Grouping

I’m a fan of men. They get beat up fairly regularly. Pretty unfairly. Mostly undeservedly. 

And white men… They don’t seem to have many supporters, even among white women. I’ve always thought that it was because they are the target of so many different groups’ ire. But now I’m convinced that they’ve been the target of a single entity with many different arms.

[Via Instapundit, which means you’ve all probably already watched the PJTV video of Bill Whittle to which I linked above.]

Advertisements

Spock!!!

I just watched the fourth installment of the Torchwood miniseries, Children of Earth. If you haven’t watched it and plan to, don’t read this post. It contains spoilers. If you’ve watched the entire five episodes of the miniseries, don’t spoil the ending for me; I haven’t watched the fifth episode yet.

In the show, alien baddies have come to Earth and world leaders must make a decision. The have two options: They can submit to the alien demands and hand over 10% of the world’s children or they can try to fight the aliens who promise to kill everyone on Earth if the 10% aren’t surrendered. The leaders decide to give up the children, predisposing that the loss of 10% of the Earth’s children is better than losing 100% of everyone. It’s an interesting dilemma to be sure, and I wonder if the percentage Russell T. Davies (the writer/producer of the show) uses is another swing at religion in his mind, but what I find most compelling about the fourth episode, is the fictional UK government’s debate on how to choose the 10%.

Very quickly, an all encompassing lottery is dismissed; none of the decision-makers want to give up their own kids. One practical-minded woman suggests that they choose the 10% of children who are least likely to be useful to society in adulthood. In other words, they will get rid of the kids who likely will be a drain on the UK system. One government guy at the table even suggests that they sell the idea to the public as a public service; his argument is that, with an expected population boom on the horizon, getting rid of the ones who won’t contribute in propping up the government could be seen as an opportunity.

What I find most chilling about the discussion is that I see such a debate happening in the US health care (Obamacare) debate. We already have people joking about certain minority groups getting better service. Hell, we already have promises that Obamacare will not cut services to the elderly because it would be wasteful (I suppose that’s because they won’t be “useful” to Obama in propping up the government in the future). And there’s a new WSJ opinion piece out that lists other groups that will suffer.

Obamacare can’t possibly serve everyone equally, so who gets cut? How do they set that standard? What about government preferred groups? Do they go to the front of the line? “At risk” people seem to be liberal politicians’ most favored recipient of government attention; do they get more service?

The decision-making process is important because they are deciding who lives and who dies. I am most uncomfortable with the idea that it is the government making such decisions about my life.

Alas, we don’t have sexy Captain Jack to save our bacon.

LATER: This post is called “Spock!!!” because the Torchwood episode reminded me of Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan and the whole “needs of the many > needs of the few” BS.

Protesting is Good for Democracy…

as long as the protesting people are liberals.

The April 15 Tax Day Tea Party in Atlanta was one of the largest protests in the country. From all appearances, The Powers That Be aren’t going to just let that happen again.

The event was supposed to have been held at Gwinnett Place Mall. I used to live near that mall. It is an old mall full of empty stores where the most frequent visitors are mall walkers who buy nothing regularly. It’s not that far away from two other newer, larger malls (Discover Mills Outlet and Mall of Georgia) and has greatly suffered in recent years. Most Gwinnecians call it Ghetto Place Mall for a reason.

I can’t imagine that the mall stores will be happy that the prospect of a few thousand shoppers will now be removed because of easement agreements.

BRIGHT SIDE: Now the Lefties aren’t laughing at the Tea Parties. They’re actively working to prevent Tea Parties from happening, which would indicate that they’re afraid of them snowballing. Sweet. Long live the new counterculture!

On with the Finger Pointing!

The gunman was a white supremacist. I am absolutely appalled that a white guy was responsible for this. That he did it because of some loony racist ideals is absolutely reprehensible. And the fact that it happened at the Holocaust museum, when the gunman was likely a Holocaust denier as many white supremacists are, is beyond sad. That this man is an American citizen and a WWII veteran strikes me as that much more of a tragedy. This is the sort of thing that happens in Europe with their rampant anti-Semitism, not in America.

Already, the news is making a stink of it. That’s all well and good; they should. Racism, from anyone, should be exposed wherever possible. And exposing the foolishness of denying the Holocaust is always worthy effort. [Holocaust deniers are right up there with the 9/11 Truthers on the Scale of All Things Dangerously Crazy.]

But I’m angry at how the news (at least Shepard Smith on Fox News) is connecting the shooting to Obama’s election. Smith is saying that Obama’s election triggered the gunman in some way. Perhaps. The gunman has been crazy for a long time; I saw briefly on the news that he was somehow responsible for closing the Federal Reserve in 1981. Practically anything could have triggered him today. It seems to have been building for some time, for at least 28 years.

Smith on Fox News is further connecting this shooting to blogs that oppose Obama. Apparently, the blogs that oppose Obama are so full of hate and vitriol that they (we, I guess) caused this. That’s nonsense. No one on any blog that opposes Obama that I read advocates shooting anyone.

Sure, we write incessantly about keeping the right to bear arms, but no one sane advocates shooting people to insure those rights. Hell, anyone with half a brain understands that tragedies such as this will only hurt our position.

As for a single event causing this, Folks, things like this don’t just happen spontaneously. They stew and simmer and boil for years before exploding. That certainly seems to have been the case today. Perhaps it was Obama, perhaps he read a blog, or perhaps he was incontinent. Who knows? Maybe we will know someday. Maybe we won’t.

The fact that the gunman was a veteran is causing all sorts of knowing nods from the media. After all, they wrote the script about crazy veterans exploding in such ways. Never mind that he hasn’t been in the military for decades. It’s complete nonsense, but it’s nonsense that’s perpetuated in most American entertainment.

We’re going to hear more of this in the coming weeks. Expect the “Gunman = Racist = Obama Opposition = Blogs Against Obama” meme to be repeated ad nauseum. The media is going to bang this drum long and hard to beat any opposition to Obama into submission.

LATER:Tea Partiers better be ready for it this. Anybody who shows up at one will immediately be lumped into the same category as the gunman and the blogs that oppose Obama.

LATER: Smith also talked about how freedom of speech is responsible for the shooting. We’ll see more of this later on, too.

LATER:Some conservatives say Obama may be responsible, but not in the way you think.

UPDATE 5PM: TWOFER! He was a Holocaust denier and a Truther. That’s almost the holy trinity of dangerously crazy. And the news is calling this guy a conservative? Not with those Truther credentials he isn’t.

History Revised, from the Self-Centered POV

Historical revisionism is alive and well in the New Socialist America.

What do you get when you have a liberal mind-set, an ambiguous moral compass, no regard for historical accuracy,  a highly-paid team of “comic” writers, a high sense of self-regard, an even higher sense of your own opinion, an infinite supply of narcissistic-colored glasses, and a thirty minute “news parody” show of your very own?  You get Jon Stewart, a man who doesn’t parody of the news nearly as much as he pushes his own personal views upon a slathering, ignorant audience.

HELLO TOPIC: Stewart thinks that Truman is a war criminal for dropping the bombs on Japan. I’ve heard this bit of nonsensical liberal revisionist history before. I’ve always felt that was worthless, but to my shame, I’ve never taken the time to do the research necessary to refute the charges.  It took Bill Whittle six minutes of googling to debunk Stewart’s ignorant assertions. Though, it did take almost seventeen minutes to explain them.

You should go watch Whittle’s PJTV video thingie. It’s a good one.

LATER: What color glasses are narcissistic-colored glasses? I suspect they’re pink. 

A LITTLE LATER: Why do conservative, logical people appear on Stewart’s show anyway? It’s nonsense and should be treated with the same respect given to silly parody shows like Reno 911!  and reality TV shows like Hogan Knows Best and Joe Millionaire. Which is to say, it should be given no respect and should not be taken seriously.

The American Addiction

Would you be willing to end federal support of schools, Medicare, Social Security, student loans, and a plethora of other benefits we collectively receive from the feds? I would. Eagerly. Happily. Easily. I’ve always thought my opinion was in the minority. I’ve always thought that most people would be shocked at the notion of diminishing federal payables.

It’s one reason I’ve been so thrilled by the tea parties. I thought that perhaps I wasn’t so alone after all. I thought it was understood implicity that by removing socialism from the US, we’d remove the federal support of those programs. But now, I’m not so sure that the tea partiers understand this concept:

So long as any American’s position on the relationship between state and individual can be reduced to “Let’s just go back to the amount of socialism (and its necessary correlative theft from my fellow citizens) that I liked”, that American is just as deranged and just as pathetic as an alcoholic who, after a bad incident, vows to avoid hard liquor and only drink wine in the future.

I now believe that it’s not socialism the tea partiers are protesting, but Obama’s radical extension of socialism. Had Obama continued W’s slow slide deeper and deeper into socialism, would the tea parties have happened on Tax Day 2009? Had the economy not tanked would anyone have cared about Obama’s radical socialist expansion?

[Via The Smallest Minority.]

LATER: I think income taxation is slavery (among other things) and I consider progressive income taxation to be discriminatory. Just saying.

A LITTLE LATER: You should read all of the post I linked to and quoted from above. Pass it on. It’s a good one.