lib as POTUS. This year we have had ring-side seats to the state-by-state rejection of conservatism. Apparently our government isn't the only group of Americans who have forgotten how we got to 9/11. When 9/11 happened, I said to my wife, "They'll do their tribute news magazine shows, have rallies, draft some legislation, and eventually forget it happened. This won't be the last tragic terror attack on our soil."
I think we need to face the fact that our countrymen still don't realize the nature or the seriousness of the fight we're in. We have terrorism and failing social entitlements. This isn't a race for President, it's a race to the next tragedy.
But that's not the end of the story. As always, we conservatives will be there to pick up the pieces, put up our sleeves, and help America carry on. It's just sad to see it coming and be able to do nothing to stop it.
I will vote for the candidate in the general election who has lied to us the least.
And don't just react to my political blasphemy. Yeah, I know, how dare I suggest I'd vote for that lib...
Consider that this country appears to be pining for a lib as POTUS. This year we have had ring-side seats to the state-by-state rejection of conservatism. Apparently our government isn't the only group of Americans who have forgotten how we got to 9/11. When 9/11 happened, I said to my wife, "They'll do their tribute news magazine shows, have rallies, draft some legislation, and eventually forget it happened. This won't be the last tragic terror attack on our soil."
I think we need to face the fact that our countrymen still don't realize the nature or the seriousness of the fight we're in. We have terrorism and failing social entitlements. This isn't a race for President, it's a race to the next tragedy.
But that's not the end of the story. As always, we conservatives will be there to pick up the pieces, put up our sleeves, and help America carry on. It's just sad to see it coming and be able to do nothing to stop it.
1/09/2008
Blink??
According to pundits, the Straight of Hormuz incident this past weekend amounts to U.S. military forces blinking during a stare-down with the IRGC.
Yeah, right.
There is a big difference between a blink and showing discretion. Obviously, Iran is doing everything they can to provoke an attack from us without committing fully to an unprovoked attack of their own.
But if they, or our pundits, or anyone else thinks Bush won't squash Iran like a bug, they are in for a big surprise. Iran is about to win the Wonka ticket in the 2008 ass-whooping contest. We will only take so much before responding with overwhelming force.
Yeah, right.
There is a big difference between a blink and showing discretion. Obviously, Iran is doing everything they can to provoke an attack from us without committing fully to an unprovoked attack of their own.
But if they, or our pundits, or anyone else thinks Bush won't squash Iran like a bug, they are in for a big surprise. Iran is about to win the Wonka ticket in the 2008 ass-whooping contest. We will only take so much before responding with overwhelming force.
12/25/2007
12/14/2007
IT'S A TRAP!
I'm going to say this here in the hopes that one of google's site indexing spiders picks it up.
I'd comment about it on HotAir, but it'd just get lost in the myriad of comments.
Huckabee's surge in the polls of late is a trap. What makes me think that? Three things:
1. The mainstream media (MSM) wants a democrat to win the presidency in '08.
2. The mainstream media is hot-to-trot about Huckabee.
3. Conservatives across the U.S. do not like Huckabee at all.
Since the MSM knows that anything they report often enough ends up being accepted by most americans as gospel, they figure
they can spend the last 20 days before the Iowa caucuses creating a self full filling prophecy for Huckabee's nomination. Once nominated as the
republican candidate, the MSM will soundly turn on Huckabee. The next year will be filled with pundits waxing poetic about Huck's various and sundry religious
sound bites effectively deep-sixing any hope of a republican victory this election cycle.
They are creating a straw man. They are choosing to support the candidate in the republican primary whom they know they have the best chance of helping democrats defeat in the general election. It's really quite smart. It's also a good sign. This strategy is divergent from that of '00 and '04 where they attempted to use brute force in defeating Bush. Now they're getting sneakier by attempting to stack the deck BEFORE the cards are drawn.
So how can we tell who the best choice is for the republican nomination? Who is the most under-reported candidate in the field? Who got the least amount of time at the last debate? Who is the media trying to avoid showing you?
Fred Thompson, that's who.
I'd comment about it on HotAir, but it'd just get lost in the myriad of comments.
Huckabee's surge in the polls of late is a trap. What makes me think that? Three things:
1. The mainstream media (MSM) wants a democrat to win the presidency in '08.
2. The mainstream media is hot-to-trot about Huckabee.
3. Conservatives across the U.S. do not like Huckabee at all.
Since the MSM knows that anything they report often enough ends up being accepted by most americans as gospel, they figure
they can spend the last 20 days before the Iowa caucuses creating a self full filling prophecy for Huckabee's nomination. Once nominated as the
republican candidate, the MSM will soundly turn on Huckabee. The next year will be filled with pundits waxing poetic about Huck's various and sundry religious
sound bites effectively deep-sixing any hope of a republican victory this election cycle.
They are creating a straw man. They are choosing to support the candidate in the republican primary whom they know they have the best chance of helping democrats defeat in the general election. It's really quite smart. It's also a good sign. This strategy is divergent from that of '00 and '04 where they attempted to use brute force in defeating Bush. Now they're getting sneakier by attempting to stack the deck BEFORE the cards are drawn.
So how can we tell who the best choice is for the republican nomination? Who is the most under-reported candidate in the field? Who got the least amount of time at the last debate? Who is the media trying to avoid showing you?
Fred Thompson, that's who.
10/16/2007
Your Tax Dollars At Work: Liberal Hit On Cheney
Every now and then I'll watch PBS. I'm a sucker for nature documentaries and history films.
But tonight I came across an episode of a series PBS does called Frontline. The title of tonight's show: Cheney's Law. The episode was nothing short of a character assassination attempt against Vice President Cheney, Alberto Gonzales, and President Bush--and a damn good one. If I didn't know the english language and was forced to derive the topic of the episode from the images, music, and tones of voice of the narrator and interviewees, I'd be forced to conclude that Cheney and Bush are the worst thing to happen to the world since Adolf Hitler.
The focus of the episode was on the patriot act, executive privilege, and how obviously jealous liberals are that Bush has been at the helm since 2000. All those against Bush or Cheney were heralded as heroes, all those for them as evil or foolish cronies. This summary of the episode would be easy for someone who reads the blogs, watches the news, and has learned the difference between liberalism and conservatism. But your average voter......I'm sure they came away from the episode shocked and appalled at how terribly, horribly, horrible Dick Cheney and George W. Bush are.
Journalistic sources for the episode? You guessed it, The New York Times and The Boston Globe.
What angers me about this episode is not that it was heavily slanted against the current executive administration but that it was slanted using the tax dollars of those who know it to be liberal propaganda. I can understand that in a democracy there will be some wasted or even stolen tax funds. What gets me is that the taxes of fair-minded citizens are being used to mislead them to the end of an extreme edge of our political spectrum. Most voters are too busy living their hard-earned lives to watch all the shows and gather a well-rounded view of their government for themselves. The press has been trusted for years and years to mind the store for them. How long can we allow government subsidized liberal propaganda to influence the minds of voters who have little time to devote to monitoring their elected government?
Not even Fox News, the most conservative of all the TV news channels, has produced such an obvious hit job as this against a liberal. I don't understand it. What do conservatives have that makes them think they are safe from subversive media like Frontline? Don't they get that the liberal message itself is almost inescapable in the news media these days? Even worse: don't they see how the government subsidy of such an obviously slanted message lends implicit legitimacy to it?
But tonight I came across an episode of a series PBS does called Frontline. The title of tonight's show: Cheney's Law. The episode was nothing short of a character assassination attempt against Vice President Cheney, Alberto Gonzales, and President Bush--and a damn good one. If I didn't know the english language and was forced to derive the topic of the episode from the images, music, and tones of voice of the narrator and interviewees, I'd be forced to conclude that Cheney and Bush are the worst thing to happen to the world since Adolf Hitler.
The focus of the episode was on the patriot act, executive privilege, and how obviously jealous liberals are that Bush has been at the helm since 2000. All those against Bush or Cheney were heralded as heroes, all those for them as evil or foolish cronies. This summary of the episode would be easy for someone who reads the blogs, watches the news, and has learned the difference between liberalism and conservatism. But your average voter......I'm sure they came away from the episode shocked and appalled at how terribly, horribly, horrible Dick Cheney and George W. Bush are.
Journalistic sources for the episode? You guessed it, The New York Times and The Boston Globe.
What angers me about this episode is not that it was heavily slanted against the current executive administration but that it was slanted using the tax dollars of those who know it to be liberal propaganda. I can understand that in a democracy there will be some wasted or even stolen tax funds. What gets me is that the taxes of fair-minded citizens are being used to mislead them to the end of an extreme edge of our political spectrum. Most voters are too busy living their hard-earned lives to watch all the shows and gather a well-rounded view of their government for themselves. The press has been trusted for years and years to mind the store for them. How long can we allow government subsidized liberal propaganda to influence the minds of voters who have little time to devote to monitoring their elected government?
Not even Fox News, the most conservative of all the TV news channels, has produced such an obvious hit job as this against a liberal. I don't understand it. What do conservatives have that makes them think they are safe from subversive media like Frontline? Don't they get that the liberal message itself is almost inescapable in the news media these days? Even worse: don't they see how the government subsidy of such an obviously slanted message lends implicit legitimacy to it?
10/10/2007
Head For The Cellar, Dorothy...
Aaaaaand the media frenzy is fully underway. That's right folks! We are bearing witness to the methodical and sensational stripping of the dignity of shooting victims!
Live shots of each and every victim as they are wheeled out of the school while some self-involved background voice waxes poetic about the necessity of hostage-situation training for high school students.
Is it any wonder we have yet to be contacted by extra terrestrials? I'm already tired of this story and it has only just begun...
Live shots of each and every victim as they are wheeled out of the school while some self-involved background voice waxes poetic about the necessity of hostage-situation training for high school students.
Is it any wonder we have yet to be contacted by extra terrestrials? I'm already tired of this story and it has only just begun...
UAW Strike Against Chrysler: Never Underestimate The Stupidity Of People In Large Groups
Did Chrysler or GM start selling cars suddenly or did they win the lottery or something? I'm trying to understand where UAW thinks Chrysler/GM will come up with the cash to meet the demands.
Here we are, again, on the other end of the the pendulum swing. At one time, employers exploited workers to the point that unions were needed to maintain some sort of balance of power. Then unions ended up having more power than employers and began to exploit them. Now, unions are exploiting both workers and employers. I understand the motivation for the strike (greed), but there's no point in shaking down a bankrupt mark....
I can only hope this ends up causing UAW a massive amount of embarrassment, causing union membership and dependancy to drop even further.
Here we are, again, on the other end of the the pendulum swing. At one time, employers exploited workers to the point that unions were needed to maintain some sort of balance of power. Then unions ended up having more power than employers and began to exploit them. Now, unions are exploiting both workers and employers. I understand the motivation for the strike (greed), but there's no point in shaking down a bankrupt mark....
I can only hope this ends up causing UAW a massive amount of embarrassment, causing union membership and dependancy to drop even further.
Forestalling The Inevitable
I'm starting to get an understanding of how the SS soldiers at Normandy felt when they looked out of their pill boxes at the swarms of G.I.s crawling up the beach. A vision of impending doom. That's what the latest S-CHIP debacle has conjured up for me. It seems that no matter how off-base leftists have been in their arguments FOR the latest S-CHIP legislation, the media somehow turns it in their favor. The emperor couldn't be more naked. The irony and absurdity of the claims by the left are maddening to the point of comedy: conservatives like Mark Levin, Seach Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, and Michelle Malkin have pointed out the obvious fact that the parrot is dead but the left emphatically denies it while the mainstream media nods along with them!
Since at least 1994, conservatives have had to beat back the liberal hordes over and over to keep our country's medical system out of socialist hands. Over time, conservative victories have become more pyrrhic in nature. For all the efforts and common-sense arguments made, we've instituted more entitlement programs at higher and higher costs to tax payers. Prescription drug plan, anyone? What were you thinking President Bush?!?!
How long can we keep up the fight? With congressmen, senators, and presidents unwilling to speak the truth anymore, is it any wonder that we are losing? How long can we expect people like Michelle Malkin to hold the line for us? If America doesn't speak up soon, and in force, the left will succeed in silencing the right--and we will deserve it. We are purchasing tomorrow's defeat with today's complacency. Idiots do not enlighten themselves.
I have lost hope for the turning of the tide away from socializing our healthcare system. With most information outlets (tv, news paper, film) against private healthcare, and with professional politicians in office, I see no way to avoid an impending medical dark age in our country.
If there is any hope at all it's that the media's public opinion research is as crappy as their story research. Our best ally is the hubris of the left: November 2008 couldn't come fast enough....
Since at least 1994, conservatives have had to beat back the liberal hordes over and over to keep our country's medical system out of socialist hands. Over time, conservative victories have become more pyrrhic in nature. For all the efforts and common-sense arguments made, we've instituted more entitlement programs at higher and higher costs to tax payers. Prescription drug plan, anyone? What were you thinking President Bush?!?!
How long can we keep up the fight? With congressmen, senators, and presidents unwilling to speak the truth anymore, is it any wonder that we are losing? How long can we expect people like Michelle Malkin to hold the line for us? If America doesn't speak up soon, and in force, the left will succeed in silencing the right--and we will deserve it. We are purchasing tomorrow's defeat with today's complacency. Idiots do not enlighten themselves.
I have lost hope for the turning of the tide away from socializing our healthcare system. With most information outlets (tv, news paper, film) against private healthcare, and with professional politicians in office, I see no way to avoid an impending medical dark age in our country.
If there is any hope at all it's that the media's public opinion research is as crappy as their story research. Our best ally is the hubris of the left: November 2008 couldn't come fast enough....
10/09/2007
"Nobody asked your opinion, Christopher."
Chris Mathews is, for lack of a better term, a douche. I'm proud of the performance turned in by all the Republicans in the debate today, Ron Paul excluded (I don't consider him a Republican anyway).
I'm sorry, but setting all his other qualities aside, Fred Thompson would get my vote based on his handling of Mathews alone:
Link: sevenload.com
It's about time somebody put that jerk in his place.
I'm sorry, but setting all his other qualities aside, Fred Thompson would get my vote based on his handling of Mathews alone:
Link: sevenload.com
It's about time somebody put that jerk in his place.
10/08/2007
Facepalm
On tonight's O'Reilly Factor Bill O'Reilly commented that he hoped Phil Spector is convicted during his retrial because, "we believe he did it."
Now, I'm the last person to come to the defense of such an obvious scum-bag like Phil Spector, but O'Reilly has no more business saying anything one way or the other concerning the guilt of a man on trial.
In fact, I remember during the Scooter Libby trial how bloviatingly disgusted O'Reilly was about the obvious prejudgement of mainstream media outlets on the guilt of Scooter Libby.
O'Reilly: thanks a lot, jerk.
Now, I'm the last person to come to the defense of such an obvious scum-bag like Phil Spector, but O'Reilly has no more business saying anything one way or the other concerning the guilt of a man on trial.
In fact, I remember during the Scooter Libby trial how bloviatingly disgusted O'Reilly was about the obvious prejudgement of mainstream media outlets on the guilt of Scooter Libby.
O'Reilly: thanks a lot, jerk.
10/07/2007
My New Hero
One of my earliest memories of politics is the confirmation hearings of Clarence Thomas to the SCOTUS. At the time I had no idea what a republican or a democrat was, and didn't care. The feelings I recall are of disgust and hatred for Justice Thomas. It wasn't until I was of voting age that it became clear who Clarence Thomas is and what the so-called "Harassment Scandal" was all about. I don't remember his stirring and bold speech in defense of himself wherein he made reference to his plight as the consequence of being "an uppity black" who deigned to think for himself. I didn't realize until today how devastating the whole harassment scandal was to him.
I suppose it's to his credit that for most of my life I had no idea what he went through. He kept it to himself until the writing of his book. He took the beating doled out by the liberals in congress and the media, accepted his role as a Supreme Court Justice, and quietly went about his life.
And I don't why he broke his silence but I'm glad he did. I wouldn't have found my new hero had he kept silent.
In speaking on C-SPAN's Q&A tonight about journalism and some of the things journalists have said about him recently, he said,
"When you get to the point of ridicule and making low-brow comments, you've run out of arguments."
The principle behind that quote is sufficient to expose the media in our country as ridiculous and unnecessary. Justice Thomas himself refuses to read papers, watch tv news, or expose himself in any other way to our mainstream media. He sees it as pointless and therefore avoids it. So do I.
I suppose it's to his credit that for most of my life I had no idea what he went through. He kept it to himself until the writing of his book. He took the beating doled out by the liberals in congress and the media, accepted his role as a Supreme Court Justice, and quietly went about his life.
And I don't why he broke his silence but I'm glad he did. I wouldn't have found my new hero had he kept silent.
In speaking on C-SPAN's Q&A tonight about journalism and some of the things journalists have said about him recently, he said,
"When you get to the point of ridicule and making low-brow comments, you've run out of arguments."
The principle behind that quote is sufficient to expose the media in our country as ridiculous and unnecessary. Justice Thomas himself refuses to read papers, watch tv news, or expose himself in any other way to our mainstream media. He sees it as pointless and therefore avoids it. So do I.
10/02/2007
Don't Mistake For Malice What Can Easily Be Explained By Stupidity
Well, that didn't take long. I figured it was a matter of time before some other stupid liberal news rag used the f-word in "solidarity" with those Colorado idiots.
If I could ask them one question, I would ask them if this show of support for free speech is worth the loss of advertisement money. I mean, I understand that college newspapers exist, by and large, to "fight the man", but how can one fight a war without funding? At least they've taught the rest of us a valuable lesson: speech is free, but the f-word will cost you.
Moral of the story: if you plan to die for a cause, pick a good one.
If I could ask them one question, I would ask them if this show of support for free speech is worth the loss of advertisement money. I mean, I understand that college newspapers exist, by and large, to "fight the man", but how can one fight a war without funding? At least they've taught the rest of us a valuable lesson: speech is free, but the f-word will cost you.
Moral of the story: if you plan to die for a cause, pick a good one.
10/01/2007
Couric - Liberalism Incarnate
Bernard Chapin over at Intellectual Conservative does a good job of validating the picture created of Katie Couric in the new book Katie: The Real Story. His indictment of the mainstream media's response to the book is also dead accurate. But I don't think he goes far enough to explain both why the mainstream media is beholden to Katie and why she makes most people right-of-center shudder when they see her on television: Katie Couric embodies the modern liberal movement.
Couric's persona, as explained both in The Real Story and in Chapin's review, is quintessentially liberal. And despite what you may think, it has nothing to do with politics, righteous indignation, causes worth championing, or any other virtue carried by the revolutionaries of the 1960's. No, Katie Couric embodies what I like to call the "genetic crap" of the liberal movement. She is their dark side. She has all their weaknesses and none of their strengths, save one: the media.
But I only draw a distinction between the virtues and vices of the left to make a point. The modern liberal movement has little-to-no virtue at all, which goes a long way toward explaining the rise of a person like Couric to the top of the media landscape. Blind ambition, ruthlessness, consistent hypocrisy, selfishness, elitism: these are Couric's constant companions. And the rest of the left know it. But instead of doing expose after expose on how Couric has politicized and criticized and played her way to the top of the empire, they stand in the background and golf-clap her cynical conquests. It occurred to Couric at some point in her career that if she became all the most powerful and destructive things the left had to offer, they'd never be able to take her down without destroying themselves. She was safe to walk naked through the living rooms of America day-after-day while her peers marveled at how beautiful and "empowering to women" her new clothes were.
So let's be clear when discussing Katie Couric. She's not an operative of the left, or a true liberal for that matter. She's a narcissist who realized that the best means of becoming the empress she's always known she's entitled to be was to ally herself with all the other self-serving would-be supreme rulers of the world: your modern liberals.
Couric's persona, as explained both in The Real Story and in Chapin's review, is quintessentially liberal. And despite what you may think, it has nothing to do with politics, righteous indignation, causes worth championing, or any other virtue carried by the revolutionaries of the 1960's. No, Katie Couric embodies what I like to call the "genetic crap" of the liberal movement. She is their dark side. She has all their weaknesses and none of their strengths, save one: the media.
But I only draw a distinction between the virtues and vices of the left to make a point. The modern liberal movement has little-to-no virtue at all, which goes a long way toward explaining the rise of a person like Couric to the top of the media landscape. Blind ambition, ruthlessness, consistent hypocrisy, selfishness, elitism: these are Couric's constant companions. And the rest of the left know it. But instead of doing expose after expose on how Couric has politicized and criticized and played her way to the top of the empire, they stand in the background and golf-clap her cynical conquests. It occurred to Couric at some point in her career that if she became all the most powerful and destructive things the left had to offer, they'd never be able to take her down without destroying themselves. She was safe to walk naked through the living rooms of America day-after-day while her peers marveled at how beautiful and "empowering to women" her new clothes were.
So let's be clear when discussing Katie Couric. She's not an operative of the left, or a true liberal for that matter. She's a narcissist who realized that the best means of becoming the empress she's always known she's entitled to be was to ally herself with all the other self-serving would-be supreme rulers of the world: your modern liberals.
9/30/2007
Levin on Media Matters
I could care less if you don't like the sound of his voice. There is a reason he's referred to as "The Great One":
After listening, see if you can tell why I'll put up with Mark's delivery and why I won't put up with Michelle Malkin's.
By the way, I agree completely with Mark on O'Reilly. What Media Matters did to O'Reilly was cheap and typical leftist crap, but I'm no fan of O'Reilly or his show.
He seems to me to be a disingenuous publicity hound. And guess who is attempting to follow in his footsteps?
After listening, see if you can tell why I'll put up with Mark's delivery and why I won't put up with Michelle Malkin's.
By the way, I agree completely with Mark on O'Reilly. What Media Matters did to O'Reilly was cheap and typical leftist crap, but I'm no fan of O'Reilly or his show.
He seems to me to be a disingenuous publicity hound. And guess who is attempting to follow in his footsteps?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
