| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Kneecapping Barack Obama at every opportunity. | ||
Michelle Malkin
Betsy's Page
Tammy Bruce
Dr. Helen
Xiaxue
Debbie Schlussel
Asymmetrical Information
Sister Toldjah
The Anchoress
My Vast Right Wing Conspiracy
Small Dead Animals
Atlas Shugs
La Shawn Barber's Corner
Transcended
Bryd DroppingsRWN has 3 468x60 banner, 20 kb or less, banner ad slots coming available this week-end. If you'd like to acquire one of them, send me an email. It's $60 to get 1 out of 4 slots for a month.
After putting together the most annoying liberals of 2005, I thought it was only fair to do a follow-up nailing people on the other side of the aisle. Enjoy!
20) Barbara Bush: Oh yeah Barbara, there's nothing poor people love better than sleeping in the Astrodome.
19) Ralph Peters: All good people hate the French, but even they're better than the rioters.
18) Colorado Governor Bill Owens: For throwing any chance he had to be President out the window by supporting a massive tax increase and the evisceration of one of the best pieces of budget legislation in America, the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights.
17) Steve Sailer: Racist Katrina coverage.
16) Senator Lindsey Graham: John McCain light.
15) Congressman Christopher Shays: The most annoying RINO that you've never heard of and that those of us who have, hope we never hear from again.
14) Senator Ted Stevens: I demand that Alaska get to keep it's pork or I'll quit the Senate! It should have been bye-bye Ted!
13) Senator Lincoln Chafee: Look! Up in the sky! It's a bird! It's a plane! It's super-RINO!
12) Senator Arlen Specter: He's a RINO and that's bad enough, but how arrogant do you have to be to try to name a building after yourself on the Hill?
11) Armstrong Williams: You're not allowed to secretly take money from the White House to promote their agenda, even if you agree with it.
10) Pat Buchanan: Yes, WW2 was worth fighting and all those people who are pointing out that you're getting progressively loonier with age? They're right.
9) Senator Chuck Hagel: An anti-war whiner who's the worst thing to come out of Nebraska since...since...wait, does anything ever come out of Nebraska other than corn? I guess, he's worse than creamed corn -- if it gives you hives or something.
8) White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card: Thanks for talking Bush into foisting Harriet Miers on us. We really needed that intra-party brawl.
7) Michael Chertoff & Michael Brown: Actually, whoever let these two charisma free wonks be the face of the Bush's administration's Hurricane Katrina relief effort deserves this slot, but they'll have to do.
6) Senator George Voinovich: For getting so upset about John Bolton going to the UN that he actually blubbered like a baby.
5) Congressman Tom DeLay: Oh yeah, we really have an "ongoing victory" over spending don't we?
4) Pat Robertson: Can you go more than a few months without saying something so stupid that it makes national headlines? Put a sock in it big mouth!
3) Congressman Randy "Duke" Cunningham: Crooked as a dog's hind leg and run out of Congress on a rail.
2) Senator John McCain: Nobody fought harder for Al-Qaeda's right to be free of belly slaps.
1) The Gang Of 14 (Republican side): Lindsey Graham, John Warner, Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins, John McCain, Mike DeWine, & Lincoln Chafee. The gang of idiots who almost led to Supreme Court Justice Harriet Miers would be a more appropriate moniker.
Christian broadcaster Pat Robertson, who yesterday told viewers that God’s wrath spurred Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon’s massive stroke, today said his own “ignorant remarks are another manifestation of God’s anger.”
The popular Tv Personality said God punished Mr. Sharon, 77, for dividing the land that God gave to the Israelites, and that Mr. Robertson’s own periodic claims to know the Lord’s motivation behind specific events are part of God’s judgment on the American church.
“If Christians would read the Bible, instead of just watching TV, they would understand that people who claim to know exactly why God does what He does are usually false teachers,” said Mr. Robertson. “God disciplines American Christians for their willful ignorance of the Scriptures by having me embarrass them every 60 days or so with another ridiculous remark.”
Mr. Robertson said that God had judged Ariel Sharon by making him “old and morbidly obese” and thus a high risk for cardio-vascular problems.
“It’s like a lightning bolt from heaven,” he said.
This satire was used with the permission of Scrappleface.
I didn't support Ah-nold when he ran for governor of California not just because he's a RINO, but because the Pants-A-Nator has morals a little too similar to Bill Clinton's for my taste.
That being said, I do have to admit I was warming up to the Governor. He was getting the California budget under control, he was an asset for the GOP on the campaign trail in 2004, didn't cave on Tookie, and his letter to Graz was just fantastic.
But unfortunately, Arnold has made 180 degree turn on his signature issue, which also means he has thrown the primary reason Republicans had to support him down a well:
"A year after picking a bitter fight with legislators that he ended up losing at the polls, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger unveiled a massive 10-year spending plan on Thursday aimed at winning back Californian support ahead of his November re-election effort.Addressing legislators in his annual "state of the state" address, the Republican governor proposed $222.6 billion in spending on schools and infrastructure over the next decade that would include a record $68 billion of new debt."
Arnold was to the left of most Republicans on a lot of issues already and now that he has abandoned fiscal restraint, I'm not sure he really qualifies as anything more than a celebrity version of Arlen Specter or Susan Collins.
That warm feeling I mentioned earlier? It's gone...
This story from (big surprise) Vermont has been getting a lot of play in the blogosphere:
"There was outrage Wednesday when a Vermont judge handed out a 60-day jail sentence to a man who raped a little girl many,many times over a four-year span starting when she was seven.The judge said he no longer believes in punishment and is more concerned about rehabilitation.
Prosecutors argued that confessed child-rapist Mark Hulett, 34, of Williston deserved at least eight years behind bars for repeatedly raping a littler girl countless times starting when she was seven.
But Judge Edward Cashman disagreed explaining that he no longer believes that punishment works.
"The one message I want to get through is that anger doesn't solve anything. It just corrodes your soul," said Judge Edward Cashman speaking to a packed Burlington courtroom. Most of the on-lookers were related to a young girl who was repeatedly raped by Mark Hulett who was in court to be sentenced.
The sex abuse started when the girl was seven and ended when she was ten. Prosecutors were seeking a sentence of eight to twenty years in prison, in part, as punishment.
...Judge Cashman also revealed that he once handed down stiff sentences when he first got on the bench 25 years ago, but he no longer believes in punishment.
"I discovered it accomplishes nothing of value;it doesn't make anything better;it costs us a lot of money; we create a lot of expectation, and we feed on anger,"Cashman explained to the people in the court.
The sentence outraged the victim's family who asked not to be identified."
A judge who doesn't believe in punishment? Isn't that like a soldier who doesn't believe in killing people or a maid who thinks it's a waste of time to clean? Any judge who doesn't believe in handing out punishment is in the wrong profession and isn't fit to serve on the bench.
So, isn't it time for Cashman to retire?
The Top 3 Quotes In The Blogosphere This Week
1) "What is the Dem message here? "Oh my gosh, that evil Bush is spying on Al Qaeda and anyone who talks to them - as Democrats, we will never do that!"Good luck. Let us know how that works out in '06." -- Tom Maguire from at JustOneMinute
2) "Andrew McCarthy dismantles the Times' newest attempt to get the public fussed about the NSA intercept case.Short version: He rides them harder than he rode Molly Ringwald at the end of the unrated director's cut of Pretty In Pink." -- Ace of Spades HQ
3) "It’s like Teddy Roosevelt said:“Speak softly, but if necessary beat them over the head until they’re unconscious.”
Or something like that." -- Jayson from Polipundit
Ariel Sharon Stable, In Medically Induced Coma
Iranian President Hopes Sharon Perishes (An Evil And Dangerous Man)
Iran leader 'Disgusts' US Over Sharon
Robertson Says Sharon's Stroke Is God's Punishment (What A Towering Idiot)
'Anti-Semitic' Talk By Hugo Chavez Angers Jews
UK: Muslims Boycott Holocaust Day
Muslim Gang Terrorizes Train In France
Young US Hockey Players Booed By Canadians Because They're Americans
Clinton Campaign Group Fined for 2000 Gala
Joint Chiefs Chairman Says Murtha's Criticism Will Hurt Morale, Recruitment
DeLay's House Colleagues Anticipate a Leadership Shake-Up (Free WAPO Reg Req)
Democrats Don't Plan Alito Filibuster
Democrats To Delay Alito Confirmation Vote For A Week
Mark Steyn: The War On Terror Is The Real Women's Issue
Mark Steyn On The Population Decline Of The West, And The Further Embarrassment Of Pat Robertson
Ltc. John M. Kanaley: Straight From The Front
Charles Krauthammer: A Calamity For Israel
Humor: How Dumb Is the Democratic Base?
Website Of The Day: South Park Studio
Website Of The Day: Nealenews
Are you ready to see a list of the most annoying liberals for 2005? These lists only come once a year and boy -- the people who made it -- whew, are they annoying. Don't believe me? Just take a look at the honorable mentions this year who didn't make the final cut...
Honorable Mentions: Margaret Cho, Ramsey Clark, Hillary Clinton, George Clooney, Juan Cole, John Dean, The Democratic Underground, Al Franken, Al Gore, Ted Kennedy, Linda Foley, Jesse Jackson, Eason Jordan, John Kerry & Teresa Kerry, Paul Krugman, Bill Maher, Moby, Michael Moore, Michael Newdow, Nancy Pelosi, Charles Schumer, Andrew Sullivan, Kayne West, Joe Wilson, James Wolcott
Want to see the whole list? Then just click here.
Pro-immigrant activists in California decried as racist a city's plans to train its police to help enforce federal immigration laws, reports the LA Times.
The city council Costa Mesa voted last month to allow its police officers to question suspects arrested for other crimes about their immigration status. Mayor Allan Mansoor insists that enforcement will focus on those accused of serious crimes and that random sweeps are not part of the plan.
Protestors who attended a city council meeting, however, said the initiative was racist. About 80 of them turned up waving hand-painted signs reading "Nobody Is Illegal" and "Mansoor Is a Bigot." Other signs proclaimed the United States the property of Mexico and Americans as the interlopers.
"We demand a reversal of the agreement," said Coyotl Tezcalipoca of the Tonantzin Collective, a pro-immigrant group.
This content was used with the permission of TongueTied.
In an editorial piece today that should surprise no one, the New York Times chose to play the blame game with the horrible miner tragedy in West Virginia where 12 of 13 miners were killed were killed in a coal mine blast accident. The NYT:
Political figures from both parties have long defended and profited from ties to the coal industry. Whether or not that was a factor in the Sago mine’s history, the Bush administration’s cramming of important posts in the Department of the Interior with biased operatives from the coal, oil and gas industry is not reassuring about general safety in the mines. Steven Griles, a mining lobbyist before being appointed deputy secretary of the interior, devoted four years to rolling back mine regulations and then went back to lobbying for the industry.
But what the NYT does not tell you is that, since 2001, fatalities from mine accidents have dropped almost 50%. BizzyBlog has the lowdown. Make sure to check out the chart he created from the data that he found here on the Labor Dept’s website. Good detective work, Tom. He writes:
Contrary to what The Times would have you believe, the trend has been favorable (”reassuring,” if you will) for many years, especially the past four, where there has been a near-50% drop in fatalities. In fact, these results support the contention that staffing Interior with people who actually know their industry has led to greater safety.
Yep.
Shame shame on the NYT.
This content was used with the permission of Sister Toldjah.
Yesterday, I noted the difference in one comparable experience between United Parcel Service (UPS), a private delivery service, and the United States Postal Service (USPS), the government mail delivery service. An interesting debate followed concerning the value and need for certain government functions. Certainly a key difference between Republicans and Democrats, is the question of just how much of our lives and power we should hand over to government. And that brings me to the place of business in the American mind and heart.
I don’t want to sound like I am trivializing the matter, but in many ways the American Revolution was a Businessman’s War. The beginning of troubles came not so much from King George III as from Parliament, whose heavy regulations and protectionist tariffs angered the American colonists; basically all they wanted was a level field for marketing and delivering their goods. But the New World was richer than England could pay for, and Parliament compensated by discounting American goods and giving preferences to British companies, in punitive practices which damaged colonists’ finances and outraged the colonial Congress. Rather than compromise to reach an amicable agreement, Parliament instead added to the tax burden, and began to send troops to occupy suspected trouble spots. In an obvious case of the self-fulfilling prophecy, people forced to house and feed troops send to punish their towns were indeed angry, to the point of rebellion, and by the time anyone in Parliament began to reconsider their actions, violence had begun and spread.
The connection between Business and Politics is long-standing, and has often been contentious. While there have been clashes, and some corrections took too long to happen, America has thrived in large part because the American Dream is real, and it allows someone to succeed on the strength of their own work. Nobody owes you a fortune, but anybody can make one. You have to know the Immutable Laws of Business, though, the ones that don’t change no matter where you are or what you are doing.
1. To succeed in Business, you have to either make or do something people need, something people want, or provide something which makes people’s lives better. There is no right to succeed; if you want to survive, you have to be about the customer.
2. Bad consequences are far more permanent than good consequences. So you’d better be able to address complaints and correct mistakes.
3. Nothing made by man is a necessity. Even if you make a great product, someone will try to make it cheaper, better, or more convenient.
4. Honesty matters. You will screw up sometimes, and things will go wrong. What happens next depends on whether you’re up to be accountable.
5. A business is only as good as its people. Especially the ones the customer sees everyday.
6. Listen to the customer.
7. No one owes you anything. (yeah, it’s kind of like #1, but some folks need to be told twice)
This content was used with the permission of Polpundit.
Earlier this week we reported that Black Entertainment Television has named Reverend Louis Farrakhan as their 2005 Person of the Year. Today the network has released the list of their other top honors of the past year. These include:
* Auto-immune Disease of the Year- Wegener's Granulomatosis
* Acquitted Pedophile of the Year- Michael Jackson
* The Comeback Kid Award- Michael Irvin
* Dental Procedure of the Year- Root Canal
* Sports Injury of the Year- Groin Pull
* Felony of the Year- Home Invasion
* Lifetime Achievement Award- OJ Simpson
Congratulations to all of this years honorees with a special "well-done" to Groin Pull. Despite a consistent and impressive body of work over the years, this is Pull's first nod from the BET. No longer will he be known as the "Susan Lucci" of sports injuries.
This satire was used with the permission of The Nose On Your Face.
"...Despite hysteria over high home prices, in most parts of the United States housing is quite affordable. But in some places housing prices are astronomical -- three times the national average in much of California, for example....Why then are there particular places where housing costs have skyrocketed?
In those places, much of the land is prevented by law from being used to build housing. These land use restrictions are seldom called land use restrictions.
They are called by much prettier names, like "open space" laws, laws to "preserve farmland" or prevent "sprawl," "greenbelt" laws -- or whatever else will sell politically.
People who already own their own homes don't worry about whether such laws will drive housing prices sky high. Somebody else will have to pay those prices while existing homeowners see the value of their property rise by leaps and bounds.
Meanwhile, land that might otherwise provide homes for others becomes in effect free park land for themselves, while such upscale communities use "open space" laws to keep out the masses. The crowning touch is that such self-interest is depicted as idealism." -- Thomas Sowell
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon Has Suffered A "Significant" Stroke And Cerebral Hemorrhage
Attacks Kill 100 In Iraq; Bomb Kills 5 U.S. Troops
NSA "Whistleblower" Asks To Testify
Jobless Claims Plunge To Five-Year Low
Alito Gets Highest Marks From Bar Association
40 Of 45 Members Of The Senate Democrat Caucus Have Taken Money From Lobbyist Jack Abramoff, His Associates And Indian Tribe Clients
Circumstances Left Many In Media With Inaccurate Reports With Trapped Miners
Gingrich Says House, Facing Scandal, Needs New Majority Leader (He's Right)
Ann Coulter: Why We Don't Trust You With National Security
Robert Novak: The "Nancy Problem"
National Review: Tom DeLay Should Step Down As Majority Leader
Ana Marie Cox: Political Theater of the Absurd (Free NYT Reg Req)
Thomas Sowell: Green Lies
Jonah Goldbeg: The Clay Feet Of Liberal Saints (Free LA Times Reg Req)
Peggy Noonan: The Road To Big Government Reaches A Dead End At Jack Abramoff
A Judge Gives A Child Rapist A Two-Month Sentence Because He "No Longer Believes That Punishment Works
Artist Binds Feet in Desert, Loses Key
Internet Provider Wins $11b Suit Against Spammer
Website Of The Day: Inoperable Terran
Look out, Republicans, because it seems that the Democrats have a crafty plan for 2006 in the works! From the Washington Times..
"Democrats on Capitol Hill are drafting a strategy to attack the Bush administration and Republicans as having little regard for the privacy of Americans."We will initiate at the beginning of this year one of the most serious debates and discussions on Capitol Hill in our history about individual rights and liberties," Minority Whip Richard J. Durbin said just before Christmas.
The topic will be a major focus of the Supreme Court confirmation hearings of federal Judge Samuel A. Alito Jr. as privacy rights -- the political code phrase for abortion rights -- already has become a major issue, Mr. Durbin said.
Democratic leaders then plan to keep the issue alive as they continue their opposition to key parts of the USA Patriot Act, which is set to expire in early February unless extended.
But the real payoff, Democrats say, will be the hearings into President Bush's authorization of warrantless spying on terror suspects. Already, Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Arlen Specter, Pennsylvania Republican, said he wants to hold hearings on the matter.
"Senator Specter has promised a hearing on the questions that have been raised about eavesdropping and spying on Americans," Mr. Durbin, Illinois Democrat, said. "At the same period of time, we will be debating those same issues in the context of the Patriot Act and the war on terrorism."
Democratic aides say privately that while it remains a high goal to win control over the House or Senate in the November elections, they think the issue will resonate with voters.
Centrist Democrats, however, warn that such a strategy could backfire."
Of course, it will backfire! As Tom Maguire over at JustOneMinute said:
"What is the Dem message here? "Oh my gosh, that evil Bush is spying on Al Qaeda and anyone who talks to them - as Democrats, we will never do that!"Good luck. Let us know how that works out in '06."
We have Democrats opposing the Patriot Act, which is designed to stop Al-Qaeda. Wanting to immediately pull our troops out of Iraq, where they're fighting Al-Qaeda. Getting up in arms about the President authorizing wiretaps on people who talk to Al-Qaeda. Fretting about captured members of Al-Qaeda at Gitmo and in Iraq...geez, they're practically acting like Al-Qaeda is one of their constituency groups.
On the other hand, Republicans treat Americans who don't want to be in a building when Al-Qaeda flies a plane into it like they're an important constituency group. Which group do you think is bigger? Maybe the Democrats should ask themselves that instead of continuing to live down to their reputation of being, "Blame America first," wimps who can't be trusted to defend the country because of their quasi-suicidal level of naivete about matters of national security.
As most of you have already heard, Jack Abramoff has rolled over and agreed to cooperate with a DOJ corruption probe. Apparently, the DOJ cut a deal with Abramoff so they could collect some scalps in Congress. In fact, there are apparently as many as 20 members of Congress -- and their aides -- that could have their heads on the chopping block because of this.
"..220 lawmakers received at least $1.7 million in political donations from Abramoff, his associates and nine tribal clients between 2001 and 2004, according to a review of Federal Election Commission and Internal Revenue Service records. Of those, 201 are still in Congress. Republicans got $1.1 million, 64 percent of the total."
You can expect the Democrats and the media to try to paint any Republican who took money from Abramoff as crooked, even though plenty of Democrats, including Harry Reid, accepted money from him and his clients as well. In any case, whether we're talking about Democrats or Republicans, it would be wise for them to get any money they received from Abramoff, which will be irrevocably tainted in the eyes of the public, out of their coffers.
Yet and still, there's nothing unusual about members of Congress receiving donations from lobbyists. That's an everyday thing in Washington. On the other hand, the corruption charges are another matter. Any persons in Washington who're crooked, whether they be Republicans or Democrats, will merit no sympathy if they broke the law.
However, it may be a while before there are actually charges filed (as opposed to fevered speculation based on leaks that may or may not be accurate), so we can expect this whole scandal to simmer on the back burner before it really heats up for some people in Congress. In the interim, if there are any Republican members of Congress who know they're dirty, now would be a great time to retire so we have time to get solid candidates for those seats before the 2006 elections. Do everyone a favor and take the hint...
From political analyst Hosein Rouyvaran on the Islamo-Fascist Iranian News Channel via Memri:
The number of Jews in the world (before World War II) was about 13 million. After World War II, the number of Jews in the world was over 12 million. The killing of six million Jews in the crematoria is a myth, not a fact, as proven by geography....There's another matter. In the discussion of the Holocaust the issue of four detention facilities is raised: Auschwitz, Struthof, Mauthausen and Majdanek. Some were in Germany, and some in Poland. There are many issues worthy of discussion: For hygienic reasons, they used to burn the bodies of those who died of typhus or contagious diseases. This means the crematoria were used for hygienic, not political, purposes, and even this was not systematically. That's one thing. The crematoria... The gas chambers were for disinfecting the clothes and the possessions of the prisoners. This too was done for hygienic reasons. In any case, the many researchers who studied this issue said that of the several millions who died in the detention facilities, only 150,000 to 250,000 were Jews. This is a perfectly reasonable figure out of the total number of victims. There is no need to focus on this issue, to discuss it separately, or to present inflated estimates.
Holocaust denial is a conspiracy theory on steroids.
Of course, the Jews say there was a Holocaust and there are still even a few survivors of the camps who can tell you what went on there. Also, it wasn't just Jews who saw the camps. Countless numbers of American soldiers arrived on the scene and saw what had been going on there. Furthermore, the Germans themselves admit that it happened. There are numerous Holocaust museums -- some of which are even in Germany. Heck, you can even see the pictures.
Yet, you still have these people denying that the Holocaust ever occurred. That's strange, isn't it? Especially since most of the people who deny there was a Holocaust tend to be Nazis, white power fanatics, Islamo-Fascists, etc., exactly the sort of people who'd be first in line to get a job if the death camps ever reopened.
Could it be that these people feel compelled to deny that the Holocaust ever occurred because their hate for Jews is so strong, so irrationally powerful, that they are simply incapable of believing a fact that presents Jews in a more sympathetic light and justifies some of their actions?
It's interesting to ponder, but whatever the case may be, Jews should be particularly wary of these kooks and when one of them is actually running a large country in their immediate proximity, like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran, then Israel should get the benefit of the doubt if they feel they need to take military action to protect their country from harm.
Giving homeless alcoholics a regular supply of booze may improve their health and their behavior, the Canadian Medical Association Journal said in a study published on Tuesday.
Seventeen homeless adults, all with long and chronic histories of alcohol abuse, were allowed up to 15 glasses of wine or sherry a day -- a glass an hour from 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. -- in the Ottawa-based program, which started in 2002 and is continuing.After an average of 16 months, the number of times participants got in trouble with the law had fallen 51 percent from the three years before they joined the program, and hospital emergency room visits were down 36 percent.
"Once we give a 'small amount' of alcohol and stabilize the addiction, we are able to provide health services that lead to a reduction in the unnecessary health services they were getting before," said Dr. Jeff Turnbull, one of the authors of the report.
"The alcohol gets them in, builds the trust and then we have the opportunity to treat other medical diseases... It's about improving the quality of life."
Any downside to the program?
Three of the 17 participants died during the program, succumbing to alcohol-related illnesses...
Ah. Well, there's always that, right?
...that might have killed them anyway, the study said.
Studies say a lot of things.
This content was used with the permission of Ace of Spades HQ.
One of the themes Mark Steyn hammers on with some regularity is that the demographics of much of Western civilization seems to be unsustainable. In other words, Europeans are dying significantly more rapidly than they're being born and unassimilated Muslims are being brought in to fill the gap.
Well, Steyn has written his magnum opus on this topic, pumping out more than 6000 words for the Wall Street Journal. I'd strongly suggest that you read it all, but the following lengthy excerpt will give you a good idea of what Steyn is talking about -- and yes, frighteningly, I think he's on to something here...
"Most people reading this have strong stomachs, so let me lay it out as baldly as I can: Much of what we loosely call the Western world will not survive this century, and much of it will effectively disappear within our lifetimes, including many if not most Western European countries. There'll probably still be a geographical area on the map marked as Italy or the Netherlands--probably--just as in Istanbul there's still a building called St. Sophia's Cathedral. But it's not a cathedral; it's merely a designation for a piece of real estate. Likewise, Italy and the Netherlands will merely be designations for real estate. The challenge for those who reckon Western civilization is on balance better than the alternatives is to figure out a way to save at least some parts of the West....The design flaw of the secular social-democratic state is that it requires a religious-society birthrate to sustain it. Post-Christian hyperrationalism is, in the objective sense, a lot less rational than Catholicism or Mormonism. Indeed, in its reliance on immigration to ensure its future, the European Union has adopted a 21st-century variation on the strategy of the Shakers, who were forbidden from reproducing and thus could increase their numbers only by conversion.
...If only a million babies are born in 2006, it's hard to have two million adults enter the workforce in 2026 (or 2033, or 2037, or whenever they get around to finishing their Anger Management and Queer Studies degrees). And the hard data on babies around the Western world is that they're running out a lot faster than the oil is. "Replacement" fertility rate--i.e., the number you need for merely a stable population, not getting any bigger, not getting any smaller--is 2.1 babies per woman. Some countries are well above that: the global fertility leader, Somalia, is 6.91, Niger 6.83, Afghanistan 6.78, Yemen 6.75. Notice what those nations have in common?
Scroll way down to the bottom of the Hot One Hundred top breeders and you'll eventually find the United States, hovering just at replacement rate with 2.07 births per woman. Ireland is 1.87, New Zealand 1.79, Australia 1.76. But Canada's fertility rate is down to 1.5, well below replacement rate; Germany and Austria are at 1.3, the brink of the death spiral; Russia and Italy are at 1.2; Spain 1.1, about half replacement rate. That's to say, Spain's population is halving every generation. By 2050, Italy's population will have fallen by 22%, Bulgaria's by 36%, Estonia's by 52%. In America, demographic trends suggest that the blue states ought to apply for honorary membership of the EU: In the 2004 election, John Kerry won the 16 with the lowest birthrates; George W. Bush took 25 of the 26 states with the highest. By 2050, there will be 100 million fewer Europeans, 100 million more Americans--and mostly red-state Americans.
As fertility shrivels, societies get older--and Japan and much of Europe are set to get older than any functioning societies have ever been. And we know what comes after old age. These countries are going out of business--unless they can find the will to change their ways. Is that likely? I don't think so.
...Even in 1968 Paul Ehrlich and his ilk should have understood that their so-called population explosion was really a massive population adjustment. Of the increase in global population between 1970 and 2000, the developed world accounted for under 9% of it, while the Muslim world accounted for 26%. Between 1970 and 2000, the developed world declined from just under 30% of the world's population to just over 20%, the Muslim nations increased from about 15% to 20%.
And yet the world is utterly altered. Just to recap those bald statistics: In 1970, the developed world had twice as big a share of the global population as the Muslim world: 30% to 15%. By 2000, they were the same: each had about 20%.
And by 2020?
So the world's people are a lot more Islamic than they were back then and a lot less "Western." Europe is significantly more Islamic, having taken in during that period some 20 million Muslims (officially)--or the equivalents of the populations of four European Union countries (Ireland, Belgium, Denmark and Estonia). Islam is the fastest-growing religion in the West: In the U.K., more Muslims than Christians attend religious services each week.
Can these trends continue for another 30 years without having consequences? Europe by the end of this century will be a continent after the neutron bomb: The grand buildings will still be standing, but the people who built them will be gone. We are living through a remarkable period: the self-extinction of the races who, for good or ill, shaped the modern world.
...The latter half of the decline and fall of great civilizations follows a familiar pattern: affluence, softness, decadence, extinction. You don't notice yourself slipping through those stages because usually there's a seductive pol on hand to provide the age with a sly, self-deluding slogan...
...Permanence is the illusion of every age. In 1913, no one thought the Russian, Austrian, German and Turkish empires would be gone within half a decade. Seventy years on, all those fellows who dismissed Reagan as an "amiable dunce" (in Clark Clifford's phrase) assured us the Soviet Union was likewise here to stay. The CIA analysts' position was that East Germany was the ninth biggest economic power in the world. In 1987 there was no rash of experts predicting the imminent fall of the Berlin Wall, the Warsaw Pact and the USSR itself.
...To avoid collapse, European nations will need to take in immigrants at a rate no stable society has ever attempted. The CIA is predicting the EU will collapse by 2020. Given that the CIA's got pretty much everything wrong for half a century, that would suggest the EU is a shoo-in to be the colossus of the new millennium. But even a flop spook is right twice a generation. If anything, the date of EU collapse is rather a cautious estimate. It seems more likely that within the next couple of European election cycles, the internal contradictions of the EU will manifest themselves in the usual way, and that by 2010 we'll be watching burning buildings, street riots and assassinations on American network news every night. Even if they avoid that, the idea of a childless Europe ever rivaling America militarily or economically is laughable. Sometime this century there will be 500 million Americans, and what's left in Europe will either be very old or very Muslim. Japan faces the same problem: Its population is already in absolute decline, the first gentle slope of a death spiral it will be unlikely ever to climb out of. Will Japan be an economic powerhouse if it's populated by Koreans and Filipinos? Very possibly. Will Germany if it's populated by Algerians? That's a trickier proposition.
Best-case scenario? The Continent winds up as Vienna with Swedish tax rates.
Worst-case scenario: Sharia, circa 2040; semi-Sharia, a lot sooner--and we're already seeing a drift in that direction." -- Mark Steyn
11 of 12 Miners Reported Alive Are Dead
Abramoff Pleads Guilty, Will Cooperate In Probe That Could Target 20 Members Of Congress
Bush Assails Democrats Over Patriot Act. Opponents Are Blocking Law's Full Renewal for Political Reasons, President Says (Free WAPO Reg Req)
Secret Surveillance May Or May Not Have Occurred Before Authorization From Bush Just After 9/11
Fed Sought To Signal Rate Cycle Near End
Rhode Island Legalizes Medical Marijuana
Florida Hospitals Face Crisis Of Treating Uninsured Illegal Aliens
Mark Steyn: Arnold Does Rings Around Graz
Bill Roggio: Embedded Bias?
Robert Scale: 2006 In Iraq
Christopher Hitchens: Are Elections Democratic? Dictatorships Are Hardly Preferable
Mac Johnson: The Soviets Had The KGB -- Al Qaeda Has The NYT
Rich Lowry: FISA Fallacies. Bush’s Unconstitutional Critics
Michael Barone: The Wal-Mart Model
The Washington Times: Is The West Losing Russia?
Mark Steyn: The Real Reason The West Is In Danger Of Extinction
Google Set To Challenge PC Makers With $200 Entry-Level Computer
Silent Souls Make.308 Holes In Iraq
Would You Pay $150,000 for a Two-Headed Snake?
100 Things We Didn't Know This Time Last Year
Humor: White House Releases Bush's New Year's Resolutions
Website Of The Day: ConservaTV
One of my all-time favorite books is Rush Limbaugh's The Way Things Ought to Be. It's a book that had a real impact on my thinking in my college years and although it's a little dated, it's still a great read.
That's why I decided to read it again and put together the best quotes from the book. You can read them all right here!
Over at Election Projection -- which is a fine blog -- Scott Elliott is predicting great things for the Libertarian Party in the future:
"So, here's my prediction. In the next twenty years or so, we'll become a three-party political system. The Republican Party and the Democratic Party will be joined by the Libertarian Party as a legitimate force in American politics. The Libertarian Party will grow substantially over the next couple of decades, pulling support from both the GOP and the Democrats.Here's the reason why: Many Americans are libertarian at heart - they just don't recognize it...yet. These folks believe in less restrictions on behaviors (a liberal or Democratic view) and less involvement by the government in economic issues (a conservative or Republican view). Right now, many closet Libertarians are counted among the two major political parties. As Democrats continue to espouse increasingly liberal economic policies - such as universal healthcare - it is becoming more and more difficult for libertarians in their ranks to remain. Likewise, philosophical libertarians in the GOP are getting increasingly uncomfortable with the growing influence of the values-based politics - such as pro-life policies and the Defense of Marriage Act - in their party.
These forces in both major parties that run contrary to their more libertarian brethren are showing no signs of backing off. As a result, I predict a slow steady bleed of philosophical libertarians from both the Democrats and Republicans. This migration will produce, sometime in the next two or three decades, a political system with three major partisan players."
With all due respect to Scott, most Americans ARE NOT Libertarians at heart. That's why the Libertarian Party has been around since 1971 and is still small potatoes.
A lot of libertarians don't get how out of the mainstream their beliefs really are because they're wildly over-represented in the blogosphere and because many of them deliberately avoid talking about a lot of the issues that really kill them with the American public.
But, the truth is that there are a lot of issues Libertarians hold near and dear to their heart that most Americans view as political, "deal breakers."
For example, how many people currently voting for the GOP would seriously consider voting for a candidate who is pro-prostitution, thinks it should be legal to sell crack, wants to gut the military, and believes in open borders and having no restrictions whatsoever on abortion?
On the other hand, as far as Democrats go, you have to understand that Dems tend to be believers in big government. Their solution to every problem is starting a new government program, writing new regulations, and increasing taxes. All of that is anathema to everything Libertarians believe.
Again, Libertarians convince themselves these sorts of issues don't matter because Libertarian candidates are rarely major players in politics, so they generally get ignored. But, what happens if a Libertarian candidate is enough of a factor in an election that his opponents have to pay attention? What happens when one of the other candidates starts running spots featuring crack babies and prostitutes and says, truthfully, that's what Libertarians believe in? How about ads featuring foreign workers walking across the border and taking jobs from Americans? You can go on and on and on with these sorts of ads and they would work exceptionally well -- if there were ever a need to run them.
Look, the hard truth is that although some Libertarian ideas can -- and have -- caught on, the Libertarian Party is never going to be big. The most the LP can ever hope to be is a political spoiler that siphons off votes, mainly from Republicans. That's not something I'm saying to be mean or spiteful, especially since I like, respect, and agree with a number of Libertarians on many important issues, but it's just reality.
If you're a Libertarian and you want to make a difference, join the Democrats or the Republicans -- whichever party most closely matches up to your beliefs -- and try to change people's views from the inside. That, unlike working for, voting for, or contributing to the Libertarian Party, is worthwhile.
This bit by Jonathan Schell in The Nation has to be seen to be believed:
The danger is not abstract or merely symbolic. Bush's abuses of presidential power are the most extensive in American history. He has launched an aggressive war ("war of choice," in today's euphemism) on false grounds. He has presided over a system of torture and sought to legitimize it by specious definitions of the word. He has asserted a wholesale right to lock up American citizens and others indefinitely without any legal showing or the right to see a lawyer or anyone else. He has kidnapped people in foreign countries and sent them to other countries, where they were tortured. In rationalizing these and other acts, his officials have laid claim to the unlimited, uncheckable and unreviewable powers he has asserted in the wiretapping case. He has tried to drop a thick shroud of secrecy over these and other actions.There is a name for a system of government that wages aggressive war, deceives its citizens, violates their rights, abuses power and breaks the law, rejects judicial and legislative checks on itself, claims power without limit, tortures prisoners and acts in secret. It is dictatorship.
Schell immediately goes on to state that President Bush does not preside over the dictatorship Schell said President Bush presides over - it is "embryonic" in Schell's phrasing.
Here we see what the left is on about - they really do view a moderately conservative Republican President acting scrupulously within the laws and carrying out middle-of-the-road economic, social and military policies as an embryonic dictatorship. Schell states that unless Congress impeaches President Bush, we will have the long-feared (on the left) dictatorship. Seeing as Congress cannot impeach for a crime which does not exist, it stands to reason that Schell's formulation is certain to come about - meaning that to at least some on the left, we are living in a dictatorship.
This begs the question: if the left believes that President Bush is a dictator and the terrorists in Iraq are freedom fighters, who's side shall the left be on? Would anyone want to be in the side of the dictator? Who wouldn't want to be on the side of freedom fighters? If the freedom fighters are fighting the dictatorship you are opposed to, what would you do to assist the freedom fighters? Is there anything you wouldn't do?
2006 really will be an interesting year.
This content was used with the permission of Blogs for Bush.
"When you are boating on the Niagara River, there are signs marking the point at which you must go ashore or else you will be sucked over the falls. With Iran moving toward the development of nuclear weapons, we are getting dangerously close to that fatal point of no return on the world stage.
Yet there are few signs of alarm in our public discourse, whether among politicians, the media, or the intelligentsia. There is much more discussion of whether government anti-terrorism agents should be able to look at the records of books borrowed from public libraries.The Iranian government itself is giving us the clearest evidence of what a nuclear Iran would mean, with its fanatical hate-filled declarations about wanting to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. But send not to know for whom the bell tolls. It tolls for thee.
...Of course they would like us to prevent Iran from going nuclear -- if it can be done nicely by diplomacy, with the approval of the U.N., and in ways that do not offend "world opinion."
It is as if we were on the Niagara River and wanted to go ashore before it was too late, but did not want to turn on the motors for fear of disturbing the neighbors with excessive noise.
But at that point, the choice is between being serious or being suicidal.
...Partly this is because most of our Western allies have been sheltered from the brutal realities of the international jungle for more than half a century under the American nuclear umbrella.
People insulated from dangers for generations can indulge themselves in the illusion that there are no dangers -- as much of Western Europe has. This is part of the "world opinion" that makes us hesitant to take any decisive action to prevent a nightmare scenario of nuclear weapons in the hands of hate-filled fanatics." -- Thomas Sowell
Happy birthday boy!
In the past, to inspire people to suggest new music that I might be interested in and just for entertainment's sake, I've posted the music I was currently listening to on RWN. Now, thanks to wonders of modern technology, I can now tell you which songs I listened to the most over the last month.
Here's the list for December...
8) Dixie Chicks: Landslide
8) Modest Mouse: Float On
8) Papa Roach: Scars
8) Quiet Riot: Cum On Feel the Noize
8) Radiohead: Creep
8) Russell Watson: Faith of the Heart
8) Shakira: Don't Bother
6) James Marsters: Rest in Peace
6) Three Doors Down: When I'm Gone
5) Chemical Brothers: Galvanize
4) Johnny Cash: Hurt
3) Billy Idol: Dancing With Myself
2) John Cena: Bad, Bad Man
1) Snow Patrol: Run
Over at About's Political Humor page, RWN was selected as About.com's pick in the Best Conservative Blog category of the 2005 Political Dot-Comedy Awards.
Thanks for the recognition. It's much appreciated!
I just wanted to let everyone know that the 4th annual "Most Annoying Liberals of 2005" won't actually be going live today. Sorry for the delay!
'Palestinians Agree':Wipe Israel Off Map. Arab Leader Claims There's Consensus Iran's President Correct With Solution
The Number Of Israelis Killed By Terror Attacks During 2005 Fell By More Than 60 Percent
U.S. Has End in Sight on Iraq Rebuilding (Free WAPO Reg Req)
Russia Vows To End Gas Shortage
Australia Refuses To Raise Its Own Flag At A Sydney Because Of Fears It Will Raise Tensions With Muslims?
Dozens Of Democrats And Republicans Send Back Lobbyist's Donations. Lawmakers Fear Link To Abramoff
Ted Kennedy Touted Anti-Bush Spy Hoax
US Rep. Murtha Says He Wouldn't Join Military Now
Bill Bennett To Replace Robert Novak On CNN
Dustin Hawkins: Liberal Loonies – 2005 Edition
Rich Lowry: The Most Underappreciated Story Of The Year
Roger Kimball: After The Suicide Of The West
Bret Stephens: What's Wrong With Steven Spielberg's New Movie, "Munich"
Victor Davis Hanson: America's Porous Border Enables Mexico's Misrule
The Economist: Gaza Slides Closer To Chaos
Black Entertainment Television Network's 'Person Of The Year': Louis Farrakhan????
The Best Blog Posts For 2006
2005 In Review: The War On Blogs
The JunkYardBlog's Top Ten Blogs Of 2005
India: A Man Beheaded His Teenage Sister For Marrying Outside Her Caste
Website Of The Day: Tapscott's Copy Desk
An Interview With Victor Davis Hanson
The Walter Williams Interview
The David Horowitz Interview
The Hugh Hewitt Interview
An Interview With Congressman Tom Tancredo
Bloggers Select The Greatest Figures Of The 20th Century
Right-Of-Center Bloggers Select The Books That Have Had The Biggest Impact On Their Thinking
Right-Of-Center Bloggers Select History's Most Interesting Dinner Companions
History's Biggest Impact Players
Left-Wing Bloggers Select The 20 Worst Figures In American History
Winston Churchill Addresses A Joint Session Of Congress on December 26, 1941
Transcript of GWB's Sept 20th, 2001 Speech
Duty, Honor, Country By Douglas MacArthur
Winning the Cultural War By Charlton Heston
Time to Recapture Our Destiny by Ronald Reagan
It's A Hitler Lovefest
The Greys Are Mutants From Atlantis Who Bred With Lizards And Survived Earths Cataclysms
The Galactic Orion/Sirian/Draconian Federation Of Reptiles Have Been In Control Of Earth For Eons
Hong Kong Death Machines!
The Web Really Does Bring People Together...To Eat Each Other
Get Your Antennae Up!
Helping Out The Paranoid Lefties Who Think The Right Is Evil
What's So Great About America?
The Nostradamus Effect
The Moral Superiority Of Israel
On Monday, I'll be running retro RWN posts and on Tuesday, I'll be back with the 4th annual "Most Annoying Liberals of 2005." Until then, consider this an open thread and have a great holiday week-end!
|
|||||
|
|
| |||
