Schmayce-ism

The title of this post is the second half of the phrase, "Racism, schmayce-ism."

I was raised in NY, so despite my thoroughly Gentile credentials, part of me is culturally Jewish. My first real experience of cultural diversity was a year I spent studying in Dayton, Ohio. I found that my English, aside from being heavily accented (Who Knew?), was peppered with Yiddishisms: schmaltz, kvetch, schlemiel, meschugganah, schiksa, yenta, etc.

Anyway, a writer in Slate just announced that The Only Reason Obama Can Lose Is Racism.

I could care less that Obama is half-white. And if there were a black politician whose policies didn't give me upper GI distress, I'd be fine voting for him. [Although I am honest enough to say that an American president named Barak Hussein gives me the willies, especially post 9/11. Symbolically, it's off.]

But it just may be, it just may be, that his friggin' policies, such as they are, (leftliberal every one) and his lack of achievement behind the faux-preacher* persona might, just might, have something to do with it.

Now I could point out that about 90% of the black vote is his, according to polls. I guess that voting for someone because he looks like you is not racism, but not voting for someone because he does not look like you is.

Welcome to the Twilight Zone of Progress.

If Hillary had gotten the nomination, As Was Her Right!....:-))...you'd only have to change the article's title to "Sexism". It's always some fucking -ism with these people. But if Mitt Romney had the GOP nod, the same author would be sounding the clarion call to man...I mean, person...the ramparts against Religious Fundamentalism. That would not be bigotry, that would be Saving The Republic.

Damn! I'm sorry. I forgot one of the Rules: only whites can be racist, never blacks. Even Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Barry Hussein O's two-decades-long pastor, only said vile things repeatedly because....well, you fill in the blank. It's not his fault. He's black.

Black-schmack.

*And while I'm at it, many people of a certain type --You Don't Know Who You Are--are entranced with his language. Two thoughts. A lot of his public speeches are in the faux black preacher mode, really short on substance and full of rhetorical sideshows. Empty of content not a little. And his ability to express himself without a teleprompter is not very impressive. All that stumbling and all that re-spinning after Gaffe #33 to tell us how he was misinterpreted, probably for nefarious reasons.

George W Bush's brand of language has been pilloried now for years. Not without reason.
But I note this. BHO sells a lot of empty bullshit. But he bullshits in a mode that his audience, especially the CaucoLiberals, loves. It is the way that THEY bullshit. Eg:

"...one's deepest values, one's core concerns, one's broader perspectives on how the world works, and the depth and breadth of one's empathy."

So I will give Barry Hussein this: he plays the faux black preacher role to the delight of blacks and to those whites for whom it is cool to like faux black preachers. (And some of them are damned fine rhetors.) But he also has managed to speak like a Berkeley intellectual. Now that is a feat which, however unattractive, impresses. But that's just the opinion of yet another "typical white person."

PS. While I'm at it. The picture, via eddiebutler.com, shows a common trope in advertising. In addition to men as a gender being portrayed as idiots, whites as a race are the ones who have old service, can't figure things out, etc. in commercials about technology. People of Color are, like, so cool.

Yeah, "oops" about says it

One of the very few things that Barack Hussein Obama has in common with George Walker Bush is a serious misreading of human nature: the belief that everyone wants to live like an American. Well, everyone wants our (frayed) material prosperity and relative stability, but not everyone wants the kind of republican government that has helped to make us unique.

People have always fought for their freedom, but that does not mean that they fought for, or now fight for, the Bill of Rights. They fight for the right to be themselves. And if that means that other people, either in their own county or elsewhere, have to suffer for it...so be it. That is why Madison and the others understood "Democracy" to be a synonym for majority mob rule.

When Tito or the Shah or Saddam or Mubarrak or Gaddafi --or the Soviet Union-- come undone, what follows in their wake is people fighting for their freedom...to kill each other and/or set up regimes that match their culture. To make world in which they and their fellows feel comfortable, at home and in charge. In the Arab world, what possible ground is there in that culture to embrace the strange and unnatural values of the soulless (and now Godless) AngloSaxon capitalists, what used to be quaintly called "Republican virtue"?

None.

Samuel Huntington, whose insights so frighten and horrify good liberals, understood that humans identify primarily with family and tribe, not with some complicated set of abstractions that are supposed to make up the "creedal" nation.

Our Founding Fathers, the  inventors of this supposed "country without a culture", all, to a man, assumed that it would always be dominated by White Protestant* Men. And for very good reasons.
Even within such a homogeneous group, the Union was fragile, as became tragically obvious in 1861.

Am I wrong to think that they would find the country they fought for dominated by Statist women, Blacks, Hispanics, Jews and Catholics --to say nothing of Mohammedans--anything less than a nightmare? Gay marriage?

Obama, Pelosi and Stern

My point is that their universal-sounding principles were not intended by them to be applied universally. How could they? Just as so many AmerIndian tribes name themselves in their own tongues as "The People" --aka, The Real Humans--, so the Founders assumed that Their Own Kind were the subject of their revolutionary project. The group they assumed would (and should always) rule is now on its way to becoming a barely tolerated if not actively despised relic.

Culture trumps institutions and laws. Even now, as the demographics and culture of the US are changing, --as they always have, of course-- our Constitutional order changes with them, regardless of what is written on parchment. There have always been elements both of continuity and discontinuity in our history: how did "America" change as it went (symbolically speaking) from the Gentlemen Founder Presidents to Jackson to Lincoln to Wilson to Roosevelt to Reagan and now to the scandal of Barack Hussein Obama?

Less then fifty years from now, when "America" will be a minority White country. There's a reason the Tea Party is so overwhelmingly White. And why 90% of Blacks voted for a "Black" candidate for president.

One of many speculative break-up scenarios which, if not concretely accomplished,
may be the psychological and power reality of a future "USA".

And why the Arab Spring will, to all current indications, bring about the re-Islamification of that world.

Not everyone wants to be "American". And some day, very soon, that will include most "Americans".


*Not in a primarily sectarian theological sense, but as combining the general moral teachings of Protestant Christendom --Northern and Western European--with the Enlightenment's Reformation-inspired privileging of a free conscience and free inquiry. Do you think George Washington's letter to the tiny Sephardic congregation of the Truro Synagogue would have been so sanguine if he had not felt so serenely in charge?

Barack Hussein

My antipathy to Hillary Clinton is surpassed by my anxiety about Barack Hussein. She, at least, is a pragmatic kind of ideologue. She loves and understands power and everyone knows that her persona is just that.

My fear about him is that he believes his own hype. He's basically a charismatic cipher for the same ol, same ol, being marketed as a biracial youth messiah and selling those finely crafted policy positions called "hope" and "change", with a huge dollop of faux racial redemption*.

This is what's behind the Wizard. At least with Hillary, the Nanny State would be run by a proper nanny.

Where's Churchill when you need him?

*I have an American friend of African descent who does not want Obama elected, for a quite specific reason. He asked me to imagine what the state of things would be if the man were to become President and then be assassinated, presumably by a Caucasian. The setback would be incalculable.

The Great Black Hope

Media, as did Faustus, sold soul | Victor Davis Hanson 

The late liberal reporter Michael Hastings summed up a typical private session between President Obama and the press during the 2012 campaign: "Everyone, myself included, swooned. Swooned! Head over heels. One or two might have even lost their minds. ... We were all, on some level, deeply obsessed with Obama, crushing hard."

I dare anyone to imagine this kind of hysterical adulation if Obama were White. American elites' "Civil Rights" obsession with Blacks turns into the most grossly pathetic kow-towing, the S&M ecstasy of submission to their massa.  Barry Hussein O is the Numinous Negro.

If you know history, you might recognize this kind of response to one Adolph Hitler, who had an entire nation eating adoringly out of his hand. Many spoke of him in much the same terms as these fetid  and shameful Caucasian journalistas.

I will never forget my 2008 experience of O's power to creepily dissolve grown men into teenage girls:

I had lunch with a psychoanalyst recently, a middle aged straight male. When he talked about "Obama's smile" he looked like he was in love. Here I am, the homo, utterly unmoved by Barry Hussein O's faux-preacher oratory and this guy, who has a visible appreciation for the opposite sex, is smitten. What's wrong with this picture?

'via Blog this'

An O by any other name

Mr. Biden is upset that The Other Side refers to Barry Hussein O as "Barack Hussein Obama."

Isn't that his friggin' name?

Franklin Delano Roosevelt
George W Bush
William Jefferson Clinton
John Fitzgerald Kennedy


Mr. Biden, with his usual masterful grasp of the language,
apparently wishing to complain that the middle name
functioned as some kind of "epithet", said that it was
some kind of "epitaph".

If only.

Next we'll be required to spell The Savior's last name
as O'Bama, lest it be suspected that his father
was a Muslim African.

____________________________

This and that

Mostly on the dislike side, but not all.

Particulars aside (and the howler about tolerance in Muslim Andalucia during the Inquisition), my beef about Barry Hussein's speech to the Ummah is that he did it at all. It's like the Mayor of LA going out to make a speech to the assembled gangs of the city. Just the fact that he showed up to talk to them tells them that they have the upper hand. He apologizes for the excesses of the police; the gangs apologize for nothing. Ever.

"America will never be at war with Islam!", says the Apostate in Chief. The lambs, in parliament, may declare the universal rule of vegetarianism, but somehow the wolves will not get the message.

I eat meat every day.

I move between macro and micro worlds. I am always trying to tweek The Theory of Everything (a compulsion of us Enneagram Fives) and yet I get carried away, often through feeling and sensation, with the particulars, especially particular people.

The combination of personal affection and sexual chemistry creates what feels like an alternate universe, with a mesmerizing combination of deep relaxation and seemingly inexhaustible excitement, of being familiarly at home and of being constantly surprised, of being utterly physical and free from the bonds of space, all at the same time.

Being a Five, and having an IQ in the top 2%, I have a natural tendency to think that I am smarter than most people. I am, in fact. Smart does not always cash out as right or helpful or even useful, --this I have learned through experience--but it definitely gives you a bead on dumb. Of which there is always more than enough to go around. Many people are, in fact, stupid. The comments sections of some of the sites I visit make me think that way too many people are being allowed to vote and procreate who really should do neither.

The Desmond Hatchett and his harem story provoked some very unPC thoughts in me. About 70% of Black children are now born out of wedlock and raised by unmarried women. That scenario now does far more damage to Black Americans than any phantom racism they are supposed to be still suffering from (though it has now "gone underground" and must be searched out more skillfully...) One of the worst features of slavery was the forcible break-up of families; now they do it themselves. What's the message to a young Black boy, especially, if neither his father nor most of his friends' fathers gave enough of a shit about him to hang around and take care of him?

On the gay marriage and homosexuality scene, some deepthinking gays have pointed out that Jesus said nothing about gay people in the Gospels, so he must have been fine with it. (See paragraph 3). Well, he said nothing about slavery, either. What do you do with that? Whatever you believe about the issue, it galls me that some self-important sloganeer assumes that he can outthink two-thousand years of engaged Christian grappling with Him and his meaning and sum it all up in a half a paragraph about Luv.

I always did and still hate Mr. Rogers.

The Queen of Norway visited a mosque for the first time recently, to promote "understanding between the two cultures." (That there should be two cultures in little Norway to begin with is its own disaster.) She wore a headscarf. And when she tried to shake the imam's hand, he refused to touch her. Is there any clearer image of what is happening there?

When Barry Hussein O said, "Let there be no doubt; Islam is a part of America", my stomach turned.

Places like Japan and Korea have cultures which make assimilation by immigrants almost impossible. And they are wise and humane and honest in resisting and restricting immigration. No one has a right to enter anyone else's country. And why should they take you in if they have no intention of ever accepting you or your children? And to throw a country with a strong ethnic identity --which means most countries--- into turmoil over some highminded and deeply destructive liberal compulsion about human rights and multiculturalism is, in my view, both stupid and evil.

Today is the anniversary of the invasion of Normandy. Proving, as we have been taught by our betters and their bumper stickers, that war is never the answer and that violence solves nothing.

I see so much of contemporary Western culture as riddled with guilt over its past successes because they inevitably came at the expense of loser groups. As if this were the first time in history that this inescapeable pattern took place. I do in fact sense a large section of the West committing suicide in atonement for this. And I wonder: has any other culture in history engineered its own destruction out of guilt like this?

And paradoxically, has any other culture in history done so much so fast to accomodate the grievances of loser groups and their descendants and wannabees fellow-victims?

One of the pleasures of abandoning liberalism, one that has been noted by other converts to the Dark Side, is that you don't have to lie to yourself all the time anymore. You get to see things and name them without the anxious fantasies of the Ministry of Truth directives in your head telling you that they are not there.

____________________________

Human dignity, ego and sentimentalism

The tsking and clucking of liberals and other high-minded Westerners, such as the Vatican, about Saddam Hussein’s recent execution got me thinking about "human dignity".

It’s now the common coin of the elites; everyone’s in favor of it. And somehow, this notion of human dignity made it uncomfortable for a tyrannical mass-murderer to be hanged.

I thought about my human dignity, my dignity as a man…and maybe they are not the same. But essential to my sense of worth –and that’s what dignity means in Latin—is that I take responsibility for what I do. If I break it, I pay for it. If I spill it, I clean it up. And if there’s a penalty to be paid for my transgression, I pay it.

In the liberal notion of human dignity, however, what is at play is sentimentality and ego. No responsibility is to be taken if it includes anything that the actor finds unappealing.

I am reminded of one of the core values of a very liberal religious denomination: to “affirm the inherent worth and dignity of every human person”. (Of course, PETA would find that pretty barbaric). What it comes down to in practice is that every human person’s ego should be coddled, no matter what they do. Dignity becomes confused with egoic self-esteem. The only form of punishment that most liberals can tolerate is the time-out.

I don’t find this dignified at all. It is sentimental, that is, it refuses to recognize the moral ambiguity of its object. Saddam Hussein may indeed have been human…but his behavior does two things: it points out what horrors humans are capable of, desentimentalizing the notion of humanity, and it calls for him to live up to his human dignity by taking responsibility for his actions. Death by hanging is the least he could aspire to in order to atone for his crimes.

What I sense in the liberal high-minded critique of capital punishment, or corporal punishment, or indeed of any kind of retribution…except against Republicans, of course…is a deep anxiety. It is an anxiety about their own right to exist and to exist assertively. What they call a concern for human dignity is really a loss of faith in their own right to exert force against evildoers. And a refusal to take evil seriously...except, again, when it shows up in their own approved formats.

My favorite slogan here is the one that says that by executing criminals, we simply descend to their level. Indeed, we sink below them, by hypocritically covering up murder with the sanction of the state. I beg most strenouously to differ. A man who initiates…initiates…mayhem, rape, slaughter, etc against innocent humans is a criminal. A society that in response…in response…then provides him with robust and terminal retribution is a world of moral difference away. It would be almost impossible to sink to his level.

People who cannot see that strike me as lacking in the confidence of their right to be. And so they take refuge in moral narcissism.

And that describes most liberals.

WTF?

After a recent Supreme Court death penalty case, Barry Hussein O said he would nominate justices who shared "one's deepest values, one's core concerns, one's broader perspectives on how the world works, and the depth and breadth of one's empathy."

WTF?

How about "one's bullshit rhetorical pap"?

Once an IrishCatholic

The harridan* Maureen Dowd, who for some unfathomable reason has been unable to find a man to marry her, ---I mean, who wouldn't want to cuddle up with that mug in the middle of a cold night?

...but I digress.

Ms. Dowd has distilled the choice that Amerikkka now has to make in calling either Barack Hussein or Ms. Rodham to stand against Tired Old White Male John McCain in a millennial battle for the Presidency. The choice? Which does Amerikkka want more: to be redeemed from its sinful history of racism by choosing the half-black Barack or from its sinful history of sexism by choosing the half-female Hillzilla?

God, Maureen, thanks for clearing that up. I feel so much better now.

One of the ways that I interpret progressive politics is as a secularized form of humorlessly pious Christianity. But without God and Christ to make the whole mythology work...well, it's not pretty. And Dowd is a classic example.

This post-Catholic girl --she still calls her 53-year-old avatar a girl-- sounds like nothing so much as a frustrated and crankily aging nun, moralizing on the state of the evil fallen world of sin as a way of projecting her own internal barrenness and rage.

Sister Mary MoDo of the Sorrowful Spinster

Or perhaps just a bitter Irish spinster with a similar psyche, who didn't even have the status of a religious vocation to mask her publicly disappointed dreams from the contemptuous and pitying gaze of her married neighbors in the village of BallyNewYork.

What kind of redemption do you want? Redemption? What the hell has politics got to do with redemption? Survival, improvement, maybe...but redemption? I forget which wag pronounced that America was a strange place because all the preachers sound like politicians and all the politicians sound like preachers, but he was right.

Well, that's where many conservatives (not coterminous with Republicans, btw) part company with the caringcompassionatecommunitybuilding liberals . As Jonah Goldberg put it so well: "Conservatism... is opposition to all forms of political religion. It is a rejection of the idea that politics can be redemptive. It is the conviction that a properly ordered republic has a government of limited ambition.”

Note the structure of Dowd's question: Which Amerikkkan sin takes precedence? Here we get a glimpse of the progressive heart, its dank submersion in its pathetic narrative of oppressors and victims, seeking a redemption no one is qualified to give, from people who very unlikely ever to give it anyway, since its withholding is their prime source of power in the narrative. It is a Lent that never ends.

One of the ironies of this reactive attachment disorder is that the two iconic victims of the crimes which call for this potential redemption are both terrifically successful and terrifically wealthy. They are running for effing President! Take that, Amerikkka, and slice of Oprah to boot.

Maureen Dowd, like Scarlett O'Hara, needs something badly and often, although in her case I suspect that kissing may not be a strong enough remedy .


But who among the straight male gender has the cast iron gonads and ironclad phallus (and stomach) to take on this mission and redeem dour Sister Dowd from her miserable self?

At least Ann Coulter can make you laugh.

*Even the relentlessly fair and rationally undramatic Jonathan Rauch finds her to be one of the "villains" of journalism.

Bama vs Mama thru Old World Eyes

As a particularly insightful, erudite and profound friend of mine named Dieter recently remarked (more than once), "Sarah Palin is the OJ of contemporary politics."

The koan-like wisdom of this viewpoint means, I think, that she has provoked and thrown into relief some deep and trans-rational cultural conflicts. No kiddin'. The combo of rightish adulation and leftish meltdowned venom shows she is no yawner. Rail number three, as Dieter might say.

Gerard Baker writes from London about the side-effect of Governor Sarah in challenging Barry Hussein O's rock-star style: when you look at how he talks and then at how he has spent his life acting, fissures appear. More than fissures.

Baker also agrees with Moi that the heart of the Democrat agenda is to turn America into Europe and bring us troglodytic Yankee slobs into line with the bien-pensants of the Old World, one which is on its last demographic and cultural legs.

I have lived in Europe and have lived with Europeans here in North America. I am unimpressed. No wonder we had a revolution to kick them out.

I remember living in Rome one year in the 70's, with an academic in the house, who had loudly embraced "human rights" as his boring mantra and who took every opportunity to borishly transgress any social form that smacked of formality and hierarchy. At our dining table, we ate from stacked plates, one plate for each course. One day my American irritation with this pretense kicked in and I decided to eat the second course off the same plate as the first. This hero of egalitarian ferment saw me out of the corner of his eye, leapt from his chair and grabbed the plate from me, upbraiding me for my lack of manners. Voila Europe.

Although on the surface they have repented of their colonial version of Manifest Destiny, the "mission civilatrice", they remain as smug and superior and hypocritical (and resentful) as ever, now directing their incredulous taste and wisdom at the last bastion of barbarism on the planet, the good ol USA.

To put it into simple American, "Fuck 'em."

I'm not alone

in sensing that Barry Hussein O sounds a lot like Jimmy the Dhimmi. Who, by the way, would be a strong contender in my Worst President In History contest.

Barak Hussein

The Doc at Shrinkwrapped puts it well.

The idea that Barack Obama is a secret Muslim enacting a plan to destroy America has always, with good reason, been treated as a fringe conspiracy theory.*

There is no evidence that Obama is anything more nefarious than a committed leftist, committed by temperament rather than ideology. If he has a political philosophy it involves redressing past and ongoing grievances, caused by the Capitalist system against people of color and other victims of colonialism and white paternalism, by using the power of the government to compel redress. In this view expanding government at the expense of the private sector is always advisable.

It is a disturbing coincidence, and says something quite disturbing about the Left, that whether or not Obama is a "secret Muslim" or a committed Leftist, the outcome would be indistinguishable.

This political philosophy is precisely what contemporary liberalism or progressivism is:

the use of state power and social control to raise the status, wealth and power of traditionally unsuccessful groups (victims) at the expense the status, wealth and power of traditionally successful groups (oppressors).

The rallying cry is "Justice" or "Equality", but it means taking from them what have and giving it to them what have not, by force of law.

Half-White, Half-African Obama with his 20 year Pastor,
White-Hating and America-Damning and Very Light Skinned Wright

And if you are a liberal member of a traditionally successful group (oppressor), you help them.


*Although the Foreign Minister of Egypt is of a different opinion.
_____________________________

Goebbels From the Grave

Great line from a ghostly new letter that the old Gauleiter has sent to Barry Hussein O from the Other World:

You made an entire nation love you merely because you were black while claiming you were hated for precisely that reason. You are the most brilliant Negro I have ever seen.

___ 

Another day in Rainbow America

The crime sheet in the SF Examiner described an assault in the Bayview. And, amazingly, it gave the races of the two men involved. Which it never does. Why? Both of them are Black, including the 75-year-old victim of a younger man. So I guess that makes it not raciss and ok to say.

One of Barry Hussein O's appointees, former head of the Congressional Black Caucus, lets us know that he'd disenfranchise a majority of Whites because he thinks their racist honky asses would never vote for a Black man.

The Washington Post pretends not to know this about him, and wants to make sure that we don't either.

See? Mr O does not think that Mr Watt's opinions are a reason to avoid giving his brutha a big Federal job. Does that tell you anything about Barry? And what he thinks of you and your honky white ass? And what your real "White privilege" means? They got themselves a Black president, twice. And only because 40% of the Caucasians helped them. And still these thugs are never satisfied. Never will be, either. Never.

I'd like to see if any of the White House press corps bring this up. Yeah, right.

--

Although

I am not happy about the reason, I am pleased to see that Victor Davis Hanson, an expert in military history, shares my misgivings about Libya. Ever the realist, though, VDH says that if we are gonna do it, unwise though it be, we better give it our best shot. So now, according to one of my more insightful commentors...ahem...we join with Michael Moore on that issue. Oh, and Louis Farrakhan. In 2008 Mr Farrakhan proclaimed O as the Messiah. Now he asks, "who the hell do you think you are?" My peeps.

Most of the liberals who hated Bush's arrogant Jew-led neo-con drive to establish Western democracies everywhere now seem strangely quiet when Barry Hussein O is at the (rudderless) helm. Funny how that happens.

Epochal presidents

Although we have kept the same Constitution for 200+ years, the country has, of course, changed. Was watching a History Channel piece on the Louisiana Purchase as an example. Fascinatingly complex.

Certain Presidents seem to mark sea-changes in the country's history.

From Washington to John Quincy, we had the period of the Gentlemen Founders, but Andrew Jackson changed everything. Lincoln was the next transformative administration. Next I'd list Teddy Roosevelt and especially Woodrow Wilson. Then, of course, the massive morph of Federal power under FDR.

In the last 65 years...are we still unfolding the logical outcomes of FDR's country? Too close to say: JFK and Democrats following him certainly are the proximate markers of the Republic's continuing alteration up to the loathsome Barack Hussein Obama.

Although Righties tend to romanticize Ronald Reagan, if you ask yourself where his "revolution" is now...??

My conservative brain tends to focus on the relationship between demographics and government power.

Still hard at it

As per my previous post, Obama ---btw, I still can't really believe that America elected some guy named Barack Hussein Obama...that alone is a bellweather of decline-- Obama gets no slack, individual though he be. He is the incarnation of everything I loathe.

A quote from a site rightier than thou...I mean me.

The real contest here is not Romney vs. Obama, it is Television vs. Reality. We have to notice how everything changes utterly once it is put within the framework of a TV screen. The President looked “authoritative,” he was “confident,” he had “great answers,” he fought back with determination. Meanwhile back in the real world, without a script, this same man fails at every point. This TV Personality President has no grasp of reality as it actually exists. He does not stand outside his received opinions even for a second. He plays a “Great Leader” on TV but hasn’t the slightest understanding of the country he leads. At every point events defeat him, but he never learns. Nothing is corrected or modified, no amount of pain inflicted means anything. Instead he grows only more determined to defeat reality. Arab Spring can be a success if we will only sacrifice more. Islam is the Religion of Peace equal to Christianity, let’s not be distracted by the piles of dead. Social Justice is just one more tax, one more government program away from being realized. Universal Equality is the highest goal even if we have to destroy the economy and every human distinction to achieve it. Yes, Obama may win the TV debate, but as the glow of the screen fades, reality closes in, accompanied by a sickening dread. 

One hesitation. He "hasn’t the slightest understanding of the country he leads." It elected him. And may do it again. At which point one must ask what is the nature of the country...

More Barry Hussein O BS

So there

Mark Steyn, responding to some lover of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and all the rights it grants....

“Rights” are not those things granted by the sovereign and enumerated in statute, but the precise opposite: They’re restraints upon the sovereign. They’re not about what the state allows you to do, but about what the state is not allowed to do to you.

Liberals like FDR, and statists everywhere, like Barry Hussein O. want constitutions to give people all sorts of benefits as entitlements. They say that the negative rights of the cranky hoary hard-to-read US Constitution do you no good if you can't properly feed, clothe, house yourself, get an education and a good job. My reply is that even if you have those things and you don't have the negative rights ...freedom from the state's controlling hands all over your life...then all you are is a well-treated slave.

Obama right for perhaps second time

Acting with the dignity and restraint we expect from the President of the Republic, Barry Hussein O reiterated his opinion that Kanye West is a jackass. True enough, but he thought that by mentioning that he's "A Chicago guy. Smart. Talented", he would do more than oxymoronize.

Mr West, an African American hiphop artist and one of the One Percent, who is worth $90 million, is crying, as my grandmother used to say, all the way to the bank.