“You Got To Understand, Now It’s Payback Time”

While the news media in general boycott the story (Moonie alert, source is owned by felon who claims to be Jesus Christ), J. Christian Adams extends his account of the policies of the Department of Justice’s Civil Rights Division (his first article was noted in TLB 153). Quotes:

The Bush Civil Rights Division was willing to protect all Americans from racial discrimination; during the Obama years, the Holder years, only some Americans will be protected.

The dismissal of the voter intimidation lawsuit against armed New Black Panthers in Philadelphia is the most prominent example of this hostility toward race-neutral enforcement of civil rights laws. But that dismissal is far from the only manifestation of the beliefs infesting the Department.

The Department recently filed a brief supporting the use of race-based preferences at the University of Texas. Holder’s DOJ wants Texas to be able to give extra admissions credit to the skin color of certain college applicants. Of course some races won’t get the benefit of these racial preferences, while the political allies of the administration will.

In New Haven, Connecticut, the Holder Justice Department took the side of those who wanted to racially discriminate against white and Hispanic firefighters seeking promotion. Not surprisingly, the Supreme Court rejected the position of the Civil Rights Division.

Adams’s account reveals the government’s policy as passivity that reeks of menace. The Department of Justice tacitly encourages thugs to settle scores with the loathed “crackers.” Holder is effectively saying that he will not try to prevent the nation from reverting to an era in which bigotry corrupted the franchise. His recidivist spite can only provoke a new cycle of violence and bitterness. If Holder is not removed from power, the future could be an unbearable replay of past horrors.

Of course Holder’s underlings have lashed out at Adams, attempting to discredit his revelations. Do click on the hyperlinks presented here, and note well the character of the remarks made by all parties to the dispute.

The Country Needs A Major Overhaul. Can The Republicans Do It?

Here are the sentiments of a weblogger who keeps up on events in Washington DC:

A majority of GOP wins in the fall will be more because of Democrats, than Republicans – no matter how the GOP tries to spin it. … And I don’t believe today’s Beltway entrenched GOP is going to bring about the kind of change America needs. The leadership is weak, wasteful, misguided and out of sync with the people. The signs are all there, from Dede Scozzafava, to Charlie Crist – and worse.

You don’t really believe they are going to repeal ObamaCare and tell millions of people expecting health insurance at taxpayer expense they can’t have it, do you? That will be politically imprudent to our Beltway ensconced GOP.

Illegal immigration? Led by soon to be ex-border cop John McCain, assuming he’s re-elected, they will be calling us racists and haters, again. They have to worry about that Hispanic vote, after all.

I’d rather be part of any insurgency, successful, or not, because today’s Republican Party is just barely more worth supporting than the Democrats on the other side.

Obama complains that the US constitution puts limits on the government and does not bestow benefits on the people. As far as he is concerned, the supreme law of the land is a negative document that prohibits when it should provide. It’s odd that a man trained as a lawyer and with some limited experience teaching constitutional law would take such a view, but there it is. Regardless of his opinion, the checks and balances are vital. They are designed to prevent tyranny.

Note that the biggest check on the abuse of power is the popular vote. Congress has grown complacent and smug, secure in the knowledge that the voters will continue their delicate adjustments of the body’s membership, leaving the vast majority of the House and Senate in place. Indications that the mood of the voters is changing have sent Democrats in particular scuttling for cover, refusing to hold “town hall” meetings. When the elected representatives won’t face the voters, you know something is fundamentally wrong.

Indeed, the Congressional ruling elite has done tremendous harm. It has mocked the wishes of the electorate and ruined the economy with incompetent oversight of Washington’s financial agencies. It has indulged itself in ideological lunacy that breaks the mold. It considers its tenure a mandate. The speaker of the House has declared the congressional offices immune to court-issued search warrants, so exalted and exceptional does she believe the legal status of the real estate to be; her grandiose, expansively egotistical attitude is shared by the GOP, which agreed with her misunderstanding of the straightforward language of the constitution. The best corrective and instructive measure the electorate could provide would be a virtual emptying out of the House and a bloodbath in the Senate.

This reform should be imposed on the Republicans as well as on the Democrats. Which party, after all, has made a serious effort to secure the borders? Neither, and that includes GOP during the two G. W. Bush administrations. Recall that this newsletter has lampooned Senator McCain of Arizona as “the senator from Mexico.” At present, a swath of Arizona eighty miles deep has effectively been ceded to Mexico, and the GOP is shamefully silent on the issue. The betrayal of the USA’s sovereignty is humiliating, if not treasonous, and should be infuriating — but no one except the governor of Arizona seems to have noticed that it has taken place.

The distinctions between the parties, while discernible on paper, do not indicate that the minority in Congress understands the issues as well as the voters do. The GOP seems as alienated by the Tea Party Movement as the Democrats are outraged by it. The system needs reform, and handing temporary power to a faction of the system would be a cosmetic sham. A plague on both their houses.


Do you like a juicy international conspiracy? Here’s a candidate for you to nurture: Google “obama anak menteng” and count how many of the listed links do not work. Note that many of the bad connections are to the original sources — those foreign publications that seem to have had the real story. Wonder who shut them down, why, and how. Fret that the connections that work are all secondary and tertiary sources, properly sanitized. Tell everybody, and warn them not to tell anybody. Don’t mention where you got this tip…just say, “I have my sources.”

Epigenetics was mentioned in TLB 150, and here it is again — because it’s truly revolutionary. It will move Darwinism and neo-Darwinism to the history of the theory of biological evolution, displacing them from the center they currently occupy. For years, some folks have perceived the problems with a total reliance on random mutation plus differential reproduction (“natural selection”), and insisted that there is more to the truth than Darwin’s speculative ruminations. The inheritance of acquired characters was considered a crackpot concept, and those who suggested there might be something to it were ridiculed and scorned. Thirty years ago, Koestler and von Bertalanffy both expressed doubts about standard neo-Darwinian cant, and were ignored. Koestler may have been right (more here), and von Bertalanffy almost certainly was, though his suggestion that there is a teleological aspect to evolution may not be verifiable. In any event, biological evolution is on the threshold of a major advance to a new paradigm that’s actually old.

Who pays attention to the hearings when a nominee to the federal supreme court appears before a panel of senators? Nearly no one, because it is a foregone conclusion that the nominee will be approved by the party in power. More’s the pity, as this post shows. Kagan is babbling like a drunken thirteen year-old, trying to bog the process down in nonresponsive blather. This female is an embarrassment; her words seem to come from a Ken Murray – Marie Wilson routine that has been stripped of wit and humor. The shameless Democrats will, of course, place her in a position far above her intellectual and ethical capacity. How can this debacle inspire anything but cynicism?

According to this guy, who says he is an expert, Obamacare is “nationalization masquerading — bad enough — as a highly regulated utility.” How bad is that? Very.

Chicago tries to retain gun control. This was predicted in TLB 153: “…states, counties and municipalities will be adding layer after layer of burdensome requirements to the process of registering firearms.”

Keeping up with the fallout from the WaPo/Weigel disgrace that led off the last issue of this newsletter: there is nothing left to fight over — the corpses have been carried off — but the hard-liners in the media have to pretend some things are in doubt.

Related, in a way: Holder and Weigel brush past each other in the Washington rat race.

This sums it up. The case against the feds, post-spill, is strong, and if the president had the vision and sheer intestinal fortitude to lead, thatdamning indictment of Washington would not even exist. Ultimately, Obama has been the one man who could sweep aside all the bad reasons for delay and begin to deal with the crisis. He has not begun to be the president he needed to be. One must ask how he might behave in a much bigger crisis, for his failure so far seems to indicate a personality flaw that disqualifies him for his office. Presidents must make hard decisions and act definitively when catastrophe strikes; the model is Lincoln, not Clinton.

Related: when CNN does it, it’s fine. When the government does it to CNN (and everybody else), it’s not fine. Why is it not fine then? Because the government is doing it to CNN. And what is it? Why, a form of censorship, of course. Pot, meet kettle.

This is a kick in the head: “Obama parses just like Clinton.” So…it all depends on what the meaning of “is” is?

There is some very funny stuff here.

The rules of engagement in Afghanistan: will Petraeus change them?

What, exactly, does “democracy” mean? Does it mean that if the country is inhabited by a majority of people who believe in witches, and who also honor the Old Testament command that “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live,” that witchcraft can properly be a capital offense (again)? Or how about this: you crash your plane on an island inhabited by cannibals, who decide democratically that you are dinner. Is that OK? No, no — those are not silly examples, because the Slaughterhouse Gang on the federal supreme court has pronounced that kind of democracy valid and constitutional. And that’s a fact. You guessed it: this is not about witches and the Bible, nor is it about homo sapiens au gratin. The topic is firearms. Read the posts at the hyperlinks, and recall how sophisticated and ethically enlightened the US constitution is (and how it was savaged by the decisions in the Slaughterhouse Cases). Then hope that all of The Supremes will some day enter this century, where the constitution is understood to mean what it says.

Speaking of the highest court in the land, Associate Justice Thomas, the quiet one, turns out to be the lone visionary. Unfortunately the court often gropes its way where simple insights are involved. We need more justices with common sense and solid Enlightenment values — more justices with vision to match Thomas’s. We won’t get them until the Senate is cleaned out.

This mess is not to the taste of TLB, but you might like it. It has received rave reviews. But so has skydiving.

Aha, so there you are, Citizen! Say your prayers…’cuz Uncle’s gonna blow you away….

A reminder: the Tea Party Movement is still growing.

What should we do about/with/for the news media? Individualists say leave them alone to survive or perish in a free market, while collectivists recall the WPA. A book review.

Well, at least the media can congratulate themselves for one thing: they are watched. Which is to say, folks are keeping an eye on the rascals.