The New Terrapin Gazette
Number 185 19 January, 2011
It is amazing that people who think we cannot afford to pay for doctors, hospitals, and medication somehow think that we can afford to pay for doctors, hospitals, medication and a government bureaucracy to administer it.
Annotated Hyperlinks Regarding Charges That Tea Party Hate (And/Or Sarah Palin) Killed Six People In Tucson
If you realize the idiotic accusations are just an adjunct to the claims that the Tea Party Movement is racist, you can skip this section.
Curious? Pick and click:
1, 2, 3: Palin’s use of the term “blood libel” is legitimate. In fact she did not use it first; a law prof beat her to it, and his commentary was linked to in Number 184 of this publication. By the way, the blood libel against the Jews was last promoted by the Vatican in about 1914. The term survives as a flexible metaphor with broad usage, like “crucify” (verb) and “target” (noun and verb).
4. Here’s a discussion of the prospects for Obama’s attempt to end the libel and slander. He (and any rational human over the age of ten) knows the Democrats will inflict hideous damage on their party and the administration if they don’t stop behaving like Nazis complaining about Jews. The voters in the political center are not stupid.
5, 6. In a weblog post that deserves to be read in its entirety, a weblogger says: “Were the false accusations against Palin a blood libel? Or merely malicious, vindictive false accusations of complicity in murder made for the purpose of inciting hatred of Palin?” — Subsequent comment here.
7. As this newsletter has already stated, explaining the killer is easy; here’s more on that. But because this is a crisis the ideologues supporting the Bicoastal Elite could not let go to waste, the facts are often ignored.
8. This video is “wingnut” propaganda, and you “progressives” will hate it, but this time the right has everything exactly right. That’s not to say that this newsletter endorses Palin for president; it does not and will not. The issue is who is responsible for the murders in Tucson, and on that, the left is wrong and nauseatingly indecent.
9, 10. Collectivist icon draws fire: “…this may be a tipping point in Krugman’s disgraceful career as a columnist.” In spite of mounting criticism of the rascal, don’t bet on his downfall. Like his NY Times colleague Maureen Dowd (who gave us dowdification, the practice of drastically altering the meaning of a quote by omitting part of it; and who later was caught red-handed in an act of plagiarism), Paul Krugman will survive because he is politically correct. The lesson here is not that you should avoid Krugman, but that it is wise to be automatically skeptical of everything the NY Times says. Even when the newspaper appears to be reporting news that can’t be manipulated to conform to an ideological agenda, don’t trust without verifying.
11. A journalist provides a list of disgraceful comments.
12. “Wingnut” anger. The guy is right to be upset. Face it: Sarah Palin has no more to answer for in the Tucson murders than does Jane Fonda in the murders committed by Charles Manson’s freaks.
The Dehumanizing Implications Of Fear Of Dissent
Collectivists find the freedoms of speech and press particularly scary. When “progressives” and other Utopians encounter objections or unruly opinions, they often react repressively; thus do they reveal that they are driven by pure, primitive fear. Conformity confers safety, and is therefore a virtue for them.
Here’s yet another example of the autocratic mindset, once again regarding the eternal bane of “progressives,” talk radio. Recall the “Fairness Doctrine” pushed by autocrats like Schumer and Pelosi (see Number 40 of this newsletter, 11NOV08; copy available on request). To the Bicoastal Elite, the popular and commercially successful medium of talk radio is dangerous because it tolerates hyperbole, politically incorrect speech, and disrespectful expression. It is, in a word, uppity.
The implications of the impact of fear on the collectivist mindset are manifold. For just one example, consider the “progressive” view of the second amendment: talk radio proves that the proles can’t be trusted to think and speak properly, and now they are to be permitted to have weapons!
For many collectivists, the mere expression of dissent is intolerable. Back in the 1960s, these folks were telling the world that disagreement with the government was an indication of patriotism; now the roles are reversed, and a leftist authoritarian regime has plunged the nation into impossible debt and provoked a tsunami of genuinely popular opposition.
The Tea Party Movement is reviled, lied about, libeled and slandered by those who today brandish the torch formerly wielded by Yippies and bombers. The aging leftist activists who once pretended to be champions of true democracy have been augmented by a new generation of class warriors. The result: the media and the academy are dominated by collectivist ideologues, while freebooters seeking to exploit their countrymen work in SEIU and groups like ACORN (whatever its name is now).
Yes, this is a new crop of parasites pushing their predecessors out of the way. It’s a change that prompts one to say, “The more things change, the more they stay the same.” Sometimes, however, the new arrivals can destabilize the system.
That destructive process can proceed if folks refuse to see the direction in which things are moving. Liberty is in danger when the contending groups become rabidly determined to put each other out of business. So…pay attention!
Begin your consideration of today’s problems by admitting a simple truth: there is nothing more American than apple pie and hypocrisy. The current leftist establishment portrays itself as radical and innovative; its rhetoric includes anti-corporate babble and neo-Marxist economic lunacy. Its core is characterized by a hatred of “brownshoe” values, an addiction to “green” pseudo-science, multiculturalist loathing of traditional US ideals, and a distaste for all symbols of US exceptionalism. Look again, and you will see the greed, the lust for power, the stunning hubris of men who believe it’s their turn now.
They reveal themselves. The collectivist elite is a dishonestly anti-establishment establishment that fiercely intends to maintain its grip on power. It’s a huge scam, and Chicago-cynical to the core.
This means the target of today’s “progressives” is not at all a decadent ruling elite, but a huge, stubbornly independent-minded portion of the electorate.
It is true that what Obama is trying to accomplish is the imposition of a quasi-Peronist populism. He expects to use redistributionist rhetoric to capture the support of those who feel deprived by a greedy class of wealthy drones (“the idle rich”). That is a topic for another day, however. For now, focus on the relationship between the administration and its opponents in the electorate.
The expectations of the new establishment add something genuinely novel to the USA’s history of governance: a degree of repression that runs counter to the evolution of Liberty in North America. This repression results from the abuse of the power of the governors, and from the relative powerlessness of the governed.
Of course the constitution of the nation was designed to prevent such an unwholesome devolution. That document will have to be ignored, at least in part, in order to secure the position of the ruling elite. To that end, the federal supreme court must include at least five individuals who understand that society’s rights demand that discourse be considered just another form of conduct. If we can prohibit and punish misconduct such as theft, why can we not repress socially harmful speech?
The model for a new society is not a fantasy. It already exists, and it works quite well: it is the virtually monochromatic news media. Collectivists can only be pleased with the work of the major networks and newspapers. The exemplary behavior is seminal; it proves that a large group of people can voluntarily cooperate in the building of a fair society.
Accordingly, the citizenry will be expected to exercise firm control over self-expression. You have already been told not to pay attention to politically incorrect commentary; you are instructed to ignore opponents of Hopeandchange.
This is, of course, the heritage of political correctness. It is the perversion of the humanism that freed the slaves, appealed to the consciences of bigots, and asked everyone to consider the requirements of true Liberty. Like many reforms (such as the French Revolution), the drive for equity and fairness in society lost a degree of its rationality, resulting in a new set of double standards that allows the corrupt to exploit racial, class and gender issues.
The reforms need reforming, but that will be impossible until the full dignity of the individual is honored. Collectivists cannot do that; instead they create new varieties of bigotry and exploitation. The instrument they use in that creation is censorship.
The “progressive” means and goal are transparent: the populace will be taxed, badgered and legislated into submission. Conformity will make safe the fearful ruling elite.
To that end, certain barriers must be removed. Chief among them is the expression of opinion. Repeating: the model of the lapdog news media is applicable. Where compliance is not ideologically inspired and voluntarily embraced, it must be imposed. Certain voices must be silenced, while others must be toned down and reduced in number. The radical extremist right is dangerous, as the Tucson murders prove, and the right’s words are the fortuitous cause of violence (“fortuitous” because now repression is justifiable, even essential to the common weal).
Yes, that does mean that the instructions of the president (it’s not empty rhetoric — he means it) and the voluntary compliance of the news media will be backed up by restrictive legislation.
Don’t doubt the content or intent of “progressive” attacks on how Palin and the Tea Party Movement express themselves. The left is dead serious when it claims that incorrect speech endangers society, and that society’s rights must be defended. (Never mind that there is no such thing as society, and that only individual humans have rights.)
The targets for “progressives” are obvious (yes, this is a variety of prediction, or at least a statement of probability). They are talk radio, which is the voice of Flyover Country, and Fox TV News. Those seditious deviants from the approved media guidelines are portrayed as complicit in murder.
Recall, please, that Flyover Country is not a geographic region, but a value system that understands and honors Liberty. It is not coincidental that it is also the land of the free and the home of the brave.
Muslims are breeding themselves into inferiority, according to this rather oversimplified article. It appears that ordinary folks in the Muslim world are often a lot more inbred than the royalty of Europe ever was — and the bluebloods got a lot of bad press for their weak-minded kids. Well, as they say in West Virginia, everything is relative.
Does it seem reasonable that Obamacare is to some extent modeled on the success of the Canadian and British health care services? Or would that be strongly denied by proponents of a federal US program? Perhaps there is something here that might address the subject.
Commentary the WaPo could not tolerate: Christianity and Islam compared. Freedom of the press, multiculturalist style.
House action to repeal Obamacare is “…designed to please the Tea Partiers.” The real battle will be in the courts, which must decide whether the central government can force everyone to enroll in a federal health care plan; see this newsletter, Number 181, on the commerce clause of the federal constitution. So far, half of the states have joined in the suit to overturn the new law. Note also that in the linked clip, Chris “A thrill up my leg” Matthews uses the word “cracker” to refer to some of the folks who do not agree with Obama. Consider the propriety of that word. Is it a racial slur, and what does it say about people who use it? Or is Matthews wrong when he insists that the use of certain words can create a toxic political climate? (He can’t have it both ways. See an insightful analysis of Matthews’ tactics here.) That line of inquiry leads naturally to the next clip, in which Pat Buchanan tries — in spite of Matthews’ censorious interruptions — to point out that Matthews and his ilk are the “birthers” of the left. Spot on! Buchanan also manages somehow to get enough words past the obstreperous “newsman” to remind everyone that military metaphors abound in politics, and only the profoundly mentally retarded take them literally. When gatekeeper Matthews is on duty protecting the public from heresy, even the weakest comment can qualify for obliteration. Why do his viewers not recognize Matthews’ contempt for their judgment?
One hundred fifty-one paragons of journolist-ism. Remember those propagandists? They are still at it, unabashed, unashamed and unrebuked.
How do you think the electorate wants to reduce the deficit? Here’s a quote from a report of a recent survey: “While ( ) percent prefer to cut spending, just ( ) percent call for raising taxes. Another ( ) percent want to do both.” What do you think the numbers are? Jot your estimates down, and then click on the hyperlink. Finally, read this comparison of two states’ approaches to budget deficits.
A self-proclaimed collectivist has the honesty to take on the loons who are his comrades in the cause. It’s a bit indirect, as he uses the JFK assassination as a kind of proxy or surrogate, but it is brave of him.
Obama is not a Muslim. Here’s proof. — What, you say the monkey in the video couldn’t convert fractions to decimals, let alone Christians to Muslims? Yeah, the “conversion by the sword” approach has always worked best for Islam.
You deserve a little meaningless fun.
This publication has had a copy of Zeitgeist for some time. It’s a mess — a concoction of speculation, conspiracist fantasies and irrationality, and it’s all directed at an overthrow of virtually everything that is. Somewhere in the sloppy video there is probably a refutation of Maxwell’s equations that the New Terrapin staff slept through. So… what? Well, it turns out that the lunatic in custody for having allegedly killed six people in Arizona loved this film. It figures. And it also figures that his defense attorney may well find a way to use the film in the trial.
Speaking of nutcases and their obsessions….
Sure, your reaction to this will depend on what you think of Obama…but ask yourself what it reveals about his opinion of you. Does he consider you easily tricked and manipulated by his cynical little deceits?
Racism rears its rear in Maine. Alert the media.
This reeks. It’s another of those fourth amendment cases where the cops lie themselves blue in the face.
Quote from a “wingnut” book: “(Conservatives) have always lacked the guts to speak the truth.” Whaaat? Not so! But if you are interested in promoting rightist political values, maybe this book will be useful.
The number of teachers murdered by Islamists in southern Thailand since 2004: one hundred thirty-eight. Government employees are priority targets for Muslims. At least two female teachers were kidnapped and tortured, and one died of her wounds; an entire village participated in that crime. When Thaksin Shinawatra was Thailand’s prime minister, he furiously rejected and publicly denounced the requests of some young female educators to be transferred to safer posts. The Land of Smiles…at the time, a teacher in the south earned hazardous duty pay of approximately fifty US dollars a month. That may have been increased.
If you don’t like firearms and you are sure the second amendment is lousy law, you might want to express your views in print. If you do that, will you just reveal yourself as comically ignorant? It does not have to happen. Here are fundamental facts for those who write about firearms and the law.
The NY Times explains it all to you. Uh-huh.
The masthead includes a quote from the works of Thomas Sowell.
The staff of The New Terrapin Gazette expresses its sincere gratitude to the many people who have gifted the world with Arch Linux, Emacs, Screen, and Firefox Namoroka.
Publisher: The Eagle Wing Palace of The Queen Chinee