Politics and Culture

...will "uphold our values"** the next time we have a terrorist mastermind with information on an impending attack that can save thousands of people is in custody.

**Non-harsh interrogation methods were declared a non-American value in 2003. Roosevelt, Truman, Reagan, Kennedy, Lincoln, and Washington may have acceded to making a spy or other unlawful combatant uncomfortable by holding his face, depriving him of sleep, or dunking his head under water.

If things go poorly in Iraq, we shouldn't blame Obama. His indifference may make a resurgence more likely, but at some point, Iraqi internal problems are Iraqis'. We have reached that point. An orderly withdrawal of American forces should more than counter-balanced by an increase in Iraqi resolve.

-Napolitano suffers from the leftist disease "equalititis," wherein leftists discard the ability to distinguish between somewhat similar things in order to construct some creamy, equal reality. It's the same impulse that sees a "circle of violence" between Israel and its neighbors. So, of course Napolitano sees no difference between the Canadian and Mexican borders, "They both have lines, don't they?"

I also like how Napolitano can't call terrorists, "terrorists," but summons the moral force to call employers who hire illegal workers "evil." I wonder if the same people who howled when Bush called North Korea "evil" will say anything? Nahh.

-This interrogation thing is taking on a McCarthy-like tone--"records show that so and so knew about the 'face grabbing' in 2003!"-- and the backlash to it could be worse than it was for the McCarthy hearings because McCarthy was essentially correct in substance, if horrible in style, while tearing the country apart because some CIA agents poured water up a mass murderer's nose is absurd.

-Or maybe there won't be a backlash. In order to see the dumminess of going after fine Americans who tried to balance protecting the country with the law, a country has to have a somewhat well-developed sense of proportion. Perhaps the United States has finally joined Europe as a nation (yes, I know Europe is many nations) of fools spiraling uncaringly, perhaps even happily and willfully, into a morally and materially degenerate existence.

-For, despite everything about the economy being worse than it was a year ago; the prospect of two hostile, nutty countries acquiring nuclear weapons; and the most clueless president since...I can't even think of one; Americans seem to be feeling quite optimistic about things. More people think we're on the "right track." Popularity's holding for Obama.

-Which reminds me again of this inquisitor hunt. This whole thing is one of the lowest things I've ever seen a president do. Obama wants to put everything in the past and move forward, apologizes to and forgives rotten countries around the world, is willing to talk to mass murderers and real torturers, but has to go after Bush-era judges for trying to draw a line on interrogations. How does this improve our standing in the world? By bringing it to its knees in mocking laughter? It's appalling; it really is.

It's also pure politics. Democrats like Pelosi knew what was going on. Obama won't release the part of the memo that talks about the information we gathered and the attacks we prevented because of the interrogations (because that would make the defenders of the country look good?) He doesn't want to anger the CIA so he goes to talk to them, "Yeah, I support you guys, you're great."

The next day, to give the lefty haters something to howl about, he pulls out a stake and tries to drive it through their heart.

And what will he do because he knows that really going through with this is crazy? Nothing, "Yeah, we looked into it because we wanted to get the facts, but we should move on..." Let's hope that instead of threading the needle and pleasing everybody, Obama will do just enough to anger all sides.

-And, Hillary denigrating Cheney's cridibility! The lady who flat out lied about being shot at in Kosovo! Sick, really.

We know what Obama wants to do with banks, health care, and education (the shameful cancellation of the Washington D.C. voucher program), and former parental responsibilities like sex education and child care.

It's pretty clear also that Obama wants to appropriate much of America's civil society-- charities, business groups, social and religious associations, arts, adult and children's organizations that promote radical ideas like patriotism, etc.-- for government.

Sounds conspiratorial, I know, but how could you add the "2" of Obama wanting to reduce private donations to charities-- donations that fund Scouting, orchestras, skid row missions, museums, and many other activities-- with the "two" of Obama increasing funding for the NEA, welfare, and government organizations that do the same thing, and not reach my "4," above.

You can check your math with yesterday's announcement that Obama will increase the money government pays AmeriCorps "volunteers." How far away is a "Jr. AmeriCorps" to replace the homophobic, religiously bigoted Boy Scouts? We already know that Obama wants to take over local law enforcement or something with a federal domestic Army.

What can Americans do? The Guirado household involves itself in organizations independent from the government as much as possible. I'm in Knights of Columbus, my son's in little league, my other son's in Cub Scouts, my wife dances with her friends. If the Girl Scouts offer a shopping merit badge, my daughter's joining. Of course, we go to Church.

Besides direct support, we need a good defensive strategy as well. We must resist any policy designed to reduce the influence of independent organizations, like the charity deduction limit and stop creeping Euro-style liberal fascism by opposing conservative speech restrictions like a variation of the Fairness Docrine and Obama's pending decision to limit dissent on abortion (FOCA).

We need to stand strong against cultural intimidation by laughing down things like what happened to Miss America and the DHS memo against socialism skeptics.

A practical example of conservative civil disobedience from my own life: The public school she attends was going to give my 10-year-old daughter a sex education class. When my wife asked me if we should sign the permission paper, I asked her, "What will they teach her that you can't?"

"Nothing."

"Well, there's your answer."

This is where liberals get almost too stupid to describe. It's so infuriatingly stupid, in fact, that I won't even try to reason with it (because, you know, asking judges for guidance on water boarding and sleep deprivation is the worst thing the Nazis ever did), hoping that anybody who happens upon this post isn't an idiot.

Story here.

Cheney wants all of the "torture" memos released. Why not? We all know why not.

I've used the case of the Canadian man who chopped off a guy's head while people watched as an example of a general decline in Western bravery, which is a natural consequence of its secularism.

Since then, Mark Steyn has given us more examples of Western un-gallantry (yellow tape installers), and we've had this embarrassing scene from France ("at least we're alive," they'd answer):

There seems to be, however, a cowardice floor-- a point where the God-given aspiration to dignity kicks in and prevents further humiliation--that even European bureaucrats can't crawl beneath. Witness this scene from the Durban "racism conference" in Geneva.**

Several European countries left during Iranian president Ackmadinijad's (I'm not looking it up again) anti-Israeli speech.

That was kind of brave, walking out. They won't actually fight Iran, but it's better than nothing.

Now, we know that President Obama sat in a hall, taking notes(!), while Ortega harangued United States, and shook Chavez' hand while a book calling us, essentially, what Amaddingjob called Israel, was thrust into his hands.

Open Veins of Latin America: Five Centuries of the Pillage of a Continent by Eduardo Galeano

(Ahh, that classic irony: The useful idiots in the United States making another communist rich)

It's pretty bad when the Belgian president out-toughs you.

Questions: Would it have been brave for Obama to walk out on Ortega? Was there any difference, in essence, between Ortega's' speech and Ackmaddjiniijad's (no, you fascist pig! you both deserve it- Comrade Chad)? Do you think Perez Hilton and his bad self would have stayed if either Ortega or Amakemewhinniedad had said that only men can marry women?

It may be that anti-racism and gay marriage are the only two things the modern West believes is worth fighting for.

**It's a silly conference. Only Europeans and the United States care about reducing racism.

**update**

According to CNN, researchers agree with me.

**update**

These issues are my least favorite to write about as people always get the wrong idea one way or another, but this post The Corner referencing this O (Oprah Winfrey) magazine article about the phenomenon of females leaving men for other women gave me the impetus to share my observations. My thesis is that the future of the Western world will be bi-sexual (unless/until either a Christian renewal or a [hopefully peaceful] Islamification).

I first encountered the idea of mass numbers of women preferring other women as mates in a book I skimmed through in the public library (it was on the table) as a high school student called Lesbian Nation that urged women to become Lesbians, mostly for political reasons.

Recently, we've had celebrities like Anne Heche, Madonna, Megan Fox (men's biggest loss), Brooke Hogan, Cynthia Nixon, Lindsay Lohan, et al, switch back and forth from men to women.

At the high school where I teach, I started noticing girls brazenly making out with other girls around 2004. It's now ubiquitous. Girls kiss other girls often, in the halls, and then tell me that they still like boys when I ask them about it. Whenever movie stars come up in class, girls hoot at the female stars as much as the boys.

They have stickers on their backpacks with lesbian slogans, join clubs, go to the prom together, amongst other evidence of its popularity.

Commercial for Axe. Notice that the women are the aggressors and the strong bisexual hints from the girls (pool, bar scenes).

It's in mainstream commercials (above), almost all television shows, even conservative, non-soapy genres like Sci-Fi (Battlestar Gallactica and Firefly).

I've talked to several women who have said that they've given up on men and will just be with women.

Statistics show an explosion of female-female sex within colleges.

The public is more accepting of lesbianism, of course, but I've concluded that the general low quality of men- barely more masculine than many women, work less hard on suppressing their predatory sexual instincts (read Maxim and FHM) than their fathers, and have little interest in the traditional male role of provider-patriarch- have also contributed to this phenomenon. Given a choice between a good-for-nothing man and an affectionate woman, and with no societal pressure to choose men, many women, especially those hurt by men or physically unattractive, will choose other women.

If gay marriage becomes legal, expect this trend to accelerate.

Male sexuality is different, and I haven't noticed the bi-sexual trend amongst men, yet. Female soldiers in the Army have told me that many men in Europe, especially Germany and Spain, are bi-sexual, but, again, I haven't seen it here, yet.

Liberals have mocked conservatives for thinking that homosexuality can "spread." Progressives have insisted that sexuality is fixed at birth, like race, and not influenced by culture.

Liberals are always, 100% wrong on social issues.**

Those of us familiar with history know that homosexuality was ubiquitous amongst the general population in every region of the world from pre-Christian America to Japan. You know about Rome and Greece. It was only with the spreading of the Abrahamic religions that homosexuality became to be seen in a negative light (Christianity was the driving factor in the Japanese, Greek, and Aztec abandonment in ritual pederasty as well).

Now that homosexuality is mainstream and sympathy isn't as necessary, I imagine that liberals will abandon the idea that homosexuality is hard-wired and just ask, "so what?"

Fewer and fewer people in the West have an answer.

**Welfare, teen pregnancy, sex education, abortion, euthanasia, crime, and marriage examples coming up soon. Stay tuned.