What In The World Is Wrong With Hillary?

The reader must be cautioned, for the following item requires a willing suspension of disbelief. In fact it’s so incredible that you may question whether The Penguin Post is attempting a cruel hoax. Yet everything reported here is true.

Someone is going to have to sit down with this pushy, obnoxious, know-it-all female, and explain the facts of life to her — with a cattle prod. She’s blundering her way around the world like a moron on methamphetamine. It’s just one gaffe after another, and she’s leaving a trail of ignorant remarks that hurt her astounded hosts. First she messed with Israel, then made some uninformed remarks at the USA-Mexico border, and then, visiting Mexico’s sacred national shrine, she blurted out a highly offensive remark that will harden anti-USA sentiments throughout the Hispanic world.

No, she was not done yet. On leaving the shrine, she gushed to some (presumably astounded Mexicans, if they understood her English), “You have a marvelous virgin.”

Some diplomat. — Say, where did she go to college, anyway?

Give The Powers That Be A Chance To Smear The Loyal Opposition, And Stand Back

They published it, and now they are un-publishing it. It describes irrational explanations for events, and it points out that some people have irrational solutions for perceived problems. It labels the critics of some governmental actions as criminally insane, and sure enough, there they all are — lunatic murderers and terrorists tossed in with legitimate presidential candidates and perfectly peaceful political parties. You can’t un-publish that, any more than you can un-say something. People have to wonder how it is that officialdom can be so stupid. Next they may wonder how insane the anti-government activists actually are…. It seems the establishment may have unwittingly tipped its hand.

Well, here’s a speculative game to occupy your mind: what if history had taken a different turn, and homicidal terrorists Dohrn and Ayers were not living in luxury and working in highly influential positions in education? Take it a big step further: what if former militia members were in their places? What would the government and the nation look like? If the militias had their way, how would the country be different, and would that be good?

The Enemies We Face

The full story is in a short, pithy post you will find on the internet. Like most damning information that tells us what the opponents of the defense of Western Civilization are up to, it will be automatically denounced by the hard left as all lies. The concluding paragraph explains why the story is so important:

The Left is desperate to discredit the efficacy of this program, and they have launched a desperate campaign to destroy it. Last week it was the leak of an ICRC document describing some of the techniques allegedly used in the program — one of the most damaging leaks of classified information since the war on terror began because it allows al Qaeda to train against the techniques. And now we have this highly uninformed front-page story in the Washington Post. All of this is incredibly damaging to the security of the United States. And if America is attacked again, those responsible for the disclosure of this information will bear much of the blame.

They may bear the blame, but they will not suffer the consequences that should attend it.

The opponents of military action against Islamist expansionism and dangerous anti-Western tyrannies (such as North Korea) are not anti-war, nor are they pacifists — they are partisans on the other side.

Fiery Outburst From ICE

It’s a stereotype. First the politicians call on the troops to do the dirty work, and then whine about the dust in the air. From a story in theWaPo:

Within ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement), the front-office vetting of cases has led to some doubts. Last week, for example, ICE postponed plans to raid employers at a military-related facility in Chicago for which they had arranged to temporarily detain as many as 100 illegal immigrants, according to one official. A second official said Napolitano thought the investigative work was inadequate.

The raid would have been the second under the Obama administration. After the first, a Feb. 24 sweep of an engine-parts maker in Bellingham, Wash., that led to 28 arrests, Napolitano publicly expressed disappointment that ICE did not inform her beforehand and announced an investigation into agency communication practices.

In response, Leigh H. Winchell, the ICE special agent in charge in Seattle, wrote an e-mail to his staff — subsequently leaked to conservative bloggers — saying they had acted correctly. He also copied a statement from House Republicans calling Napolitano’s review “beyond backwards.”

“You did nothing wrong and you did everything right,” Winchell wrote. “I cannot control the politics that take place with these types of situations, but I can remind you that you are great servants of this country and this agency.”

This raises lots of questions, and in view of the case of Jamie Gorelick (see PenPo 67), we should ask just who and what Napolitano is. Educated in California (Santa Clara University), did well academically, became a lawyer after study at the U. of Virginia, did some clerking, went into private practice in Arizona, had Anita Hill as a client (you remember Hill — she was the nutcase who accused Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment), was appointed by Slick Willy to be US Attorney, ran for and won office of Arizona Attorney General. Thereafter twice governor of Arizona, praised by Time magazine, got on the Obama bandwagon early, and was recently named Secretary of Homeland Security.

Is she good? Can she do the job? Hard to say, but the answer is just barely “Yeah, most likely” to both questions. Is she in for a rough time? Sure. She is the boss of a lot of men who are basically cops, and her position is more like a chief of police than that of prosecuting attorney, so she’s out of her element. She probably is not trusted by the ranks, and she probably does not trust them — which seems to have made her a bit testy. Finally, she’s yet another lawyer with no experience in the work done by her agency. Sheesh!

It was not a great appointment, but then Obama is not a good judge of people, as his many other appointments and past associations demonstrate. He appears to think that lawyers can do anything well.

What’s A Gal To Do?

So Israel went into Gaza, killed a few of the bad guys, and pulled out. Then Hillary showed up, and the world’s oldest and most useless debate got rolling again. From Israelis, from “wingnuts“, from assorted lefties both loony and self-righteous, the brickbats and praise came. None of it was in any sense helpful.

What is Obama going to do with Israel, and to Iran? Those who try to figure it out based on his and Hillary’s pronouncements would be better off to study the entrails of sheep sacrificed at a shrine to Beatrice Webb.

The prevailing opinion seems to be that somehow the “Palestinians” must be brought into the talks, convinced to give as well as get, and taught some manners. That in turn rests on the assumption that the West must adopt a “we are all decent adults here” attitude. As this newsletter said recently, when dealing with non-Westerners, it is claimed that…

“We have to respect their culture.” No, we don’t.

That’s because sometimes there is a right side and a wrong side.

If, over the years, the “Palestinians” had displayed any prospect of growing up and behaving themselves, then Israel should be scolded and cajoled into adapting to reality. Unfortunately, reality as defined by “Palestinians” is insanity.

Diplomacy has a very limited role to play under such toxic circumstances. Its major function is usually little more than to deliver — just for appearances’ sake — this message: “You are in more trouble than you can imagine. Prepare for an end to your current status, an end to your dreams, and an end to your hopes. We pity you more than you pity your children.”

Hillary, however, was sent on a very different mission. Exactly what the Israelis are supposed to make of her messages is hard for outsiders to fathom — and may be even harder for the Israeli insiders who listened carefully to her every word. She and her boss are slippery, and that’s putting it mildly.

The USA’s chief concern must be what Obama and Hillary have in mind for Iran. The current government of that nation is the real problem, the real threat, and the real enemy. So far, this newsletter rates Obama a total failure in dealing with the mullahs, but that may change when he is informed unequivocally that Israel intends to strike, and within hours.

It is an imponderable about which to worry.

A Penguin Post Exclusive

The soon-to-arrive New Societal Demographic Administrative Plenipotentiary, NSDAP for short, will be announcing design contests for uniforms, flags, banners and awards within a month. Graphic and fashion designers will be competing to provide the nation with stirring patriotic accoutrements that will inspire and motivate. A major competition was planned for a marching song, as well, but the PenPo has it from an inside source (W. von Schirach, it can be revealed, and yes, der heilix Name…ooh, gooseflesh) that no contest will be held, as the choice has already been made. And this newsletter is the first to reveal what it is. You lucky Folk….!

But wait! That’s not all! With this issue of the PenPo, you receive a FREE .mp3 of the just-adopted march!

It’s ideal music to which you can read your favorite Obama-certified news magazine or newspaper. Nothing makes the sterling pages of the WaPo or the NYT or the LAT or Newsweek or… well, just about any damn dead-tree rag… more pleasurable reading! The right song just carries the message straight into your formerly rational brain, plants it deep, and lets it work while you sleep!

So load the attached .mp3 into your computer, and pipe it to every room in the house. Hell, put speakers up on your roof, and tell the whole bloody neighborhood that you are marching with The One! Everybody will look at you as a son of a, er, a son of the Utopia to come!

Watch these pages for more Insider Tips and Sexy Revelations, as The One unfolds his net and spreads it, there to ensnare the Eternal Jew and his sniveling, verminous co-conspirators. All in good time…. Meanwhile, Hail Victory!


Obama to lobbyists: “Shut up!” The presumed quality of the message determines the degree of Liberty granted the messenger, in other words. Fearless prediction: this is not the last time The One will try to cancel someone’s ability to express himself. An effective community organizer can’t let people say whatever they want. It’s not in the job description. Related: When Obama sees things like this and then this second post, he’ll realize that a vastly expanded “Fairness Doctrine” is an absolute necessity for his administration.

Today’s bitter pill: Jim Hansen and the AGW cult again. Jim’s disappointed in democracy — says it refuses to cater to him, obey his commands, and so on. That’s the opinion of every criminal, Jimmy — all the world’s worst people have always taken a very dim view of decent governments. You’re a pipsqueak compared to Mao, Tamerlane, Che Guevara and Boss Tweed, but you are cut from the same bolt of cloth.

PenPo 71 has this link to a speech by a Brit who attacked the tax-and-spend policy of Gordon Brown, the UK PM. The very left Guardiannewspaper subsequently carried a sneering, mocking column attacking the attacker. The fuss was picked up in the USA. It seems the Yanks think this guy — and the French and German governments — have some useful comments to make. Imagine that.

Here’s another of those Rorschach test “news” items. If you see politics one way, it will be the mass media advising the Obama team to be more careful, control things better, polish its act — or get beaten up by a few nasty obstructionists. If you see things the other way, it will be the media protecting Obama, excusing the “inevitable” errors and telling everyone to give the president months in which to iron out wrinkles. Nowhere in the article, however, is there mention that the last few weeks have seen momentous legislation introduced and a gargantuan national policy articulated (legislation and policy like this, and then there’s this commentary to consider, OK?). This looks very much like the media telling the media to carry on with the bias that characterized the press misbehavior during the campaign.

More: here’s some information on one of those sweeping, hugely important new policies the Obama administration likes. It’s the “cap and trade carbon tax.” If this newsletter understands this concept, it begins with anthropogenic global warming. End of report.

Are the quintessential Democrats running scared? So soon?? Are these True Believers no longer drinking the Kool-Aid, or is The One really, really scary, even when you’re loaded? — Naah. The Nervous Nellies will be back in the flock with the other sheep any week now. This little bit of “What if” hysteria is just a ploy to boost readership.

Meanwhile maybe the major media will find a way to fix this little glitch, perhaps by convincing the electorate not to be afraid of homicidal lunatics whose only aim in life is to destroy as many of us as possible, enslave our children, and utterly extinguish our culture and heritage.

Here’s something that will help, you betcha.

The UN to everybody: “We’ll tell you when to shut up, and you damn sure better do it.” This newsletter to the UN: go to hell. Collateralinformation here.

Original thinking is a rare commodity — always has been. Refreshing, bracing example here.

Oops…this bit of really old news got past the PenPo’s filter. Sorry, this is not a recent development, and it will be removed…unh, that is, er…gosh…look at the date on the darn thing….

What’s that you say? You want something really big to worry about?? Cripes…well, here you go. Unhappy now?

Back to basics: what, exactly, was Obama before he was president? Right, a federal senator. And before that? A state senator; right again. And before that? Check this out, and consider the implications of the biography.

Here’s a take on the mortgage crisis you probably never thought of.

This brief post is about money, profits, and Liberty. It could make you think. Whether you agree with all of it is not important — the idea is to make you think. So click on the link. Read. Then, no matter what the UN or even Obama tells you, let the relevant ratiocination happen.

Just in case you have a burning desire to know the AIG story, there’s this, which explains what happened. It’s reliable and not too technical.

The Path To Utopia: An exasperated weblogger complains, “Even putting aside the fact that the Left’s only plan to reduce inequality is to reduce the incomes of the prosperous, I see no virtue in income equality.” For supporting information, see this post and then look at the root causes of the current mess. Finally, file this prediction away for future reference: Obama’s authoritarian program to organize the national community according to neo-Marxist principles will not be tolerated, but before it can be rejected, it must be recognized.

The UN is preparing to take over the world. No kidding. It’s not militia nonsense. Really. More here.

This newsletter considered the entire “Journolist” phenomenon non-news, and ignored it. Why? Because obviously birds of a feather, and so on. It’s not a sinister plot when people you disagree with communicate with each other. Well, usually not. For those who want a final word on the trivial story, here’s all anyone needs. The subject is now closed.

From The Archive

This comes from The Terrapin Gazette, Number 79, dated 29 December, 2005.

The Darkness Spreads

Two profs at UCLA decided to determine whether the US news media are biased. Their conclusion: “…almost all major media outlets tilt to the left.”

This conclusion took two years to reach. It is reported in an article titled, “Media Bias Is Real, Finds UCLA Political Scientist.” Well, now, how about that headline? When that real media bias found the UCLA political scientist, what do you suppose it did to him?

We might also ask who the political scientist found by the media is; after all, the work was done by two profs, not one.

Oh, well. (Heavy sigh.) Here’s our point: this study is almost useless. Its findings are not just in doubt; they can be dismantled by a minimum of thoughtful consideration.

There are two fundamental reasons for this: first, the criteria used allow the inclusion of data that can lead in exactly the wrong direction. Second, the way media bias operates is complex, and virtually all of that operation was ignored in this study. That means a lot of bias got past the researchers and thereby avoided recognition and analysis. Let us explain each of these flaws.

The article tells us that “Groseclose and Milyo (the UCLA profs) … directed 21 research assistants — most of them college students — to scour U.S. media coverage of the past 10 years. They (the students) tallied the number of times each media outlet referred to think tanks and policy groups, such as the left-leaning NAACP or the right-leaning Heritage Foundation.”

The idea is, the more you quote authorities that press a conservative agenda, the more conservative you are. And so on. That means a tract fisking Chairman Mao would appear to be Maoist. Some issues of The Terrapin Gazette would appear to be Islamofascist, and we could be accused of approving the US federal supreme court’s Kelo decision.

Look, when you write an article, the sources to which you refer do not always represent your opinions. Your words and your expressions and your articulation and your rhetoric tell your readers what you believe. (“D’uh,” as the kids say.) Yet this study ignored those vital elements.

Then too, as The Terrapin Gazette has tirelessly and brilliantly pointed out, propaganda is not simply what is said. It is also what is not reported, not repeated, and in fact prevented from finding wide distribution to the body politic. The media gatekeepers slam the door on a lot of material that The Terrapin Gazette tries to bring to your attention.

Without censorship, propaganda just adds noise. With censorship, propaganda is a virulent, corrosive opponent of Liberty. The UCLA study was conducted in total ignorance of these facts.

Moreover, the UCLA profs did not deal with other definitive indicators of bias: lies, for example. In past issues, The Terrapin Gazette has told you about some of the deliberate falsehoods the media have perpetrated. In fact our wish list for the media — the things we want them to stop doing, listed and explained in TG Number Nine — provides category after category of misbehavior that all indicate the presence of malicious bias. None of those categories were examined in the UCLA study.

Then there is the question of balance. As we have said again and again, balance between two lies is not truth. Simply pitting two feuding nutcases against each other does not generate wisdom. Yet this UCLA study claims that the news consumer who gets his information from both liberally-biased and conservatively-biased sources will have the (presumed) benefit of “balanced” reporting. So…what? Balanced news is not in and of itself accurate, good or helpful. Those oh-so-balanced data may still contain untruths, distortions, serious errors, sloppy reasoning, and attempts to deceive.

Strike a balance between a Stalinist and a Nazi, and what do you have?

Even more important, balanced reporting is not necessarily complete, which means that the most clever propagandist would present opposing sides of the issue and still omit all the facts that are unfriendly to his cause.

We conclude with this simple observation: as long as objective, scholarly studies of media bias are this exclusionary and superficial, the public will remain for the most part uninformed of what is going on in most of the US newspapers, TV/radio stations, and news magazines. Bias will not be understood. That virtually guarantees that it will survive and prosper.