NAILS IT. I told you at
the very beginning he wasn't my
president. By which I meant he wasn't going to be everybody else's
president, either. He's president of some of the people, the ones his
community activist heart believes are worthy victims. And not all
victims are worthy. Some of them were just asking for it, for various
reasons. Which is why he can't speak from the heart to the whole
nation. Every national audience contains multitudes of people he
despises. His mission in life is to humble and punish and 'reeducate'
and ultimately control those people.
I didn't watch the speech because I already knew it wasn't aimed at
reassuring me or most of America. So I won't give you a review. What I
will do is share the best
rundown I've come across in a morning of surfing the Interwebs:
Nothing Left to Say
The Left's rejection of
President Obama's speech last night was breathtaking in its scope.
RCP has some tidbits from the MSNBC set — Chris
Matthews, Keith Olbermann, Howard Fineman — which we've already highlighted on the homepage:
Olbermann: "It was a great speech if
you were on another planet for the last 57 days."
Matthews compared Obama to Carter.
Olbermann: "Nothing specific at all was said."
Matthews: "No direction."
Howard Fineman: "He wasn't specific enough."
Olbermann: "I don't think he aimed low, I don't think he aimed at all.
Howard Fineman: Obama should be acting like a "commander-in-chief."
Matthews: Ludicrous that he keeps saying [Secretary of Energy] Chu has
a Nobel prize. "I'll barf if he does it one more time."
Matthews: "A lot of meritocracy, a lot of blue ribbon talk."
Matthews: "I don't sense executive command."
Kevin Drum at Mother Jones called it a "terrible speech."
This gives pablum a bad name. Obama
wants a bill. Pretty much any bill will do. But he didn't say a single
word about what he himself
wanted. A carbon tax? Cap-and-trade? Nuclear subsidies? Electric cars?
Who knows? And as Kate Sheppard notes, he didn't breathe so much as a
word about climate change.
I dunno. This speech felt entirely
by-the-numbers to me. He told us
about the spill. He told us the best minds in the country were working
on it. He told us BP would pay for it. He told us he was setting up
some commissions. He said he wanted an energy bill of some kind. Then
he told us all to pray. It felt like he was reading off a PowerPoint
This is, by a long way, the most
negative reaction I've ever had to
an Obama speech. Even on Afghanistan, where I was dubious of his
strategy and felt his address at West Point was technocratic and
unconvincing, I thought his speech had at least a few redeeming
features. But this one? There was just nothing there. I felt better
about Obama's response to the spill before the speech than I do now.
At The Atlantic, James Fallows'
response was a "sigh."
Do we think anything
different about our problems,
our policies, the possible solutions, or the Administration's
intentions after this speech than we did before hearing it? For many of
Obama's big speeches, from "race" in 2008 to national security last
month, the answer is Yes. To me, the answer for this speech is No. If
this speech resembles anything in the past Obama canon, it is his
address last December, at West Point, announcing an increase in U.S.
troop commitment to Afghanistan. Unfortunately.
said the part of Obama's speech concerning Obama's energy and climate
bill "revealed just how much Obama is operating from a position of
Even Ezra Klein, for whom Obama's wonky
sobriety is ever a source of starry-eyed optimism, couldn't help but fret over the speech's lack of
The optimistic take, at least for
environmentalists, is that this is
the language and approach Obama uses when he really means to legislate.
The pessimistic take is that Obama shied away from clearly
describing the problem, did not endorse specific legislation, did not
set benchmarks, and chose poll-tested language rather than a sharper
case that might persuade skeptics.
But perhaps the most damning commentary
came from Jon Stewart, in a show taped hours before the
president's speech. It doesn't cover the BP stuff but is well
worth a watch as a pure distillate of the left's disaffection...
Overlook the lefty rhetoric. What they're discovering goes deeper
than that. They're finally realizing that POSPOTUS is an incompetent
empty suit who can't see past his own ideological cant to communicate
anything helpful, meaningful, or substantive to the American people.
Just to rub it in, here's part of what I said on Election Night, November
I'm not urging violence of any kind. I'm
simply declaring my
unalterable opposition to the worst electoral decision this country has
ever made. I will not wait and see. I will not give him the benefit of
the doubt. I will not hope for the best. His election is the greatest
catastrophe that has befallen this republic in 232 years. Clinton was
just corrupt. Obama is a nemesis. I will do
everything I can to turn him legally out of office as soon as
I'm sure there's going to be a lot of making nice in the next few days
and weeks. I won't be part of that. When you get sick of all the
attempts to put the best possible face on this unutterable disaster,
come here. We'll be at the old stand as usual, fighting for what
remains of this stricken dream, our country.
Let me repeat a couple of suddenly relevant words from that post:
It's time to start thinking about impeachment.
thing about the Internet? It preserves history many would like to
WE CAN PROVE IT. After putting up my
last post, which referenced
my thoughts on Election
Night, November 4, 2008, I chanced to go back
and read the comments it received. They represent a slice of time past,
something like those ice cores they dig out of Antarctica. So I thought
it might be illuminating to show you one of those cores, unexpurgated
and unfiltered by convenient selections. The McCain camp on
that night was in agony, the Obama supporters jubilant and
triumphalist. Just how dumb and thick-headed and backward were the
conservatives? Just how far-seeing and accurately visionary were the
libs? Take a look. I'll begin with the first three paragraphs of the
post that drew the comments. Then I'll show you what people were saying
on that momentous night.
IT ALL UP. I have no intention of being gracious about this. I'd like to say I never thought I'd see
the day we'd elect a president of the United States who hates the
United States, but the truth is I've been fighting against this day for
35 years. I always knew this day could come. I just hoped it wouldn't.
Right now I'm in the mood for kicking ass and taking names. Top of the
list, John McCain. I always had doubts about whether he really wanted
to win, and his refusal to use the legitimate issue of Jerermiah Wright
seals it as far as I'm concerned. After that, the turncoat Republican
pundits -- David Brooks, George Will, Peggy Noonan, Kathleen Parker,
David Frum, Christopher Buckley, Ann Applebaum, Michael Smerconish, and
the snipers like Michelle Malkin and even Ann Coulter -- it doesn't
matter who you ultimately voted for, because you did your damage long
before election day. You helped turn this country over to a vengeful
marxist without portfolio because he made your panties wet. I don't
care how much damage it does to the Republican Party to read you out of
it. The Republican Party is better off without you, ALL of you. Go to
hell. Except, sadly, you're taking all of us with you.
Next up, the American people. I urge you to support your new president
with all your patriotic fervor and belief. Because I won't. I refuse to
accept a president who thinks our constitution is fatally flawed and
who sees nothing wrong with choosing a black racist as a mentor or a
murderous terrorist as a partner in a conspiracy to radicalize school
children rather than teach them to read and write. To every one of you
who voted for this pampered, resentful faker,
I have just four
words: I spit on you.
Now the comments. The only changes I've made are to eliminate comments
consisting solely of links that no longer work and to boldface the ones
written by Obama supporters/defenders (Warning: some are NSFW):
seraphim31587 2008-11-04 09:30:00
jwillmoney 2008-11-04 09:45:00
Well put. President Obama WILL be an unmitigated disaster....
Wade 2008-11-04 10:17:00
I voted for him. And I couldn't be
happier with the way tonight has gone. As for your spit, well, I
suppose I'll have to take it in stride. Perhaps I can give you some
advice that I was given in 2004. "If you don't like it that much, then
move to fucking Canada." Good night, all. A very, very good night.
BahHumbug 2008-11-04 10:19:00
7 years after 09/11, our friends the pali's can once again dance in the
streets. And to think that Jewish votes and money was instrumental to
that... Only 7 years later. It boggles the mind. A fucking nightmare is
what it is.
Chris P 2008-11-04 10:28:00
Instapunk: Beautiful. Yep, leave no name unscathed when it comes to
calling out the bullshit.
And let me add this: As we regroup and reenergize the conservative
movement and/or Republican Party, let's make especially sure that the
Ross Douthats and other young wide-eyed nitwits don't have any sway in
the matter, either.
BahHumbug: Time moves fast now, doesn't it? It's all sped up. Seven
years was seven lifetimes ago to most of our zoned-out, happily
fattened fellow citizens. They don't know history, or see its broader
arcs. Pray God they and we don't have to learn the hard way again.
The purge must begin: obviously the Noonans, the Douthats, the Buckleys
and the Brookses must be ostracized, literally. Thrown out of the party
and not given voice. That part is simple.
More complex is how to refine policy changes. This will come, and will
be dictated by events. One of our hopes is the Supreme Court.
One hopes that this will be made more easy by the (soon to come)
Carter-esque mistakes of the incipient Obama administration.
The Kid 2008-11-04 11:14:00
I feel as though all is lost.
I feel rage.
I feel the need for vengeance just as much as you do.
I feel all of those years of watching CASINO running through my veins
(I know YOU know what I mean).
On the bright side of things, this LOSS will encourage me to become
more politically learned and ultimately more politically active. As I
get older, I only grow wiser (I had a pretty good start to begin with).
qrstuv 2008-11-05 04:36:00
He stole it, at least in some states.
And I'm with you. He gets as much support from me on day one as Bush
got from the left.
trencher 2008-11-05 06:28:00
what? Obama is a marxist? I knew he
was bad, but not that bad?!
JS 2008-11-05 06:32:00
Honest to God, if there really was somewhere to go I'd leave this
pathetic place. What we just elected is nothing more than a common
street thug. There will be no "re-energizing" of the Republican
blablabla at all. The epitome of the dreaded "N" word is now in control
of our military, and darling commentators across the bloggosphere are
offering congrats. Jerkoffs like Malkin and Hannity and Limbaugh and
Ingraham and all of them got just what they wanted: They selfishly
NEEDED to "prove" that they were the purest of pure conservatism, even
if it meant an American hating racist dolt would win (giving all of us
dumb whites the "finger" as he moved along, for God's sake). From
Wright to now, Barry has hidden NOTHING about himself. Time for a black
president? Fuck all of you.
Mephitis 2008-11-05 07:49:00
I agree on most of what you said, but I divide the pundits into two
categories ... the hoity toity republicans, and the died in the wool
conservative ones. I think the conservative ones were right, the wimpy
ones just too scared to take a stand against THE ONE.
Having said that, I believe that MM and Ann are on the good side of the
fight and I do not advocate throwing them under the bus, but following
their advice and nominating a good conservative that is not a career
politician. (Sarah and Ronald Reagan have a lot in common).
Having said that, when do we get started so that we do not get our next
nomination delivered to us by the Northwestern states that
overwhelmingly went to the opposition this year? How do we take back
the party? How do we get a good candidate? Frankly Sarah and Bobby
Jindal are both better candidates than any of the field that McCain
beat, so how do we get a potential winner on the ballot?
Brizoni 2008-11-05 09:37:00
You're mostly right, so I hate to argue what might seem like a minor
point. But our new president isn't "The epitome of the dreaded 'N'
word." (that'd be Lil Wayne)
Barry is something much, much worse. He's more like a suicide bomber
driving a van full of chemical fertilizer into our national morale.
We're walking away from the next four years like the girl from Trang
Brizoni 2008-11-05 09:46:00
"when do we get started so that we do not get our next nomination
delivered to us by the states that overwhelmingly went to the
opposition this year?"
To do that, we'd have to change their fundamental beliefs about the
role of government. Namely, they'll have to stop believing that people
need to be protected from each other by government. They'll have to
want to protect each other FROM government. A huge sea change in their
If anyone has any ideas, speak the hell up.
Gareth 2008-11-05 09:52:00
Maybe I'll just stop working and jump on the Obama wagon. They probably
have some good weed.
me 2008-11-05 10:48:00
Needless to say, all those who voted for him will soon see
Atlas shrugging... and weaklings that they are, they will not be able
to bear under the weight of it. I feel like someone died today...
Yeswecan 2008-11-05 01:52:00
I suppose all of you hoped for a
better tomorrow with Miss Bikini and old McDonald. Wow, the dream team.
McCain and Palin were just not good enough. Remove your heads from your
underwear and start sniffing something else. Raise your heads high and
be optimistic. At least, he will try to get you out of the shit that
the real bastard put you in with his war against terrorism and weapons
of mass destruction. America is writing history here, hope is around
the corner; try to surf on the wave instead of looking down. This is
why America never goes anywhere, everybody is against change.
IP 2008-11-05 02:40:00
"This is why America never goes anywhere, everybody is against change. "
What're you, sixteen? Change is the engine of America. Always has been.
When it comes to looking down," your man is the champ. Everything is
dismal in his sight. You seem to be cut from the same cloth. If you can
even think the phrase "why America never goes anywhere," you're no
optimist. You're just a bitter malcontent who thinks that because your
own glass looks half empty, you're entitled to drink from everyone
else's glass. But why should they bother refilling them if they know
you're going to take them away.
Enjoy your victory while you can, and gloat all you want. Just remember
that there's bad change as well as good, and the only area where your
man has shown any talent or accomplishment is getting elected. You'd
better invest all your newfound "Hope" in one area: that Obama can
somehow learn how to be an effective president before his airball
notions sink the whole damn country.
Now run along and play.
JS 2008-11-05 05:09:00
JD 2008-11-05 07:35:00
"This is why America never goes anywhere, everybody is against change."
1st - America has gone from British colony to
undisputed leader of the free world, yet in your opinion that's never
2nd - The type of people who made America great didn't spend two
seconds thinking about change. They selfishly bettered themselves and
in the process dragged the whole world to higher levels of freedom and
prosperity. Their ideas and hard work led to freed slaves, women's
rights, the end of child labor, and on and on.
All those mistreated poor folks you're so concerned about couldn't have
built this country no matter what advantages they might have been
given, and they won't improve it no matter how much money and favors
you throw their way. And you know what, neither could I. I'm not
industrious or smart enough. However, I am smart enough to know my
limitations and be thankful that there have been enough of those
selfish types to create a nation where I can have nice things and never
be hungry despite working less than half as hard as EVERYONE born only
a few years before me.
Now you naive assclowns who think you can perfect the world (if only
those selfish people can be forced into the hope and change corral with
the rest of the sheep that need to be minded) have elected us all a
savior. Yippee. Let's see how good he is at rewiring human nature.
Let's see how he magically produces a better society and spreads wealth
to every corner of the globe while pulling the rug out from under the
people who created the wealth in the first place.
I sincerely hope the man only screws things up enough to ensure his own
political demise and not that of our freedom and prosperity. But even
if that's what happens, it doesn't absolve the clowns who voted for a
man who's still living on ideas that most of us outgrew at 22. If you
had given the thugs of the world (Putin, Achmadenijihad, Chavez, etc)
their pick of the entire country, they would have been hard pressed to
find anyone who would do more to further their interests than this
overgrown child from Illinois.
The Kid 2008-11-05 07:36:00
As much as we just love Ludacris...
There are a great many words that come to mind having wasted a few
moments of my life on this video. One is: sickening.
I'm sickened that I can't be outspoken about my support for the
Republican party without being branded a racist; however, the
African-American community is being just what they accuse of me:
racist. They have shown to me in HUNDREDS of ways that they only voted
for Obama because of the color of his skin. This video is the epitome
of what they collectively believe is a right to the highest office of
BahHumbug 2008-11-05 07:49:00
"Barack Obama, by reportedly tapping a prominent Jewish congressman to
be his chief of staff, earned renewed support from the Jewish community
here and abroad "
They obviously haven't read Lenin on useful idiots, and Machiavelli of
course. He has. And once again they'll ask "why us, God, why us?".
JS 2008-11-05 08:37:00
It's sad/comical. All the talking heads/bloggers, are throwing Sarah
under the bus now; they are discussing why "we" lost, as though this
thing were a real election, with real disputes, and not a MSM "power
left"; they are categorically ignoring the 500 lb gorilla in the room -
we just elected a racist - so that they can "regroup" for 2010 and
2012, and not be seen as the racists that they ARE. Jerks. This thing
is not reversible. As soon as this SOB appoints his supreme court
justices, it is end game. The "Fairness Doctrine" is not
constitutional? It is now! Reparations? What the?? Yup. Pay up stupid.
And on and on...
Captain America 2008-11-06
It's astounding to me that you bunch
of ridiculous cracker assholes actually appear to believe that Barack
Obama is a Marxist. It would be completely hilarious if you could just
take a moment to explain to me how you came to that conclusion.
The US Presidency is a middle
management position, and Obama is no more than a nice smiley-faced
centrist executive who has done nothing but demonstrate that he will be
a willing and able servant of the great American Imperial Project. His
electoral success is already providing some much-needed positive PR for
the empire, which has been suffering from a severely bad rep for the
last few years (although it has deserved this rep for much longer).
He is as beholden to corporate power
as any of the other multi-millionaires you macho dudes have shined your
boner for in the past, if not more so. Don't fucking panic. There is no
chance in hell that Obama will do anything even remotely Marxist. None.
The US will fall at some point; it is
very possibly already doing so. This will not be the result of Obama's
stewardship, but the inevitable result of a system which is predicated
on perpetual growth and consumption in a finite space with finite
resources. It is a process which is thousands of years old, and way,
way bigger than any cheesy-grinned, media-friendly corporate middle
You bunch of bitches will need to get
over your obsession with "leaders" and big, strong powerful men to tuck
you in at night. Fucking pussies.
apotheosis 2008-11-06 07:42:00
Gosh, Cappy, that was so...so forceful. Dominating. I almost want to
I believe in you, Cap! I do!
J. 2008-11-06 08:33:00
As if you weren't already painfully aware, one glance at the exit polls
reveals precisely which groups made this election a racial issue. Hint:
It wasn't whites, who split 43-55.
I intend to respect BO about as much as your average Daily Kossack
respects GWB or any other Republican (though it's hard for me at this
stage to consider GWB a Republican).
November 4th was the darkest day in American history. A certain
percentage of us know that now. In the coming months and years other
Americans should come to realize it too when they understand that they
were hoodwinked into voting for a marxist by an America hating media.
We were given hope off the left teleprompter and change off the right,
and that was enough to make a tingle go up the leg of fickle America.
God help us.
Jim Treacher 2008-11-06 04:57:00
"I suppose all of you hoped for a better tomorrow with Miss Bikini"
Hey look, the guy who's never heard of Photoshop is giving civics
lessons. Everybody siddown and listen.
"It's astounding to me that you bunch of ridiculous cracker assholes
actually appear to believe that Barack Obama is a Marxist."
It's astounding to me that someone so ignorant, incurious, and
insulting actually took the time to keep typing after an opening
sentence like that.
I love Penny 2008-11-07 08:35:00
I think one of the keys to answering your question is the phrasing of
your preceding statement, “appear to believe that Barack Obama is a
Marxist.” You see, I don’t know that Obama is a Marxist, but there are
several aspects of his history, campaign and comportment that might
lead a rational person to believe that he is a Marxist, or at least
holds principles closely akin to or derived from Marxism.
He has a history of being in the company of parents, family friends,
mentors, etc. who hold Marxist ideals. He worked for an organization
that is arguably a Marxist/communist front.
The manual he taught from was written by an affirmed Marxist, and his
performance in the campaign was praised by the son of the author as
being a textbook example of his father’s theories on community
I also think Obama’s “spread the wealth around” comment is significant.
I’ve heard Democratic strategists explain the comment away as a
politician “closing the play book” and speaking “off the cuff”. They
criticize those, who jumped on the comment as proof-positive that
“Obama is a communist”, as penalizing a politician for trying to speak
plainly and get away from canned answers. What bothers me is that when
Obama decided to turn off the teleprompter and start shooting from the
hip, he was firing off Marxist talking points. When he takes down the
campaign filter so he can relate to regular Joe as a regular person,
the Barak that comes out speaks Marxish.
I know you’ll disagree that any of this is Marxist. Perhaps you are a
Marxist yourself, and are better acquainted with what constitutes
Marxist practice and policy. Or perhaps you are simply a student of
history and have read about Marxism than I have. Either way, I’ll hold
to my belief that what Obama will do is further a progressive agenda
entailing more state regulation of the market, higher tax rates,
increased government spending on programs that alternately relieve the
populace of personal responsibility and restrict the populace’s liberty
and freedom, and redistribute private property per the mandate of the
While it may not be Marxist to the letter, it seems remotely close to
me. If you think Obama is centrist I’ll venture to guess that your own
spot on the political power spectrum is just left of Fidel.
mlah 2008-11-08 12:48:00
yeah. i give the same benefit of the doubt to obama that libs gave to
There you have it. It's not all pretty. Note that I didn't eliminate
references to race. This is fair and accurate reporting. If you read
past your liberal hot-headedness, you'll see that conservatives were
concerned more about Obama's potential racism than the mere fact of his
race. This has proven to be a legitimate concern in matters large and
small, from the silly Cambridge police incident (small) to Eric
Holder's refusal to prosecute Black Panther violence at the the polls
in Philadelphia (large).
The bigger question remains. Who was prescient, and who was deluded?
You tell me.
I love me some Fat Man
WHEN. I know this is already all over the Internet, but I'm
it because I have some provenance here. He's my governor, I voted for him, and I just can't
manage the electoral math that makes him a 2012 presidential candidate,
but that's what we need. He's the ultimate antithesis of Obama. He
speaks from the heart, he knows the people, he has no teleprompter,
he's bold, direct, humble, plain-spoken, and he's as far from telegenic
as you can get (he's fat, fat, fat, SOOO fat), and he connects. Which is exactly what
Obama has just proven he cannot do.
So there's no math that works. But who would ever have thought that the
heir to Ronald Reagan might just be a sweaty fat man from New Jersey
who remembers the American Dream?
. Pardon me. I don't care about any of you today. This
is a Scots
day. He was better than everybody, including me. I won't tell you
anything about the history of deerhounds, or Sir Walter Scott, or any
of that guff. I know I made fun of him here, because he had no
he was the best soul I've ever met. Some ghost of ancient lords, maybe,
but sanctified and purified somehow. Never saw him curl a lip or snarl
at anyone, man or beast. He was, from first to last, a prince walking
among us. Now he's dead.
He particularly loved the smaller and less potent among us. Our
granddaughter Anna immediately saw that he was submissive to her. His
huge size scared her not at all. In fact, he loved all the lovely,
sweet, most open ones: our tiny Bengal cat, my stepdaughter, and most
recently Anna. He wanted to condense his great size to something they
could accept without fear. He would touch noses in the morning with
Izzie -- her seven pounds against his hundred-plus -- because he was
Psmith and she was Isis.
He grew up surrounded by greyhounds, who might have been (slightly)
faster, but he had their blood in his blood too. He was the one who had
been bred to bring down stags with his tree-trunk legs, but he was also
the one who was Scottish through and through, with that coat which was
proof against weather even greyhounds couldn't survive.
And he had that Scottish reserve. He didn't like the nastiness at
dinnertime, though he was the best buddy of the pug who started all the
nastiness at mealtime. It reached a point where he couldn't eat,
knowing what was coming -- female pug against female greyhound. That's
when we had to begin feeding him separately. Which is the thing I'm
clinging to now. Because for most of a year, I had to dish his food
apart from the others and let him eat alone. It gave me my only
intimate moments with the man of ultimate reserve. He learned to let me
pat him on the head and steer his huge hind-end out the door of the dog
room after he was done.
Which leads me to a second soundtrack for him. The one that
characterized his last day and, come to think of it, a lot of days
before. Listen to this while I tell you of the brave. mischievous,
wonderful, Scottish Psmith I will miss for the rest of my life.
He liked the ladies, and they all loved him. My stepdaughter house-sat
for us for a week during our honeymoon and she announced afterwards
that he insisted on accompanying her into the bathroom for showers and
such (which he never did with us), and while he was never so forward
with anyone else, he always seemed to like the young ladies best; he
responded more to women of all ages. Because he may have been dumb, but
he was never stupid.
When new children came to visit, he was always there with a wagging
tail and that big friendly nose. What few people saw were those ancient
eyes, buried in the Scottish way, under brows that had seen absolutely
everything ever. It looks like kindness when you're a child. When
you're an adult, you know it's the wisdom of the ages: I've seen every
kind of slaughter, murder, and torture a human can commit, and I've
come back this time only because I don't have to participate. That's
how I fell in love with the breed. From a picture of a deerhound. It was my
wife who made the dream come true. You get to borrow such souls for a
time, and when they are withdrawn you feel as if you have been tossed
farther from the seat of God.
He convinced Mrs. CP that he should spend his mornings on the sofa in
the tack room, while the greys and the pug remained gated inside the
breezeway. Then he convinced me that he had to rejoin them in the early
afternoon, because they were always a pack and always missed one
another after too many hours of absence.
But he was always, gentle as he was, a lord. When the moment came, he
was so brave that it's all I can remember of the entire nightmare. He
was succumbing to the bloat -- an ailment of giant dogs and horses --
which usually means a fatally twisted gut. He passed up his breakfast,
then lay down panting slightly. Mrs. CP knew the symptoms, though, and
placed an emergency Sunday call to our veterinary hospital. They said
they'd be waiting when we arrived. He allowed me to hoist him into the
car, then sat quietly while we drove the half hour up the Turnpike. He
was suffering when we arrived, but without a whimper, he allowed us to
half-carry him, Mrs. CP at his head and me steering his once mighty, now
stumbling hindquarters up the long, jointed ramp (stairs were out of the question) to the foyer. Where
he collapsed. His heart stopped beating when he thought he had made it.
We told him it would be okay. All the way up the Turnpike. The vet and
her assistants swarmed in with a stretcher. They hustled him away and
restarted his heart. They operated, severed and reconnected his twisted
gut, removed his spleen, and brought him out of anesthesthia. He sat up
briefly. Then collapsed. They gave him valium. He fell asleep. Then
arrested again and was gone.
We told him it would be okay. He was a couple weeks away from his sixth
birthday. And now I'm assailing myself with the idea that the dumbass
actually believed us. That if
he could make it from the car to the foyer, our promises would be
But that's not true. Psmith did that last journey from the car to the
vet foyer on sheer courage. I know it because the thought of it brings
me to tears every time I think of it. He did it because we asked him
to. Because we asked him to. And he made it the whole way.
O Lord. Give me the courage of Psmith to do one impossible thing and I
will be content.
Give me one moment of the beauty of Psmith and I will lay down my pen.
. We're anxiously awaiting a report from one of our (two if
you count Puck Punk) far-flung foreign sports correspondents, hoping
against hope that his story about the gloriously talented Team USA will
arrive before they are inevitably laughed out of the competition.
In the meantime, we looked up our own report on the last World Cup and
discovered that it's just as appropriate this time. So here's a
word-for-word reprint of our post
from exactly four years ago today.
So it's the World Cup... Where were we? Uh, yeah. The big
international championship of soccer. Also called futbol. By people who
don't know what football is.
As usual, the Americans have a team. A bad one, of course. This is a
big part of why we're so not liked around the world. We have the best
athletes, and somehow we can't field a soccer team that can measure up
to the best of the Czech Republic. Maybe we should learn something from
the fact that the children of all those Clinton-loving soccer moms
aren't automatically good at soccer just because their doting mothers
drive them to practice in Range Rovers and cheer their pathetic
attempts to KICK THE BALL.
Which brings us to the biggest reason why Amerians suck at soccer.
American moms don't understand any game, period, and since they're the
only ones in this country who pay attention to soccer, the sad fact is,
nobody in this country knows anything about the rules of soccer. Today
we're going to correct that.
Soccer. It's a European imitation of hockey, played without violence
(on the field) and on a much bigger scale, in order to insure that
nothing ever actually happens in the course of play. The soccer field,
for example, is the largest arena in sport, 340 yards long and 135
yards wide. Teams use 25 players on the field per side, and they play
three halves of forty minutes each. The action consists of players in
short pants KICKING THE BALL back and forth, up and down, hither and
yon, to and fro, etc, for hours at a time, in front of hundreds of
thousands of drunken spectators who assault one another with bottles
and brickbats as a kind of homage to their team's ability to KICK THE
Despite the violence among the spectators, soccer is essentially an
aesthetic experience, akin to a bullfight, in that there's an ideal,
more important than mere winning or losing, to which all teams aspire:
nil-nil tie. Nothing inflames the soccer fan like hours of frenzied
KICKING OF THE BALL that ends with no result of any kind. For true
afficianados, this particular outcome is more satisfying than a sexual
Nevertheless, on rare occasions, scores do occur. This happens when the
ball inadvertently leaves the field of play and falls into a zone
called the Goal. All soccer teams work very hard to make sure this
happenstance is avoided, but even the best athletes make occasional
mistakes. One in four soccer contests are marred by the instance of at
least one goal. When the calamity transpires, soccer announcers express
their disappointment by bellowing the word "Goal" for some five minutes
at a time. Generally, players are so chastened by this verbal
denunciation that they prevent any subsequent reoccurrence: 90 percent
of the games that do not end in the preferred nil-nil tie conclude with
a 1-0 score. Teams that consistently fail to achieve the nil-nil
outcome are eliminated from competition.
It's a shame that Americans can't quite get on board with this, the
most popular sport in the world. If we could, we might have more
appreciation for not only soccer, but the incredibly important role
played by the U.N. in keeping the peace (a.k.a. KICKING THE BALL),
which we really should learn to think of as a nil-nil tie, regardless
of how many hooligans perish during the fighting in the stands.
Got it? Good. That's our G-O-O-O-A-A-A-A-L!
With the benefit of hindsight, we wouldn't change a thing. But at least
we can share the thoughts of one of our commenters on that piece:
Dan 2006-06-16 04:20:00
Soccer is a beautiful sport. You're right that soccer moms have helped
stunt the growth of the sport in this country.
Your ridiculous analysis and sarcasm make it apparent that you'd rather
see sports like American football where some of the 'athletes' are
encouraged to be grossly overweight for the purpose of providing a wall
for other players. A sport where the coaches tell the players exactly
what to do every 30 seconds and where you have a stop in play every
5-10 minutes for 2-3 minutes of ads. Yeah baby we rule!
Screw you for making fun of soccer, it is the beautiful game, it is
physically exhausting and takes great coordination, and some Americans
are actually good at it, and a lot enjoy watching it.
It's only taken us four years to find the perfect rebuttal, courtesy of
The Onion (h/t Hotair):
Only the fourth time we've awarded it in seven years.
This time it goes, magnificently, to the first female recipient (Yay!),
Charen of the National Review,
who wrote the speech Obama really should
give tonight. But won't. Here it is in its entirety:
Obama Should Say Tuesday Night
My fellow Americans: Events of the past 55 days have taught me some
valuable lessons about leadership and I’d like to share those with you
When the Deepwater Horizon rig blew up and spawned a terrible oil spill
on April 22, my administration’s response was conditioned by decades of
liberal and leftist thinking about business and government. My
background in academia and community activism had never exposed me to
the basics of making business decisions or to the fundamentals of a
market economy. To the contrary, my friends on the left and I tended to
see businessmen, doctors, bankers — pretty much anyone who made a
profit — as selfish creeps. “There comes a point when you’ve made
enough money,” I scolded, when urging passage of a financial-reform
So when the oil spill became a national story, our instinct was to bash
the company. “I am angry and frustrated that BP has been unable to stop
the leak,” Interior Secretary Ken Salazar complained. “We’re 33 days
in, and deadline after deadline has been missed.” Salazar seemed to
believe that BP — which was losing millions of dollars a day, had lost
half its market capitalization since April, and was potentially facing
ruin if the spill could not be contained — somehow lacked a sense of
urgency. “We’re keeping our boot on the neck of BP,” Salazar assured
members of Congress.
Going beyond rhetorical overkill, Attorney General Eric Holder
announced that the Justice Department had opened a criminal probe into
the oil spill — though without offering a shred of evidence that any
laws had been broken.
I piled on, offering that I would have fired Tony Hayward if he had
been working for me, and allowing as how I was studying whose derriere
to kick. And this leads me to the other problem with our approach.
Because my party and I have a quasi-religious belief in the power of
government, I rushed to position myself as the responsible party in
this crisis. “I’m the president and the buck stops with me,” I intoned.
“It is my job to make sure that everything is done to shut this down. .
. . I ultimately take responsibility for solving this crisis.”
That was foolish. Just as Jimmy Carter permitted the Iranian regime to
take his presidency hostage by making the release of our diplomats his
overriding, even obsessive concern, I have permitted this oil spill to
swallow my presidency. In truth, I have no idea how to stop the oil
spill (as I mentioned to Gulf coast residents), and I should have been
more humble about what government can and cannot do.
We certainly can make a terrible situation worse — and I’ve become
convinced that the arbitrary six-month moratorium on new deepwater
drilling will further damage the already-reeling economies of the Gulf
states and could result in the loss of 20,000 oil-industry jobs in
addition to the losses being suffered in the fishing and tourism
By demonizing BP and searching for scalps to display in this
crisis, I’ve shown poor leadership. I regret that now. Here is the
Our economy cannot function without fossil fuels — not now and not for
the near future (wind, solar, and geothermal fantasies
notwithstanding). There is nothing immoral about companies that extract
the coal, oil, and gas from the earth — no more than those of us who
enjoy air-conditioning, computers, cars, and airplanes are immoral for
using those fuels. Perhaps we’ve all learned now that we must take
another look at ANWR and shallower waters. Environmentalists did us no
favors by agitating for bans on drilling in more accessible sites. At
least if a spill happens there, it can be dealt with.
But most of all, we must, as grown-ups, recognize that sometimes
terrible things happen and there is no one to blame. The search for
villains is unbecoming to a mature people. My administration will drop
the criminal probe. We will abandon the paradoxical posture of saying
that we are responsible for the response to the spill yet at the same
time hurling thunderbolts at BP. Every government asset that can be
mobilized to help with this mess will be made available. Our job is to
ensure that the more than twelve government agencies cooperating to
mitigate the damage (including OSHA, the Coast Guard, EPA, FEMA, NOAA,
Interior, and the U.S. Geological Survey) will not impede one another
I won the confidence of many voters by showing that I didn’t lose my
head in the midst of the financial crisis of 2008. In response to the
Gulf spill, I forgot that. I’ve tried bullying, boasting, threatening,
and emoting. I now understand that the best course is one I’ve never
considered for myself or my political philosophy — modesty.
It's perfect. That almost never happens. Usually, we have something to add. (Previous winners
Congratulations, Ms. Charen, on an award you're almost certain never to
learn you've won.
Just a reminder. The purpose of some commenters is to confuse the
issue, get people talking at cross-purposes, and then magically
disappear with hurt feelings or unappeased grudges that might change
the subject. These, in fact, are specialties of those who espouse
causes as opposed to overcoming obstacles. If you really care about
something, I shouldn't be
able to piss you off enough to keep you from participating in what
needs to be done.
I still want to start a
website called "It's Happening Again." It's my mule. We still need an email address where
can meet and a web design. And, yes, we still need a format that will walk
the tightrope between "me too" and Instapunk's talent for repulsing
So let's forget all the previous posts and do our brainstorming here.
In comments on this post.
Whether anyone's feelings have gotten hurt or not, we're still staring
into the barrel of planned genocide.
What are we going to do about it?
If you have no interest, I'll keep doing what I do. But some of you
seem to think that just pisses people off. So I'm waiting to hear what
would be better. My foot is tapping....
Obviously, I'm thinking about dog years, for obvious reasons. It begins
easily enough. Why do dogs live so much shorter lives than we humans
do? Seems unfair doesn't it, given that they're generally nicer people
than we are?
But do they live shorter
lives? Really? What if they live every second of every day of their
lives and we don't? Would that change the equation?
I'm thinking most people live a dog's lifespan, if that, in terms of what I'd call real years. Bear with me for a
second or so here. (You've got that much in you, don't you? Dog
Face it. Lots of what we non-dogs do is treading water. Human
consciousness is about making decisions. What do we base those
decisions on? Usually, only a handful of years that shape our views
about character, sex, the way of the world, and human relationships of
Permit me to use myself as an example. Most of my memories are a blur.
I have a narrative that makes sense to me about my childhood,
adolescence, young adulthood, and early career. Everything I am now
flows from those taproots. And if someone were to ask me about any of
those essential elements of my life, I would think immediately of SPECIFIC
highly memorable, evocative, even transformational experiences which I
can focus on out of the general blur associated with all of them.
I don't remember every class I ever took, every test I did well or
poorly on, every girl whose boob I tried to feel, every academic
achievement I sought and won, every paragraph I tried to write, or even
every paragraph I did write.
What I remember are moments, the pivotal, life-changing moments where
something changed for better or worse. It is those moments which constitute the
life I remember and make decisions to this day on the basis of.
I learned at one point in my life how to cook. I don't remember all the
eggs I've massacred or transformed in the interim or since. To be more
pragmatically specific, I had a pretty successful management consulting
and writing career whose fundamental truths -- decision bases -- all derive from the 15 months I
spent at NCR Corporation in Dayton, Ohio. In terms of the specific gravity of my business life it dwarfs everything before and since. It might as well have been 15 years. I'm not saying I never
learned anything before or after that, but that 15 months is the
gravitational center of my business life. I understood everything I
ever learned before and after in terms of that time. It was sufficient to make me good at what
As I sit here in my computer chair, pontificating, I'm thinking that
everything else in life can be described in terms of moments or spans
of the same kind of specific gravity. A few months that taught me
everything I'll ever know about sex. A few key events that constitute
what I remember and still pretend I know about mechanics. A few hours
of intense driving that stand in for 40 years behind the wheel. A few
ceremonies, joyful and sorrowful, that constitute my reference points
for the milestones of life. A few episodes in business life, airline
travel, success, failure, that stand in for years of grinding this and
When I ask you to remember the past, just how big is the past you're
calling on? I'm thinking the sum total of life lessons, joys, horrors,
and ordeals amounts to something under ten years, no matter how old you
Because the human curse is that we never live completely in the
present. We're dwelling in the past, dreaming of the future, cruising
through today, blah, blah.
While our dogs patiently try, and fail, to teach us that life is today,
this moment, right now. No wonder it wears them out. But at the end,
who's lived the longer life?
Do the math. Add up all the moments that constitute your reservoir of
pleasure, taste, knowledge and wisdom about what you do, why, and how.
Some of it is essential; the rest is a time-killing blur of repetition
and if not boredom forgettable forgottenness. Then tell me how
much of your chronological life you've lived -- in Dog Years.
Cup Live Blog!
anti-climactic 1-1 tie, stay for the mind-melting buzzing!
right, Puck Punk isn't the only one that can cover crazy sports no one
else cares about! Where has he been since the Canadiens were buzz-sawed
by the Flyers, anyway? Oh well, no matter. It's time for everyone to
catch WORLD CUP FEEVAH!!!
So lucky for you I forced myself to watch (most) of the USA's big game
1 against our favorite colonial oppressors: England! Why am I doing
this? Partially for your amusement, but also because a friend of mine
recently berated me for making fun of soccer. He pointed out that
I like hockey, and hockey is merely soccer on ice, so I should like
both of them or neither. Is
that true? Let's find out:
2:25 pm EST
Well it’s very nice to see the whole team put their hands over their
during the National Anthem, unlike our
2:32 - Soccer should have a clock that counts
down, not up. You count up when you're timing how long it takes someone
to do something, like running a race. You count down when you're giving
someone a set amount of time to accomplish something, like scoring more
goals than their opponent (or not scoring any goals at all).
- Goal for England on a pathetically defended situation by the US. Goal
scoring in soccer is like anti-hockey. Not exciting, the crowd noise
pretty much the same (a constant buzzing & thrum), and the goalie
practically a spectator because the goal itself is so damn big.
can blatantly trip people with practically no penalty. Weak. There is
the power play in soccer.
What is up with this buzzing noise?It
sounds like the game is being played inside of some turbine engine room
there is a swarm of bees on the PA system.
The “action”, such as it is, stops an average of every 10 seconds when
goes out of bounds. It is then that we are treated to excessive
the announcers and boring, ultra slow motion replays of things that
the previous 10 seconds, like close ups of people’s feet and elbows as
fall down.Ah, finally an entertaining
replay: a slow motion shot of the English coach scratching his eye.
If you’re in trouble in your defensive zone, you only have to wildly
out of bounds or up the field. This should answer everybody’s question
there is icing in hockey as well as explain why scoring two goals in
considered “running away” with a game.
Make soccer more exciting: replace the sidelines with walls. No more
bounds. This constant stoppage of play is unbearably tedious.
2:54 – I’m finally getting around to watching that
video of that drummer guy as I noticed Lake just posted it on
him the 1,000th person to do so, so I should probably get in
now.The infernal stadium buzzing
continues.Now I think I hear a brass
the source of the buzzing people blowing into trumpets to make noise?
Wow, that drummer is really into it! Meanwhile, the US
goalie dove to swat away a ball
and got hurt! This results in a long stoppage of play as he looks like
he may die from the unspecified injury. Are you kidding me??This
is soooooo the opposite of hockey. I think the English guy that ran
goalie got the dreaded YELLOW CARD! Oooooooo! That means that like, he
be careful or something. Because the ref is seriously considering
doing something to him next time he breaks the rules. Boo-yah!
Look, fucking get up, goalie guy. I played soccer for years and never
crumpled up like a bitch on the field, not even when the ball nailed me
nuts one time. I only played soccer through 8th grade, but still.
Slow motion shot of our goalie wincing. Playing hurt, I guess. What a
trooper. Get this guy a Purple Heart. The announcers
talk about how you are expected to be brave in “those situations”,
guess means when somebody is streaking toward you with the ball trying
score? Which, is your job if you’re a goalie, right? I dunno,
standing still and letting a 90 MPH puck smash into your helmet to stop
Is that brave? No? How about blocking a puck if you're a defenseman and
don't have all those goalie pads?
Number 10 of England is a bit fat. His shirt is rather tight. Not the
image that comes to mind when you think about the average soccer
physique. Er - not that I sit around and think about the average soccer
Don’t forget: tomorrow at 9:30
Eastern, World Cup action continues with Serbia
for the reminder, announcers.
Remember what I said about goalies being spectators? The English goalie
just completely choked. Hope he doesn’t
assassinated like the
dude that scored
own goal a few World Cups back.
Announcers can’t stop talking about what a sorry sack of shit that
is.The British announcer is extremely
upset. Compares the US
goal to winning a raffle.
They stop the gratuitous replays of the US goal and the camera
to show two English players lying down on the field, writhing in pain.
Huh? Oh well, back to more
replays of the newly-crowned most hated man in Britain blowing the
save! Let’s add the obligatory angry still of
David Beckham, decked out in his $1,000 suit, glaring from the
sidelines. “Ay, guv’na! ‘ho let this sorry
buggah on the pitch, then? I should ‘ave ‘im killed roit now, I should!”
3:14 – Luckily, that US goal has not lessened the
whoever is creating that awful buzzing noise as it enters its 44th
straight minute. I swear people are just razzing trumpets in the stands.
Oh, is it halftime
3:28 - Getting a kick out of the American announcers,
pulled from their other sport duties, trying to look passionate &
knowledgeable as they talk about soccer. There is one guy with some
accent that seems like a legitimate soccer person. Pele, maybe? I don't
know. What other soccer figure would the audience of ABC be expected to
The players may have taken a break during halftime, but the buzzing
Still going strong to start the second half.
3:39 – So it seems that any time soccer players
contact with each other, at least one of them stays on the ground,
collapsed in a heap of pain. And it's funny, but I don’t remember being
allowed to grab
people and lock my
arm around their neck when I played soccer. I guess that’s the refs
“letting them play”.
goalie comes up with a huge stop, but then again the English guy did kick the
ball directly at him.No, wait, I mean,
U-S-A! U-S-A! U-S-A!
Ultra-slow replay confirms: the English guy shot the ball directly into
goalie’s chest. British announcer upset again.
The build up for the dramatic free kick! Aaaaaannnnnnd...as with every
soccer free kick I’ve
ever seen on TV, it simply gets knocked out of bounds. Landon Donovan
one. Isn’t he like 45 years old now?
So this US
forward had what would be called a breakaway in hockey and the English
basically runs up and pushes him down. The only consequence is that the
gets a free kick relatively far away from the goal. So during some of
biggest scoring chances, defenders can just kick the ball out of bounds
break the rules and knock attackers down. Very exciting *yawn*.
know I will regret saying this, but I guess the US goalie is all right
after all. He's had a couple quality saves.
Another thing I’ve never liked about soccer is that the US
team always makes their uniforms look very European and distinctly
un-American. It feels like they do this
to fit in with the international community because it wouldn’t be cool
uniform that broadcasts you are, without a doubt, American.Case in point, this season’s uniforms look
more like the Norwegian flag than anything else.Why
uniforms always make you
you think anything but?
this just scream "America"? The little crest seems to be saying, "PSSST.
-- I'm American. Please don't be offended."
So in summary, the game ends in a 1-1 tie and
soccer still sucks. Something that
comes along every four years to wild international excitement has games
can end in a tie. Really?? I know they go to shootouts after a certain
point, but why not just start with shootouts? I would like to
definitively beat opponents, even if that means we might lose, instead
of walking away with nobody knowing who might have won. Is that too
much to ask?
Also, the biggest buzz (no pun intended) surrounding the World Cup so
been over those annoying horns (which everybody apparently hates and
wants banned, which begs the question of who all the people are in the
stands that are blowing them) and most especially the Great Adidas
Soccer Ball Design Conspiracy (boldface mine):
The infamous Jabulani World Cup ball has had goalkeepers in
the tournament worrying, panicking and complaining for the past week.
Now it has reduced one of them to tears.
Algeria’s Fawzi Chaouchi was the latest keeper to be impacted when he
allowed a long-range strike from Slovenia’s Robert Koren to evade his
grasp and produce the only goal of a 1-0 loss at Peter Mokaba Stadium
That ball is the Adidas Jabulani, and it already has sparked a
storm of controversy. The manufacturer claims it is the most accurate
ball ever made, but some weird plays on the field say otherwise.
Its unpredictability may have
United States on Saturday night, when Clint Dempsey’s tame
effort worked its way past England’s Robert Green. In truth, both Green
and Algeria’s Chaouchi should have made comfortable saves on the goals
Oh just come right out and say it: it's
the ball's fault that the US tied that game! Never mind the quality
saves that the US goalie had, or the fact that the English goalie had
roughly his entire body on top of the ball but still let it slip
through. It's the ball's fault! Did I mention that the author of this
article is British? Hard to believe, I know.
I heard about this ball controversy a few weeks ago and knew that
whoever ended up losing would blame it on the ball. Why? Because an
incredible majority of soccer games are decided by one goal (or end in
ties, as previously mentioned) and most importantly: Europeans are
whiny, shitty losers. This is especially
true if they lose to (or tie) the hated, war-mongering United States.
of game summaries through June 15 is the final reason soccer
sucks. There sure are a whole lot of ones and zeroes there. Even a
couple of zeroes and zeroes. Awesome. There are three exceptions: two
games that ended 2-0 and Germany pounding the scheisse
out of Australia 4-0, which is funny to me for some reason. I think
this lack of scoring has something to do with the number of players on
the field and how they should get rid of at least two of them.
Soccer is the world's favorite game, yet it's slow, supremely
low-scoring, and has frequent stops in play. The only thing it's really
got going for it is that there aren't any commercial breaks. The real
question is, though, given how boring soccer is, why don't more
foreigners like American football, baseball, and, well, hockey? I think
it's because they are too American, even though hockey is from Canada.
Anyone else have any better theories?
Too good to pass up: this video posted in comments by Lake.
Brennan's "Al Quds" NYU Address - Providing Aid and Comfort to the
In Wake of Uproar, White House Pulls
Main Brennan Video Links
By WILLIAM MAYER
May 25, 2010 - San Francisco, CA - PipeLineNews.org - On February 13 at
New York University, the Assistant to the President for Homeland
Security and Counterterrorism, John Brennan, delivered a 34 minute
Brennan's remarks were made at an event entitled, "A Dialogue on our
National Security" which was sponsored by the Islamic Center at NYU and
the school's Islamic Law Student's Association. [see, White House
website, Brennan Speaks at NYU]
Brennan was introduced by Dr. Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic
Society of North America [ISNA]1, an Islamist organization named as an
unindicted co-conspirator in America's largest terror funding trial,
U.S. vs. Holy Land Foundation [HLF]. The trial, which resulted in the
conviction of all of the defendants on a total of 108 charges, proved
that HLF funneled over $12 million to the Palestinian terrorist group
"Prosecutors applied the label of 'unindicted co-conspirator' to the
Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North
America, and the North American Islamic Trust in connection with a
trial planned in Texas next month for five officials of a defunct
charity, the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development." [source,
New York Sun, June 4, 2007, Islamic Groups Named in Hamas Funding Case]
Brennan, acknowledging Mattson, thanked her "...for your leadership as
an academic whose research continues the rich tradition of Islamic
scholarship, and as the president of the Islamic Society of North
America, where you have been a voice for the tolerance and diversity
which defines Islam."
It's sick bullshit. Maybe Diogenes and Tatioso can explain it to me. If
you don't want to start calling out accomplices because their
ignorant friends and acquaintances might be offended, you're opposing
genocide with cocktail party etiquette.
That's called diplomacy. It's worked out much less well than saving physically imperiled populations
from the sword they don't want to see until it's sawing at their necks.
I don't give a rat's ass about Barney Frank. I want to save those whose
necks are about to be separated from their heads, which is very
different from saving malcontents from the poor choices they've made
about education, pop culture, and peer pressure.
And when I say I'm not about understanding, it's not because I don't
understand a lot. It's because when war has been well and truly joined,
as it has here, there's absolutely no point in pretending the other
side has a point other than the one on the end of their knives. We're
looking at the smooth diplomatic buildup to the acceptance of genocide.
I don't care who's part of that, what color their robes and hats
are, what the meaning might be of their strategic silences, or the
rationalizations that pour from one side of their mouths while the other
side is making self-serving deals. The Saudis are prepared to help the
Israelis, are they? Or they're prepared to allow the Israelis to take out
one of their enemies in a way that escalates worldwide anti-semitism?
Distinction without a difference. When the world is rife with those,
the value of understanding falls below the value of being prepared to
deal from a position of unwavering strength rather than ambivalent
groping for a fantasy of common ground.
The time is here, now. All of you who are timid and measured about
speaking the truth need to ask yourselves why you are timid, or, if you
prefer, patient. And what measured and thoughtful and patient and
understanding will really buy you when Tel Aviv is a smoking ruin and
Jerusalem or "Quds" is only a memory.
It's okay to yell fire in a burning building, but only if you do it in an undemanding voice, to those who are already inclined to agree.
I wrote this post, understood its toxicity, and so
ran it by the two people I most respect on such issues, my wife and my
friend from Philly, who is Jewish, though that's far from the only
thing he is. Thirty years of friendship does not turn on religion or
race. It has no hinge. It just is. My wife said, no, you can't post
this. No matter how well intended or true it is, you just can't do it.
My friend said, I mostly agree, and I'd like you to post it, but I fear for
you if you do. "Let's sleep on it," he said.
So I slept on it and woke to the following comment from the
perpetual thorn in the side of this site:
IP, you have a world class brain occupying a fifty-something, male,
right-wing, American body.
You're a Christian, so I know you've already contemplated leaving your
body behind after death.
Might you think about leaving it behind while still fully alive?
The internet doesn't need any more news aggregators. The internet
doesn't need any more conservative or liberal sites that exist to
"prove" their original, dyed in sheep's wool, premise .
What the internet DOES need is thoughtful people who are willing to
leave their "bodies" behind in order to discuss philosophical and moral
outcomes for the world at large if we continue down the path we are on.
We have more than enough people out there who are DEAD sure their
assumptions are "right". And if we keep those same assumptions, we will
more likely find ourselves, very literally, DEAD.
We need a site with more questions than answers. We need a place where
we listen, if only for understanding another person's position.
We need a site where we PROTECT the minority view, as if it were our
own, but more importantly, a site where each of us understands that it
is our OBLIGATION to stand up as the voice of ONE.
It is with that last thought in mind that I stand up as ONE who says we can best help the Israelis by not
standing behind them right now. [boldface added]
Really? Who does that help, exactly? Only those people whose idea of
morality is mixed up with their idea of politeness. But politeness
isn't going to save the Jews or anyone else in a world riven by
gutter-ugly hatred. So, having slept on it, here's my post, as I
wrote it in the first place.
Yeah. Everybody knows it. Why do we have to pretend? In this
case, it's not pure political correctness. It's the collision of two
narratives we'd like to keep separate. The first narrative is the Civil
Rights story, which we want to see as pure and beautiful and perfect,
regardless of any infections it might carry like mould in its innerds.
The second narrative is the rescue of the Jews from Nazi genocide,
which is, in some ways, the ultimate immigration success -- smart,
capable, civilized people who came here and immediately contributed to
national prosperity even if they didn't get into all the best country
clubs. We Americans don't like the idea of two success stories clashing
in any ugly way. In much the same way we don't hold black leaders
accountable for promoting illegal alien amnesty despite the fact that
the first victims of such amnesty will be black people.
We also have to pretend because the Jews insist we pretend. Which they do
for two reasons. They're proud of how much they contributed to the
Civil Rights movement, which could never have succeeded without their
activism, legal counsel, and proven martyrdom. And they are ashamed of
the fact (yes, fact) that
they have never regarded black people as
equals. But, then again, they've never regarded any other group as their equals. So
this particular intance is, well, embarrassing. It's the one that makes
them look, uh, illiberal.
Does any of this matter? Well, yeah, it does. Black people hate the
Jews (and, oh yes, they really really
hate the Jews), and Jews pretend they don't notice because mostly they
can live somewhere far away from the "Schwartzes," but it's the rest of
us who have to deal with the consequences without offending anyone's
Here's the thing. The Jews are holding a secret in their way-too-smart
heads. They know that we're not all created equal, because we're not
equal to them. This is true of both the orthodox and the supremely
secular Jews. This is also the rot that leads to self-hating Jews of
the type who defend muslim terrorists and work to destroy Israel. They
suffer from a common delusion: being smarter means you're better.
They're wrong about that, but who's to tell them they're wrong? That's
why it's our job to save them
from themselves. Human value is not about smart. It's not about
degrees, cultural impact, academic breakthroughs, Einsteins. We need
all those things, but they're not the definition of superiority.
Because that would be kind of a Hitlerian idea, wouldn't it?
Which is why blacks hate Jews. They sense the contempt, despite the
courage and sacrifice Jews have shown for the "schwartzes." They sense
that Jews are stooping when
they advocate for black causes.
Which is where America comes in. Most of us are just garden variety
Americans. We don't care who's smart, who's not, who's Ivy League, and
who's high school. We really don't..Which is why we're big enough,
finally, to absorb everyone.
Except we said that it matters. Why? Because now the whole world wants
the Jews dead. If we let any
group get away with wanting the Jews dead without calling them to
account, we are accomplices.
Meaning it's time to call African-Americans to account for hating Jews.
It's not acceptable. Even if the Jews keep on accepting it.
wife is mad, mad, mad at me for posting this. Maybe she's right. But
maybe for once I'm right.
When millions of lives are at stake, maybe it's time to stop
pretending. When does the truth have currency? When does it matter? If
not now, when?
. I told a longime Catholic friend that I
was not the enemy but a critic. He chastened me thus:
All right. Accepted.
But, it is difficult to imagine that the Church at this time in history
needs another critic. There seems to be a surplus both within and
Thinking about our talk the other day reminded me of Pope Benedict's
discussion in Introduction to Christianity, Chapter 1, §4 where
the difference between defining knowledge in a "make-know" paradigm is
compared and contrasted with knowledge arrived at in a
"stand-understand" framework ( §5). Moving toward a
conclusion (pp. 57 - 74) he writes:
"What is belief really? . . .It is a human way of taking up a stand in
the totality of reality, a way that cannot be reduced to knowledge; it
is the bestowal of meaning without which the totality of man would
remain homeless, on which man's calculations and actions are based, and
without which in the last resort he could not calculate and act,
because he can only do this in the context of a meaning that bears him
up" (p. 72).
"Without the word, without meaning, without love he falls into the
situation of no longer being able to live, even when earthly comfort is
present in abundance . . . But meaning is not derived from
knowledge. To try to manufacture it in this way, that is, out of
the provable knowledge of what can be made . . . No one can pull
himself up out of the bog of uncertainty, of not being able to live, by
his own exertions; nor can we pull ourselves up, as Descartes still
thought we could, by a cogito ergo sum, by a series of intellectual
deductions. Meaning that is self-made is in the last analysis no
meaning. Meaning, that is, the ground on which our existence as a
totality can stand and live, cannot be made but only received"
Now seems to be a time for men to take a stand and work toward
I'm not disposed to understanding. I'm a Scot. I'm pretty much about
. So Glenn Beck has a new book coming out, this time a work
of fiction he wrote during lunch hour (Brizoni take note). I have no
idea what it's about, and the trailer above certainly doesn't help. But
at least I recognized the voice of Rudyard Kipling, although I don't
understand what this
poem is about, either. In general, I'm hugely in favor of Kipling.
At his best (which this isn't), he has a kind of Swinburnian momentum
that just feels good to recite out loud, whether it actually means
anything or not. Is that what Beck is hoping for?
Gods of the Copybook Headings
AS I PASS through my incarnations in every age and race,
I make my proper prostrations to the Gods of the Market Place.
Peering through reverent fingers I watch them flourish and fall,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings, I notice, outlast them all...
We moved as the Spirit listed. They never altered their pace,
Being neither cloud nor wind-borne like the Gods of the Market Place,
But they always caught up with our progress, and presently word would
That a tribe had been wiped off its icefield, or the lights had gone
out in Rome...
When the Cambrian measures were forming, They promised perpetual peace.
They swore, if we gave them our weapons, that the wars of the tribes
But when we disarmed They sold us and delivered us bound to our foe,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "Stick to the Devil you
On the first Feminian Sandstones we were promised the Fuller Life
(Which started by loving our neighbour and ended by loving his wife)
Till our women had no more children and the men lost reason and faith,
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "The Wages of Sin is Death."
In the Carboniferous Epoch we were promised abundance for all,
By robbing selected Peter to pay for collective Paul;
But, though we had plenty of money, there was nothing our money could
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings said: "If you don't work you die."
Then the Gods of the Market tumbled, and their smooth-tongued wizards
And the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was
That All is not Gold that Glitters, and Two and Two make Four
And the Gods of the Copybook Headings limped up to explain it once more.
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began.
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool's bandaged finger goes wobbling back to the Fire;
And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!
Apocalypse may be heading our way, but if it resuscitates Rudyard
Kipling, I'm pretty much for it.
[I]t was clear from the first that this
president—single-minded, ever-visible, confident in his program for a
reformed America saved from darkness by his arrival—was wanting in
certain qualities citizens have until now taken for granted in their
presidents. Namely, a tone and presence that said: This is the
Americans' leader, a man of them, for them, the nation's voice and
champion. Mr. Obama wasn't lacking in concern about the oil spill. What
he lacked was that voice—and for good reason.
Those qualities to be expected in a president were never about
rhetoric; Mr. Obama had proved himself a dab hand at that on the
campaign trail. They were a matter of identification with the nation
and to all that binds its people together in pride and allegiance.
These are feelings held deep in American hearts, unvoiced mostly, but
unmistakably there and not only on the Fourth of July.
A great part of America now understands that this president's sense of
identification lies elsewhere, and is in profound ways unlike theirs.
He is hard put to sound convincingly like the leader of the nation,
because he is, at heart and by instinct, the voice mainly of his
ideological class. He is the alien in the White House, a matter having
nothing to do with delusions about his birthplace cherished by the
The question of the moment is whether
Barack Obama understands the power of fear, or if, like Gandhi, he
prefers the power of love. If the last month is any indication, he
doesn't seem particularly effective at either.
After outcries from the left and the right that the President hasn't
been an effective leader on the oil spill, he seems to have read those
cries as a push for, well, more profanity, telling aides to "plug the
damn hole" and the "Today" show that he wants to know whose "ass to
While his momentary turn as foulmouthed intimidator (I can't recall a
time when another President had to be bleeped during a televised
interview) may reveal he knows the value of bravado, there is much
evidence to show he hasn't quite mastered the power of fear and
intimidation to actually get what he wants. Obama may be walking
loudly, but he is carrying a very small stick.
50 days in, and we’ve just learned another shocking revelation
concerning the Obama administration’s response to the Gulf oil spill.
In an interview aired this morning, President Obama admitted that he
hasn’t met with or spoken directly to BP’s CEO Tony Hayward. His
reasoning: “Because my experience is, when you talk to a guy like a BP
CEO, he’s gonna say all the right things to me. I’m not interested in
words. I’m interested in actions.”
First, to the “informed and enlightened” mainstream media: in all the
discussions you’ve had with the White House about the spill, did it not
occur to you before today to ask how the CEO-to-CEO level discussions
were progressing to remedy this tragedy? You never cease to amaze.
(Kind of reminds us of the months on end when you never bothered to ask
if the President was meeting with General McChrystal to talk about our
strategy in Afghanistan.)
Second, to fellow baffled Americans: this revelation is further proof
that it bodes well to have some sort of executive experience before
occupying the Oval Office (as if the painfully slow response to the oil
spill, confusion of duties, finger-pointing, lack of preparedness, and
inability to grant local government simple requests weren’t proof
enough). The current administration may be unaware that it’s the
President’s duty, meeting on a CEO-to-CEO level with Hayward, to verify
what BP reports. In an interview a few weeks ago with Greta Van
Susteren, I noted that based on my experience working with oil execs as
an oil regulator and then as a Governor, you must verify what the oil
companies claim – because their perception of circumstances and
situations dealing with public resources and public trust is not
necessarily shared by those who own America’s public resources and
trust. I was about run out of town in Alaska for what critics decried
at the time as my “playing hardball with Big Oil,” and those same
adversaries (both shortsighted Repubs and Dems) continue to this day to
try to discredit my administration’s efforts in holding Big Oil
accountable to operate ethically and responsibly.
Mr. President: with all due respect, you have to get involved, sir.
And one of the truly legendary fast guns in town, Ann Coulter:
Oil is spewing from beneath a British
Petroleum oil rig into the Gulf of Mexico at a rate of about 1 million
gallons a day. There's no end in sight -- although White House
officials have made it clear their goal is to stop the leak before the
midterm elections in November.
Obama now spends at least half of every day answering pointed,
increasingly aggressive questions about the oil spill, most of them
from his daughter Malia.
The president finally went down to take a look at the oil disaster last
week –- which is weird because I didn't even know there were golf
courses near the Gulf. To show his concern, Obama is thinking about
returning some of the nearly $1 million the oil industry donated to his
Ha, ha -- just kidding. He's not returning any oil money. But the
situation has gotten so urgent that Obama did take time off from his
golf game to praise the Phoenix Suns for protesting Arizona’s new
Which is why it's so critical that like Don Knotts in the clip above,
The One has a woman to do some backshooting for him -- the crazy in
love with all things Obama, Maureen
It’s not a good narrative arc: The man
who walked on water is now ensnared by a crisis under water.
One little hole a mile down on the ocean floor, so deep it seems like
hell spewing up its sulfurous smoke, has turned the thrilling saga of
“The One” into the gurgling horror of “The Abyss.” (Thank goodness
James Cameron, the director of “The Abyss,” came to Washington Tuesday
to help the administration figure out how to cap the BP well. What’s
next? Sending down the Transformers and Megan Fox?)
With as much as 34 million gallons of oil inking the Gulf of Mexico,
“Yes we can” has been downgraded to “Will we ever?”
It’s impossible not to feel sorry for President Obama, pummeled by the
cascading disasters, at home and abroad, unleashed by two war-mongering
oil men — plus scary escalations by Israel, Iran and North Korea...
Obama wanted to be a transformative president and now the presidency is
Instead of buoyant, he seems put upon. Instead of the fairy dust of
hopefulness, there’s the bitter draught of helplessness.
Oops. We'll know it's really over when DoDo finally figures out that
the "scary escalations" she's worried about aren't natural disasters but the kind of man-made disasters you bring on
yourself by a policy of weakness, appeasement, dithering, and apologies
to all the wrong people.
Maybe that won't ever happen. All women may be created equal, but some
women are less equal than others.
As we had hoped, you're fired up, too. Here's what we're getting.
Diogenes has volunteered to rewrite our Mission statement:
We recognize that the world is moving
toward a consensus that the state of Israel be eliminated. We
cannot allow the extermination of Israel to happen: should it happen,
we will all die as civilized men and women; and we will have silently
permitted a dark age to arise that our children and grandchildren won't
see the end of.
Hence the new site “title of site” is dedicated to stopping the
extermination of Israel and a promised second holocaust.
Our mission is to resist the growing tide of anti-Semitism and
anti-Israelism. Hence we speak to Jews who have not realized their
danger, and who hence cannot begin yet to respond to it; we speak to
non-Jewish religious people of good will who understand that the
highest ethical standards of the world arise from Hellenized Judaism,
and that thus its creators must not be destroyed; and we secularists
who abhor the fact that genocide is again coming.
This site will be:
1. A news aggregation site:
a. For news about
b. For news about anti-Semitism
c. For news about violence against Jews
d. For news about violence against Israel
e. For news about responses to sections a - d from
other open sources
2. A site for deep
moral commentary demonstrating that news listed in part 1 has
importance for all western civilization.
3. A site connecting to others who perceive the
danger and wish to resist it.
We include news and analysis that pertains to our mission. We
include topical information as well as historical texts. We
provide links to other sites and media that contribute to or support
We report on or connect with news, commenting on and questioning
it. We provide the historical and cultural context in which that
news has meaning so as to understand and prevent the second holocaust.
We seek out exclusive interviews and essays from the people who are
involved in policy and punditry. We question them in order to draw out
their knowledge, without recourse to any political agenda apart from
the salvation of Israel.
This site will not be political in any partisan or ideological sense to
the extent the editors can avoid such partisanship.
It will not be a commercial site created to make money for participants.
It will not be an exclusive voice, advocate, or outlet for any one
interest group or player in the issues which it addresses.
We measure the success of our mission by the extent to which we come to
be seen as a nonpartisan advocate of civilization, as opposed to
Eduardo has thoughts about how the site should look and feel:
So I've been thinking about the best
way to set up this site and my opinion is that it should be modeled
after the Drudge Report. This is because we want traffic. The beauty of
Drudge is the quick access to copious links on a variety of subjects.
Already know about something? Then keep looking until you see something
that interests you. And it's all concisely organized into an easy to
scan format. The opposite of this would be a site like HuffPo that
looks like someone threw up on a monitor and things fell all over the
place. I think the site contributors should be scouring the net for
Israel-related stories and linking to those.
Hot Air is another high traffic site, but I think our site should be
less like that. At HA, Ed & Allah pretty much link to things and
pontificate a great deal. I think our site should be more about simply
providing access to information. If something requires commentary, it
could be done at InstaPunk (with a link to the IP post on the new site
under the headline, of course, as Drudge often does).
There are already a plethora of pro-Israel sites out there, many of
which link to each other. We have to make sure there is something
unique about our site and we're not just a "me too" blog or there will
be no reason for anyone to visit. News breaks fast on the internet, and
thinking realistically I doubt our site will be breaking a whole lot of
news, so the best we can probably do is to collect the most important
news out there as quickly as we can and try to highlight more obscure
things that people might not have heard about in addition to all of the
major stories. And, as I mentioned, InstaPunk would be where all of the
heavy intellectual hitting is done when the need arises.
Them there's my two cents. A bit unoriginal, perhaps, but it's not
about style points, just traffic.
Then he has additional ideas:
I agree that the site should be non-partisan, but we've still got to be
able to call a spade a spade. Peripheral jabs at Obama and Co. should
not be made (like about the oil spill & teleprompter), but when
he's screwing Israel over and dining with anti-Semites we need to be
able to trash him for that. We definitely need to avoid Allah &
Ed-style "infinity & beyond" evenhandedness.
All of the extras you mention in the mission statement would be nice,
but it feels a little like overreaching. Links, commentary, news,
history...I think we need to go Drudge-style minimalist at first to get
things up and running and get people involved. I think the more people
get involved and see what is happening, the more they will want to get
further involved and start offering up their own commentary. Then we
can build off of that. But I don't like the column idea. That seems
less like a total traffic site and more like a niche site. When I go to
a new site and there is stuff all over the place, my first thought is,
"I don't have time for this." You know, like you said about my emails
and comments (ha-ha).
Maybe we could add all of those bells & whistles eventually, but I
don't think we should try to start out like that. It may be too
overwhelming and become one of those things that doesn't get done.
Let's get a basic framework set up and develop from there.
If you agree, that is.
And btw, what I can bring to the table: I have serviceable photoshop
& video editing skills. I can also look around for news to
link to and write when appropriate.
Comment. Yell. Agree or disagree. What I see is that people care about
this and are prepared to work. So let's hammer out what we have to do
and start doing it. I have no ego on the line here. Nothing anybody
says will offend me. Let's get to work.