Quote of the day - Joe Sobran

If you reject a political claim made in the name of any category of people, you can expect to be accused of hating all the people in that category.

Joe Sobran

Quote of the day - George Jonas - multiculturism

Multicultural Canada is turning from a country of two nations into a country of a dozen xenoliths: Inward looking, hostile fragments, jealously guarding their ethno-religious distinctions as entitlements, while resenting the entitlements of others as privileges. It's scant consolation that, being culturally silver-plated, such groups are likely to express their sectarian sentiments in idiomatic suburban English, sometimes peppered with current slang, Internet lingo or even mock-liberal concerns.

"By their fruits shall ye know them." We disdained the American melting pot and embraced multiculturalism instead. We forgot that the opposite of integration is disintegration.

George Jonas - National Post - 7-22-09

Obama plays the race card; Professor Henry Louis Gates; Tavis Smiley; Mark Steyn; The big picture

The nation has become embroiled in another racial controversy this week, as President Obama lashed out at local police officers who arrested a black Harvard professor. Conservatives who attack the President by getting bogged down in the minutiae of the arrest are missing the point.

The same story repeats itself every time.

(1) Some racial incident occurs.
(2) The left predictably cries "racism."
(3) The left predictably links the incident to the entire US history.
(4) President Obama either (a) attacks America for its racist past or (b) flies to a foreign country and apologizes to terrorists for America's racist past.

There is no point in arguing about what some Harvard professor said to the police or whether the police should have arrested him. The real point is that the election of the nation's first black president has accomplished nothing. The sequence of events listed above has been repeating itself for decades [except for the part about Obama making it worse.]

We elected a black president, yet white America receives no credit for this fact. We are still accused of racism at every opportunity. Overpaid taxpayer funded PBS talk show host Tavis Smiley has stated that Obama's election was only a "down payment" on what white America owes to African Americans.

Barack Hussein Obama, the candidate, held out the promise of ending bitterness in American politics. Obama was elected with the help of a few moderate swing voters that abandoned the Republican party in favor of "change" and the promise of an end to divisive politics. Those who thought they were voting for Ghandi or the Dalai Lama or Jesus Christ are now surprised to learn that they ended up with Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson with a better haircut and less jewelry. There is little that Obama said in speaking out against the police officers that would not have been said by Jackson or Sharpton.

In fact, it seems that the Obamedia owes an apology to Bill Clinton. In 2008, Clinton was denounced after he discounted the South Carolina primary (in which Obama beat Hillary) by comparing that primary to previous South Carolina primaries in which Jesse Jackson emerged victorious. It turns out that Clinton's comparison was closer to the truth than the Obamedia would have had us believe at that time. As president, Obama has played the race card just as clumsily and dishonestly as Jackson ever did during his heyday.

Mark Steyn is among the few that have placed the incident in its proper context:

A black president, a black governor and a black mayor all agree with a black Harvard professor that he was racially profiled by a white-Latino-black police team, headed by a cop who teaches courses in how to avoid racial profiling. The boundless elasticity of such endemic racism suggests that the "post-racial America" will be living with blowhard grievance-mongers like professor Gates unto the end of time.

In a fairly typical "he said/VIP said" incident, the VIP was the author of his own misfortune but, with characteristic arrogance, chose to ascribe it to systemic racism, Jim Crow, lynchings, the Klan, slavery, Jefferson impregnating Sally Hemmings, etc. And so it goes, now and forever.

As long as one white person in America is not penniless or holds a job or owns anything that might be taxed by the government or taken by force, the race-baiting establishment MSM/DNC will cry "racism." Black on white racism does not stop merely because the blacks have seized power. In fact, with more power in the hands of the reverse racists, we can expect race card usage to intensify.

Somewhere in the United States there is another innocent policemen or local official or average homeowner or financially strapped employer that will be the next victim of the race card. As Mark Steyn wrote, "[a]nd so it goes, now and forever."

Mitt Romney's Mormon speech; The Coming of the Mormons

I did not hear Mitt Romney's speech today about his religion. But the speech has received national attention, as MSM/DNC commentators strive to apply their usual victim-group script to every situation. In this case, the MSM/DNC plays the religion card by asking whether America is "ready" for a Mormon president. While the MSM/DNC hates Republicans, its real target is America itself. The MSM/DNC doesn't mind letting a Republican play the coveted "victim" role once in a while, so long as MSM/DNC gets to portray America as a bigoted, ignorant country that fears and "hates" diverse religions.

I am also stricken by the modern tendency to view issues in terms of the superficial headlines of the moment instead of the deeper facts that might truly educate us all. In this case, we hear a constant discussion on the MSM/DNC news, in which various commentors speculate as to what Mormons really believe and what they practice. But the MSM/DNC provides few tools for us to make up our own minds about this religion (or any other issue). We hear a constant din of white noise, consisting of superficial sound bites, but we learn little of any use.

Here is my contribution to the issue. I am not a Mormon, nor do I support Mitt Romney (for reasons other than his religion. My reasons for preferring a different Republican nominee include Romney's flip-flopping on major issues (and see Debbie Schlussel's discussions)). But I do think a further study of Mormonism is in order. Decades ago, American students used to learn a little history in addition to the usual leftist indoctrination. One history book was entitled, "The Coming of the Mormons." This book detailed not only the Mormon migration to Utah, but provided good background into the whole pioneer era.



Regardless of how I feel about Mormonism, I would have a lot more confidence in what I see on television if the television mouthpieces knew even a fraction of the material featured in books like this before assembling stories that impact Presidential races. This is true not only for the Mormon "issue", but for every issue that receives the usual MSM/DNC white noise, race-politics, PC, superficial treatment.

Quote of the day - Ann Coulter

Half the English language is becoming the "N-word" as far as liberals are concerned. Words are always bad for liberals. Words allow people to understand what liberals are saying.

Ann Coulter

Quote of the day - Thomas Sowell

The unraveling Duke "rape" case should be a wake-up call, both for blacks and for liberals, on how easy it is for their emotions to be manipulated by even a third-rate demagogue with a flimsy fraud. The time is long overdue for some of those who consider themselves "thinking people" to start doing some thinking.

Thomas Sowell

Quote of the day - Joe Sobran

An agenda of power underlies -- and belies -- most rhetorical appeals for variety. If we really want "diversity," centralizing power and outlawing local differences are the worst ways to achieve it. But the same people who most loudly insist on diversity usually want forced busing, race and sex quotas, compulsory integration and bureaucratic supervision to ensure hair-splitting "equality" in every facet of life. They are suspicious of -- no, downright hostile to -- private property, state and local government, popular traditions and, above all, religion.

Joe Sobran

Quote of the day - Ann Coulter

In 1960, whites were 90 percent of the country. The Census Bureau recently estimated that whites already account for less than two-thirds of the population and will be a minority by 2050. Other estimates put that day much sooner.

One may assume the new majority will not be such compassionate overlords as the white majority has been. If this sort of drastic change were legally imposed on any group other than white Americans, it would be called genocide. Yet whites are called racists merely for mentioning the fact that current immigration law is intentionally designed to reduce their percentage in the population.

Ann Coulter - June 6, 2007

Quote of the day - Thomas Sowell

This case [Duke "rape" case] has already sent a message about the kinds of gutless lemmings on our academic campuses, including our most prestigious institutions. [referring to the 88 professors]

Thomas Sowell - April 17, 2007

Quote of the day - Al Sharpton

It is our feeling that this is only the beginning. We must have a broad discussion on what is permitted and not permitted in terms of the airwaves.

Al Sharpton (spoken in the wake of the Imus affair)

Crystal Gail Mangum

I am about a day late on this blogburst. I am repeating the name and photo of the Duke rape liar even though they have already appeared on numerous websites.

Crystal Gail Mangum













As John Podhoretz wrote today:

It is the policy of the news media not to publish the names of rape accusers on the grounds that they should not have to fear public shame for coming forward with word of a horrifying personal violation.

That is a noble policy. But it needs a codicil. The codicil is that if a rape accuser is revealed as a liar, her name should be spoken loudly and often - as loudly and often as the names of those whom she falsely accused have been over the past year.

Her name is Crystal Gail Mangum.

She must be denied anonymity because she makes a mockery of the very policy of granting anonymity to rape accusers. We do not publish their names so that they will not fear public exposure. But people who are tempted to do the monstrous thing Mangum did should fear public exposure.

They should be terrified of it.

They should have nightmares about it.

They should be given no encouragement whatsoever to believe they can launch a nuclear weapon at someone's reputation and escape unscathed.

Her name is Crystal Gail Mangum, and she should not escape the world's scorn because she is poor, or because she is black, or because her life circumstances led her to work as a "stripper."

I do not believe that D.A. Nifong is the "real" culprit in this case. Nifong is clearly "a" culprit for bringing a politically motivated prosecution against innocent people, but many prosecutors would have done the same thing, given today's PC political climate. Nifong is one of many culprits. The real culprit is much larger.

Crystal Gail Mangum is also a culprit, but this case is much bigger than she is. Mangum is not the first, nor will she be the last, minority to bring false charges of racially motivated crimes.

Even the Al Sharptons and Jesse Jacksons of the world are not the "real" culprits. They are opportunists who filled a void created by the MSM/DNC's climate of race baiting. That climate was summed up in this week's Time Magazine:

The flip side of the instant-attention era is the gotcha era. We may be more inured to shock than ever, but when someone manages to find and cross a line, we're better able to generate, spread and sustain offense.

What time really meant is that MSM/DNC is better able to "generate, spread and sustain" racial tensions.

MSM/DNC is able to persecute innocent white people. This list of Duke rape headlines indicates the MSM/DNC's high level of salivation over a possible conviction in this case:

The Devils at Duke
White boys Wilding
Racism, Sexism, and priviledge play roles in scandal at Duke
Black Students rally around Duke Rape victim
NC Central Chancellor: The alleged victim has our support
Duke lacrosse team out of control
Duke lacrosse allegations fit mold
Committee to probe Duke Lacrosse culture
Duke Season cancelled due to bad behavior
Duke Team incident merits punishment
Duke Lacrosse case somehow gets uglier
Duke Lacrosse team had a reputation for swagger
Threats made against Duke Lacrosse team
Duke's lacrosse team incident has hate crime written all over it.
Duke Lacrosse team in trouble before
Duke games called off amid team sex scandal
Duke Lacrosse Rape claim spurs outrage
Duke Larcosse Rape scandal; accused players revealed in victim's statement
Duke Lacrosse Players may be charged for failing to stop Gang-Rape
Grusome Duke Lacrosse Details
Duke Lacrosse behavior unacceptable
Advantages of the privileged Lacrosse sect
Truth is worse than fiction: Duke Lacrosse
Player threatens Strippers in E-mail
The Devils came out in Durham
Duke Team exposed
Male violence against Women at Duke
Sounds like Hate
Duke players afflicted by sense of entitlement
A call for outrage
Fraternity of Silence
Hundreds join rally for victim
Professor wants team to be disbanded
Knowing White from Wrong
Code of Silence harms integrity
Another Reason to Hate Duke
To Hate like this
Take back the Night against Sexual Assualt at Duke
3 miles and a World away, a vigil for the accuser
Sex crimes awareness vigil at Duke
NCCU students march against assualt at Duke
Day 3 of Protests at Duke
Crowd gathers to protest Lacrosse team
Speak out against team scandal
Search warrant reveals plans for another team party
NAACP weighs in on rape case
DA confident Gang Rape occured
Dancer tells of Duke Rape
Victim reveals details of ordeal
Duke should do the Honorable thing
NAACP meets with DA in Duke Lacrosse case
DA stands behind rape charge
DA: Rape may have a racial angle
A pained community gives love and support to victim
Duke saga shows athletes can’t be allowed to think they are above the law

But when the MSM/DNC addresses actual violence committed by minorities, it often lies and blames white people, as it did in the Toledo riots of 2005.

The MSM/DNC allows race hustlers to escape responsibility for incidents like the Duke rape case. MSM/DNC seriously entertains Al Sharpton's views on who should be allowed to speak on the radio even as the North Carolina A-G attempts to clean up the Duke/Mangum case.

The MSM/DNC is the real culprit in this and many other cases. If we are looking to prevent this type of false prosecution from happening again, disciplining Nifong and prosecuting Mangum are only the first steps. Those steps need to be taken in order to discourage others from doing the same thing, but we need to go further.

The PC culture must disappear. The MSM/DNC stranglehold over our language and discussion must be broken. PC must cease being profitable. Companies must stop paying ransom to Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. All governments must take them off the taxpayers' payroll, which means that whatever subsidized housing, welfare or related program dollars find their way to Sharpton's/Jackson's organizations must cease. The system of shakedown lawsuits based on invented discrimination must end.

The educational environment that allowed 88 Duke professors to condemn the real victims solely on the basis of race must end.

I realize that these solutions are comprehensive, massive in scope and will require a tremendous awakening on the part of the public in general. The bad news is that even those changes that I advocate in this post would be only the beginning. But pretending that a rogue DA is solely to blame and hoping for the best is no solution.

Quote of the day - Thomas Sowell - Duke "rape" case

The biggest losers from the current Duke "rape" case include not only the three students accused but also the black community, which has once more followed a demagogue who knew how to exploit their emotions for his own benefit.

Thomas Sowell

Jonestown massacre; Jim Jones; Peoples Temple; Willie Brown

Update - May 23, 2009 - see the end of this post for the story of Harvey Milk's role in the Jim Jones political machine and the death of at least one of Jones' victims.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I saw the PBS American Experience documentary on the Jonestown massacre this week. [Debbie Schlussel earlier commented on a History Channel documentary that was probably better.] I found the documentary noteworthy for a few simple reasons. Without going into the entire history of the cult and the murders of 900+ people, I want to point out some similarities that emerge between Jim Jones' cult and the modern left.



As most of you know, Jim Jones founded his own "church," built a following and isolated his congregation from the outside world. Jones built this church in the 1960's and 1970's after moving to the northern California/San Francisco area. According to the PBS documentary, Jones became very influential in San Francisco politics during the 1970's as a result of the large number of loyal volunteers he could command from the ranks of the Peoples Temple.

Jones with Mayor Moscone and Walter Mondale







h/t brasscheck.com.

Jones exercised an iron will over the cult. Members sold their homes and donated the proceeds to the Temple and Jones. Other allegations much more tawdry were discussed on the PBS program. During the late 1970's, some members quit or tried to quit the cult. They tried to raise a public outcry against Jones and his cult in order to free their own family members from the clutches of the cult.

Willie Brown(l) and Jim Jones(r) at 1976 testimonial dinner for Jim Jones








But Jones and his cult were protected by Jones' political influence within the Democratic establishment of the San Francisco area and the local media:

But if, by the late '70s, Jim Jones was insinuating himself in the San Francisco power structure, there were questions beginning to be raised about some of the less savory goings-on inside the Peoples Temple. Throughout 1977, Jones allies in high editorial positions in the local media thwarted attempts to investigate. Nor was it editors and publishers alone who caviled before Jones. Political allies such as Mayor Moscone, Assemblymen and future mayors Art Agnos and Willie Brown, and others worked behind the political scenes to protect Jones and the Peoples Temple.

When he started to feel the heat of scrutiny, Jones was able to move the Peoples Temple to Guyana virtually lock, stock and pulpit. Perhaps worst of all, he was able to escape with hundreds of mostly black children, and the wards of various Bay Area social services agencies initially delighted to turn them over to foster parents within the Peoples Temple. Virtually all shared the fate of their parents and guardians.

Today, Willie Brown refuses to discuss Jones.

The PBS film pointed out that Jones would often frighten his followers with stories that his enemies were coming to kill their children. At other times, he would have his loyalists place children into a dark well, whereupon he would tell the children that there were monsters in the well. [In fact, it was Jones' own loyalists who were grabbing at the children from the bottom of the well in order to add to the terror.]

So we see in Jones and the cult several of the most important characteristics of the American left:
1) Paranoid rantings worthy of the tinfoil hat brigade;
2) Protection by a symbiotically intertwined media;
3) Disaster.

I have mulled over this post for the last two days. For years we have heard the left compare Bush to Hitler, etc. I really had to satisfy myself that, by comparing the left to Jones, I was not simply repeating the leftist tactic of comparing a political opponent to a random evil person. But I am comfortable with my analogy in this post despite the leftist tactic of Bush/Hitler association. I know that Bush and Hitler have nothing in common. I know that the Hitler accusation is simply a convenient tool that the left has used against every Republican for decades.

But Jim Jones actually was a real leftist. He was committed to socialism and the Democrat candidates who took control in San Francisco in the mid-1970's. More importantly, the tactics Jones used on his own flock are very reminiscent of the statements that the extreme left uses today. Jones kept his people in a state of fear about the outside world. Are Jones' statements any more ridiculous than Rosie O'Donnell's rantings about 9-11 being an inside job? Or Al Gore's theory that the Earth is going to get hot and melt icebergs in the North Pole that will one day flood the world?

O'Donnell and Gore and Moveon.org and the Kos Kidz lack one thing that Jones possessed - power. While the left possesses much power in America (and in the West) today, they do not exercise the type of absolute power that Jones exercised over his people. Jones' word was the word of god as far his people were concerned.

Absolute power changes people. With no restraints on one's actions, those actions become not only abusive, but bizarre.

In ancient Rome, the first five years of Nero's reign were relatively normal and benign. The bizarre sexual behavior, the enforced sycophancy and the murderous, random persecutions did not begin until later - after Nero's power over the known world had a chance to condition his mind.

For all we know, Jim Jones might never have dreamed of mass murder when he began his "ministry." In the 1950's, he might have been horrified at the thought that he would one day kill 900+ people (or even that he would take hundreds of people to a different country, isolate them and frighten them into submission). But that scenario became plausible as Jones' power grew.

There is no doubt that the left in this country has become bizarre and power hungry. They advocate more power over our children with federal programs and controls. They advocate a federal government takeover of the entire health care system throughout the nation. They have created bizarre double standards of political correctness, under which millions of Americans cower in fear of saying the wrong words or telling the wrong joke or offending the wrong people. They have created a climate of fear in which public officials, businesses, advertisers and ordinary people hesitate to use words like "Christmas" or otherwise acknowledge the Christian faith that has guided Western Civilization for almost two millenia. These are only a few examples.

When Rosie O'Donnell rants about 9-11, or when Al Gore shouts to screaming audiences, or when the leftist thugs e-mail death threats to conservative bloggers, or when race hustlers force authorities to prosecute innocent people, they may not be winning new converts or making friends among average Americans, but they are energizing their base. They are keeping their faithful in line. Every PC prosecution, every false accusation, every weird theory, every violent act, etc. rallies the uncritical leftists, confuses the adolescent who is new to politics and ratchets up the emotions of their uncritical masses so that they cannot see their way clear to escaping the ideological Jonestown that the left has created.

The one question we should be asking is, "What will happen should the leftists ever achieve complete power?" What will happen when the left controls all branches of government and the government programs have become so large and all encompassing that the normal constitutional limits on power have become meaningless? What will happen when the electoral crisis towards which the left is driving us finally destroys all confidence in the very concept of elections or the regular, peaceful transfers of power on which this country has depended to maintain our freedoms for generations.

If the hardcore left ever achieves total power in the ruins of our Republic, can we count on Al Gore to be a better person than Nero or Jim Jones? Do we honestly want to find ourselves at the mercy of Rosie O'Donnell or Michael Moore with no escape except through a vat of flavor-aid?

If the Democrat politicians of the past could be so enamored of Jim Jones [as Exile has pointed out]. . . :

Who Is This Man?

- Walter Mondale, as a United States Senator, invited him to a meeting on his campaign plane.
Mondale also wrote to this man, "Knowing of your congregation's deep involvement in the major social and constitutional issues of our country is a great inspiration to me."
- Willie Brown, eventual Mayor of San Francisco, introduced him as a combination of Martin Luther King, Angela Davis(!), Albert Einstein and Chairman Mao.
He met personally with Rosalynn Carter, Jimmy Carter's wife. He later wrote to her professing his "deep appreciation for the privilege of dining privately with you prior to the election."
- Senator Mike Gravel (D - Alaska) said that this man was "almost too good to be true."
- Congressman Don Edwards (D - California) wished that "there were more like the people" of this man's "church".
- Vice President Hubert Humphrey said that this man "is testimony to the positive and truly Christian approach to dealing with the myriad problems confronting our society today."
- Joseph Califano, Secretary of Health, Education and Welfare under Jimmy Carter wrote to him saying, "Knowing your commitment and compassion, your interest in protecting individual liberty and freedom have made an outstanding contribution to furthering the cause of human dignity."

. . . then how do we expect today's leftists to exercise greater restraint with their own movement and with their own power?

---------------------------------------
update - May 23, 2009

Now that some Californians have proposed creating a holiday for Harvey Milk, it is important to remember his role in the Jonestown murders. Daniel Flynn has written specifically about one of Jones' child victims and Milk's role in aiding Jones against that victim.

Nine days prior to Milk’s death, more than 900 followers of Jim Jones—many of them campaign workers for Milk—perished in the most ghastly set of murder-suicides in modern history. Before the congregants of the Peoples Temple drank Jim Jones’s deadly Kool-Aid, Harvey Milk and much of San Francisco’s ruling class had already figuratively imbibed. Milk occasionally spoke at Jones’s San Francisco–based headquarters, promoted Jones through his newspaper columns, and defended the Peoples Temple from its growing legion of critics. Jones provided conscripted “volunteers” for Milk’s campaigns to distribute leaflets by the tens of thousands. Milk returned the favor by abusing his position of public trust on behalf of Jones’s criminal endeavors.

“Rev. Jones is widely known in the minority communities here and elsewhere as a man of the highest character, who has undertaken constructive remedies for social problems which have been amazing in their scope and effectiveness,” Supervisor Milk wrote President Jimmy Carter seven months before the Jonestown carnage. The purpose of Milk’s letter was to aid and abet his powerful supporter’s abduction of a six-year-old boy. Milk’s missive to the president prophetically continued: “Not only is the life of a child at stake, who currently has loving and protective parents in the Rev. and Mrs. Jones, but our official relations with Guyana could stand to be jeopardized, to the potentially great embarrassment of our State Department.” John Stoen, the boy whose actual parents Milk libeled to the president as purveyors of “bold-faced lies” and blackmail attempts, perished at Jonestown. This, the only remarkable episode in Milk’s brief tenure on the San Francisco board of supervisors, is swept under the rug by his hagiographers.

emphasis added

Read the whole thing.

There will be no day set aside to remember John Stoen. Is it too much to ask that we refrain from desecrating this child's memory by naming a holiday in favor of the man who aided his murderer?

Quote of the day - Thomas Sowell - Duke "rape" case

The haste and vehemence with which scores of Duke University professors publicly took sides against the students in this case is just one sign of how deep the moral dry rot goes, in even our most prestigious institutions.
We have become a society easily stampeded, even by the unsubstantiated, inconsistent and mutually contradictory statements of a woman with a criminal record.
All it takes is something that invokes the new holy trinity of the intelligentsia -- "race, class and gender." The story of a black woman gang-raped by white men fit the theme so compellingly that much of the media had no time to waste trying to find out if it was true before going ballistic.

Thomas Sowell

The "open letter" is now an "open and shut case."

I hate to keep beating a dead horse, but circumstances have proven that many of our conservative allies made a tactical mistake last month on one discreet issue.

Numerous conservatives expressed displeasure at Ann Coulter's use of the word "faggot." In response, I wrote an "open letter" to Michelle Malkin, in which I wrote the following:

Will criticizing or even banning Ann from CPAC and other events soften the tone from the left? Or will it embolden the left? Have we changed the tone of political discourse? Does the left now recognize that you are somehow "fair" or "civil", thus causing them to stop their attacks on you? . . .
I am guessing that they will continue their personal attacks against you. They attack you not because some conservative said the word "faggot" or because they really care about gay rights (or any other rights), but because you are an effective voice for conservatism, America, free markets, etc. . . . .
They will continue to attack you with even more ferocity if Ann Coulter is silenced or marginalized - for they will have one less enemy in that instance.

emphasis not in original

Today, Michelle quotes the following from a leftist blogger:

If your newspaper carries this hateful bitch - this self-loathing immigrant [referring to Michelle Malkin] - contact the editorial board. We got Ann Coulter and Linda Bowles banished from the op-eds in this town - can we get the Star to come to their senses about this idiot child, too?

The point is, conservatives should leave Ann Coulter alone, no matter what she says. That leftist blogger never gave credit to Michelle for Michelle's annoyance at Ann Coulter's "faggot" comment. Niether did any of the other leftists Michelle cites in today's post. The leftists are attacking Michelle harder than ever.

Michelle and the rest of us will be safer with Ann Coulter speaking uninhibited than with a kindler, gentler Ann Coulter.

Quote of the day - Thomas Sowell

Can you cite one speck of hard evidence of the benefits of "diversity" that we have heard gushed about for years? Evidence of its harm can be seen -- written in blood --from Iraq to India, from Serbia to Sudan, from Fiji to the Philippines. It is scary how easily so many people can be brainwashed by sheer repetition of a word.

Thomas Sowell

Quote of the day - Mark Steyn

For the First Lady [Hillary Clinton], New York has become a kind of Panderer’s Box: the minute you open it all kinds of competing identity groups fly out demanding you kiss up to them and you can never get the lid back on again.

Mark Steyn - March 16, 2000

Ann Coulter; "faggot" comment; Open letter to Michelle Malkin

I write this piece in reference to Ann Coulter's "faggot" comment over the weekend at CPAC. [See also Atlas' excellent vlog today.] I write in response to the conservatives who have criticized and distanced themselves from Ann in response to Ann's comment.

I specifically address these comments to Michelle Malkin because she has been the target of necklacing and vile attacks over the years. I preface my post by saying that I don't think Michelle is a Rino. It is because I respect her greatly that I address her among all of Ann's critics. I will continue to be a fan and reader of Michelle Malkin regardless of this incident. [And I will continue to troll for links from Michelle whenever I can get them.]

Yesterday, Michelle quoted approvingly the comments of Captain Ed, who wrote the following:

If one wants to change the tone of political discourse, then one has to start with one's self, and hold one's own side accountable for their incivility.

These comments followed Michelle's own commentary that was highly critical of Ann Coulter's remark.

I ask Michelle the following questions. Has it worked? Will it work? Will criticizing or even banning Ann from CPAC and other events soften the tone from the left? Or will it embolden the left? Have we changed the tone of political discourse? Does the left now recognize that you are somehow "fair" or "civil", thus causing them to stop their attacks on you? Will they stop using the "c" word in reference to you? Will they stop publishing your home address in the hope that your family will be harrassed and attacked? Will they stop making ping pong ball references? Will they stop placing cropped photos of your head on top of bikini clad college girls?

I am guessing "no" to all of the above questions. I am guessing that they will continue their personal attacks against you. They attack you not because some conservative said the word "faggot" or because they really care about gay rights (or any other rights), but because you are an effective voice for conservatism, America, free markets, etc.

They attack you because they mimic Bill Clinton's philosophy that it is hard for their opponent to speak while they have their fist in his/her mouth. They do it because they can. They do it because the attacks energize their base. The attacks serve as a rallying cry for those who would use the government to destroy all of the freedoms for which America has stood for generations. They will continue to attack you with even more ferocity if Ann Coulter is silenced or marginalized - for they will have one less enemy in that instance.

These attacks come for the same reason that conservatives face prosecution on false charges - so that conservatives can be silenced despite, like Scooter Libby, having done nothing wrong.

There is a reason that Islam is known as the "religion of peace" while Christianity is reviled for homophobia, racism, intolerance, etc. That reason is fear. Islam saws off heads while the Christian churches welcome gays into the clergy. The more gays Christianity welcomes into positions of power, the more the Church will be known as "homophobic." The more heads Islam saws off, the more the western media will declare that Islam is peaceful.

The more we distance ourselves from Ann Coulter, the bolder the left will become.

The left will never give us credit for criticizing Ann.

Ann Coulter, John Edwards, faggot, Dr. Thomas Szasz, Billy Sol Estes; Free Isaiah Washington!

Ann Coulter commented yesterday at the CPAC convention to the effect that she could not discuss John Edwards because those who use the word "faggot" are sentenced to "rehab." The Dems have rushed in to defend their favorite constituency. Michelle Malkin has more.












But no one has questioned the underlying reference. No one has raised concerns over a major television star that has been required to undergo rehab because he used the word "faggot":

Grey’s Anatomy star Isaiah Washington has entered a residential treatment facility in an effort to quell the controversy surrounding his anti-gay remarks — and save his job, Life & Style has learned exclusively.

According to an insider, Isaiah, who issued an apology for his statements on Jan. 18, agreed to undergo a psychological assessment after talks with ABC executives.

See also USA Today.

No one seems concerned that we are treating opinions as a mental illness in a fashion reminiscent of the Soviet Union. This is not an isolated incident. In February 2000, Joe Sobran wrote the following:

Major League Baseball commissioner Bud Selig has ruled
that Atlanta Braves pitcher John Rocker must undergo
psychological testing for his recent disparaging remarks about
New York City. Among other things, Rocker said: "Imagine
having to take the 7 train to the ballpark, looking like
you're [in] Beirut next to some kid with purple hair next to
some queer with AIDS right next to some dude who just got out of jail for the fourth time right next to some 20-year-old mom with four kids. It's depressing." Rude, yes. And Rocker
apologized. It should have ended there, but the Diversity
Gestapo is demanding his head for his thought-crimes, and
Selig, taking a leaf from Soviet psychiatry, is treating them
as symptoms of mental illness. Rocker wouldn't be in trouble
if only he'd spewed a few normal jock obscenities. As things
now stand, he may be on his way to Siberia. Under baseball's
Schott-Turner rule, only Christians may be insulted with
impunity.

* * *

Meanwhile, Al Gore has announced that if elected
president, he will make favoring homosexuals in the military a "litmus test" for his appointees to the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Nobody is demanding that Gore be subjected to psychological examination.

* * *

A Maryland judge, Durke Thompson, has given a 24-year-old
man a sentence of 18 months for the statutory rape of an 11-year-old girl whose mother found him hiding in the girl's
closet at 2:30 AM with his trousers around his ankles.
Thompson explained the light sentence with the adage that "it takes two to tango." Yes, some of these pre-teens are just begging for it. However, nobody is demanding that Thompson be required to undergo psychological examination. Liberalism is not yet recognized as a form of mental illness.

It is not secret, except among those who learned history from the MSM/DNC, that the Soviet Union used the "mental illness" card as a weapon against enemies of the state. The mental illness label often served as a prelude to brainwashing.

As long as those who hold unpopular opinions are at risk for compulsory psychological treatment, the rest of us should stand in solidarity with them, even to the point of using their terms. We cannot fear words, or else the establishment will criminalize more words. The point of the PC enforcement is not really to protect the actual "faggots", but to create more thought crimes so that ordinary citizens can be kept in line. The inevitable result is that even members of the MSM/DNC are not immune to thought crime enforcement:

The latest forced grovel has been extorted from NBC's Tom Brokaw, who, after stepping over "homeless" people on the way to an interview on the Today show, quipped on the air: "You feel great sympathy for them. But you also envy the extra hour of sleep that they're getting."

How insensitive! The joke police swung into action. Tom apologized, profusely. He had momentarily forgotten the first article of the liberal creed: Women and minorities never have a nice day. That goes for all the other expanding categories of victims, which include the "homeless," as we're instructed to call them.

When natural reactions are unnaturally suppressed, they often insist on sneaking back into view, frequently in the form of humor. Freud called this "the return of the repressed."
. . . . .

One of the traits of the good old days was that you could call a guy who slept in the street a "bum" without getting flayed. In fact, "bum" was the word even liberals used, shamelessly, for guys who slept in the street, which may have had something to do with the fact that hardly anyone slept in the street in the good old days.

Joe Sobran - March 31, 1999

I believe that Washington was not actually placed into rehab by the government, but he had no choice if he was to keep his job. The old alleged military-industrial complex has been replaced by the government/media/entertainment complex, with the entertainment/media wing exercising broad powers to enforce the PC taboos. You can work in Hollywood or otherwise become a public figure, but if you violate the PC code, you will either give up the good life or receive psychological treatment.

The "mental illness" card is not new in the West, as it was used against those who blew the whistle on the Billy Sol Estes grain elevator scandal in the 1960's and has been used in other contexts. J. Evetts Haley wrote about those who were placed in mental institutions when they refused to be silent about the grain scandal -



1964






The same matter was also discussed by Senator Williams (R. Del.) on the Senate floor as he demanded the release of those who had disappeared.

Dr. Thomas Szazs has written about the misuse of psychiatry and mental illness against innocent people:



[I have not read most of Szazs' book, so I cannot give it an unqualified endorsement.]

The bottom line is that I believe we all have a duty to use the taboo words until the PC police agree to leave us alone and abandon the psychiatry card. Much like Ann Coulter's use of "raghead" last year, our freedom may depend on our ability to say "faggot".
















-----------------------------------------------------------
update - 3-4-07 Michelle Malkin comments further and misses the larger point.

Passionate American is keeping score.

Pam at Atlas Shrugs weighs in - Pam is the only one I have seen to point out Kerry's outing of Dick Cheney's daughter during the 1994 2004 debates. I can recall Edwards doing the same thing during the Vice-Presidential debate.

The end of Europe as we know it - part II - Paris "youths" and the new media

Click here for part I.

We can learn something from the rioting muslims in Europe. Brussels Journal shatters one myth that is prevalent among the MSM/DNC regarding the Paris intifada:

It is not anger that is driving the insurgents to take it out on the secularised welfare states of Old Europe. It is hatred. Hatred caused not by injustice suffered, but stemming from a sense of superiority. The “youths” do not blame the French, they despise them.

By the same token, the readers and listeners of the new media have earned a sense of superiority over those who receive their news only from Ted Koppel or the ladies on the "View".

As I pointed out yesterday, new media sources have been predicting this month's European carnage for years. Writers like Ba'at Yeor, Mark Steyn and Spengler have predicted the demise of Europe and provided warnings for the United States. But the MSM/DNC focuses instead only on daily polls, human interest stories and someone named Scooter Libby.

Years after new media readers learned of the fate of Europe, CNN's anchor referred to some of the participants in the Paris fiasco as "African-American" (apparently for lack of a better euphemism).

Thinks "African-Americans" started the Paris riots.















While Little Green Footballs (and its readers) regularly kept track of dhimmitude and terrorist attacks around the world over the past few years, Katie Couric has, like, talked about politics and stuff every morning in that perky little way of hers.

The union shills who call Sean Hannity's radio program to yell at him about Republican hypocrisy over the Miers nomination or something are probably only vaguely aware that there are Islamic riots taking place in Paris. The Oprah viewers who are concerned that women achieve equal representation in government and the workplace or whatever probably know that there is a place called France. All of them will be shocked someday when France (and other European countries) endure a lengthy, bloody insurgency followed by partition and, utlimately, complete Islamic domination.

When that happens, new media writers will once again say "I told you so," while old media viewers will be asking, "who are these 'youths' that now dominate Europe and what happened to Jacques Cousteau?" [CNN viewers will ask, "who are these African-Americans?"]

The point is, new media readers and listeners have earned the right to a superiority complex. We have earned the right to despise those who think they are well informed because they listen to Today with half an ear while ironing their clothes in the morning. Just as the Islamic "youth" are on the rise in Europe, the new media is on the rise in this country. Even if we can't save Europe, we can do our best to displace the old media in this country and achieve the kind of dominance that would rival that of a European Islamic "youth."