Brought to You by…You!

“The spectacle of September 11 is a forceful reminder of the potentially destructive power of the three great monotheistic religions [Christianity, Judaism and Islam] that have dominated the world one way or another for nearly 2,000 years…You only have to travel a few miles from New York City to find yourself in the middle of a country which is – far from being the secular world which was deplored and attacked by the Islamic fundamentalists – is in fact intensely Christian and therefore in its own way, of course, is just as religious as the Muslim world that attacked it.” So says Jonathan Miller, host of a 2005 pro-atheism documentary by BBC, now coming Stateside courtesy of PBS.

Yup, that’d be the same PBS that
wouldn’t allow an important anti-Islamofascism film to be aired. Why isn’t anybody on Capitol Hill calling for PBS to be defunded?
(By the way, the folks behind the BBC piece use the term “nontheism” a lot. I’ve noticed this in Sam Harris’s writing, too: What’s up with their dislike of the label “atheist?”)

Don’t Let This Happen To You

http://youtube.com/v/hkcMPTmVkNA

This is part of Sean Hannity’s brawl with Al Sharpton. Overall Hannity does a pretty good job, but about 1:50 in, he gets caught in a smarmy and needless display of partisan apologizing.

When challenged to demand Hillary Clinton return the donation from gangsta rapper Timbaland, Sharpton retorts by demanding Sean blast George W. Bush for welcoming Sean “Puffy” Combs to the White House. Hannity, who can’t level anything but the very mildest criticism at the President, gives a weak response, first trying to parse the number of N-words in each thug’s song (he’s “not that familiar with him,” you see), then changing the topic to Sharpton’s own use of foul language.

Sharpton dodged the question, and his record needs to be challenged; no question. But conservatives simply cannot claim the moral high ground if we make excuses for our guys like Hannity did.

The proper response would have been, “First, I’m not familiar with the case you’re talking about, and I frankly don’t trust you to represent it accurately. But if it did happen, then it’s inexcusable and the President should be ashamed of himself.”

Rational Discourse, Liberal Style

That same arbiter of civility who stood up to mean ol’ me on YouStinkLeft has a new post about a classy, productive [read: whiny indulgence] website called sorryaboutourpresident.com. Not surprisingly, it’s another opportunity to show the Left’s upside-down sensibilities.

Remember, the Left
does not approve of mean-spiritedness. No sir! ‘Course, that apparently doesn’t apply to the following:

Calling half the American voting populace “halfwits.”

Saying “their bad choice has made me hate the country I was born in, the country whose anthem could bring tears to my eyes. I hear it now and feel a little nauseated.”

Moreover, this reaction to a comparatively-mild counter-post puts this whole thing in perspective quite nicely:

The post: “We are fighting a war to win, hopefully, so my great-grandchildren DON’T have to fight to live in a peaceful world. The great-grandchildren of the fanatics we now find ourselves engaged with, although unborn, will be just as dedicated to our demise as their predecessors. If you don’t have the courage for this battle, fine. Step out of the way. Your lack of courage embarrasses me. It should embarrass you, too.”

The reaction: “Excuse me for this comment, but who the hell is this person to tell me what I should be embarrassed of? What gives them the jurisdiction to tell me that ‘Dubya’ is doing a good job and that I should stop complaining? Oh, and we lack courage. Yeah, that’d be why we’ve been working to impeach Bush. This person’s great-grandchildren are probably going to have to fight in a war (if we make it though this one). Do they think that after this war that there will be world peace? Well, in that case, this person is not only not worth the glance, but also ignorant.”

I love it: these people can take the most heinous, lazily-ignorant, hypocritical, and reckless positions imaginable, but unless we treat them with kid gloves, we’re the bad guys. ‘Of course, daring not to pull the lever for their guy is enough to make somebody a “halfwit” and justifies hating their country & being sickened by the National Anthem (straight from the horse’s mouth, folks!), so currying favor with them is really a tremendous waste of time.

The Statesman that Time Forgot

His name is Mike Gravel. He hasn’t held public office since 1981. He manages to make the rest of the Democrats look hawkish by comparison. And he wants to be your president.

Senator Gravel advocates a plan that empowers individual citizens to actually make law, believes in global warming (of course), and wants to “de-criminalize minor drug offenses.” Oddly enough, he also happens to support the Fair Tax.

The would-be commander-in-chief “firmly opposed President Bush’s decision to send 40,000 [say what?] more troops to Iraq.”
How would he get out of the war? He would “pass a law. Not a resolution, a law making it a felony to stay there,” and he thinks Barack Obama (!) wants to nuke somebody.

Huh.

I’m Ashamed of Myself…NOT!

A milestone in my life as a conservative rabble-rouser: I’ve been banned from a liberal blog! Why? Because I was “obnoxious,” “patronizing,” and I “insulted” people.

If you want the full context of what went down, check out the debate on
this post, then this one, and lastly this one. Under a revised profile I left a parting message for the little darlings, but just in case they decide to delete it, I think I’ll post it here for posterity:

Hah! I’ll admit, I took a couple potshots at some stunningly bad logic, and described your position in frank terms, but you libs really oughta consider that for the most part, my insults were in RESPONSE to:

– Aryeh insulting as a “scumbag,” a “nosy and controlling neo-christian,” a “cultist,” and a “bully”
– Emily lying about my very words, mischaracterizing “I understand there will always be some teens who have sex” as “You aren’t willing to admit that sex is something that teenagers have and will continue to have.”
– that twit Things Come Undone likening me to ABORTION CLINIC BOMBERS based on – you guessed it! – ZERO evidence whatsoever.
– Brittainy demagoging me a sexist, an “ideology-driven nutjob,” “crazy anti-sex, anti-woman” (also based on nothing more substantive than her hatred & ideology), & insulting my “reading comprehension skills.”

It’s also worth noting that Brendon’s idea of an “insult” is more than a little bizzare; I claimed that societal narcissism is a result of liberalism. Right or wrong, it’s a debatable position, not a personal insult.

Now, do I particularly care that any of you insulted me? Nah – I’m a big boy, and I’ve taken worse from better. I don’t mind a light jab or two – from either side – but I DO mind when self-righteous hypocrites get on their high horses and pretend they’re innocent little angels (remember Angelica from the cartoon “Rugrats”? That’s you guys.)

Not only that, but you shouldn’t be surprised that your position – that some humans are unworthy of being protected by lethal force – is looked upon unkindly by normal Americans.

Anyway, thanks for the laughs and the practice; I do so enjoy taking the occasional trip to the ol’ intellectual boxing bags! Catch ya later.

Calvin

PS: as always, I’ll be sure to keep you in my prayers to the “invisible man in the sky.”
UPDATE: Yup, I’ve been deleted. Oh well, their hypocrisy is pretty glaring on their own pages for anybody independent passersby, and as for the rest…well, I can’t even begin to guess how many psych-analysts & all the intensive care you’d need to untangle the years of brainwashing and biases that’ve layered on over the years. Deception is a tangled web, indeed.

Just a Bit of Perspective

I’m among the last guys on Earth to give the Iraq War’s mismanagement a pass, but for what it’s worth, I think this needs to be said: Right now I’m watching Bill O’Reilly interview an ex-Iraqi ambassador – who happens to be a woman. That’s right; a woman in a position of real power in an Arab government, and it wouldn’t have happened if not for George W. Bush. With so much we’ve promised the Iraqi people, and so much hanging in the balance, we cannot abandon this cause.

Must-See TV: O’Reilly vs. Dawkins

http://youtube.com/v/wECRvNRquvI

I was surprised to see Richard Dawkins on “The O’Reilly Factor’s” lineup last night because of Dawkin’s refusals to debate Michael Medved or Dennis Prager; he doesn’t want to dignify “creationists” with his presence, you see. But watching Bill grill him the other night, another explanation revealed himself: the guy’s case just ain’t that powerful.

Dawkins is considered to be one of secularism’s brightest lights, so after watching you may be compelled to ask: “This is it? Maybe they meant ROBERT Dawkins…Ronald Dawkins? Rudolph Dawkins?”

Maybe Pat Robertson Wasn’t That Far Off…

So what’s Cindy Sheehan’s best buddy up to these days?

Thousands of Venezuelans have taken to the streets of Caracas in protest at the president’s decision to close the country’s oldest private TV network. [Hugo] Chavez’s supporters say Radio Caracas Television (RCTV) backed a 2002 coup which briefly ousted him. But the country’s opposition say the decision to close the network is an attempt to silence Mr Chavez’s critics […] The government claims that the channel is breaching the constitution by rallying support for the opposition.

Don’t worry, though—Jimmy
told us Chavez got elected fair & square, remember?

(Hat tip:
Boots & Sabers)