January 12, 2005 by s.z.

Keeping You Entertained While I Eat Soda Crackers and Watch "The People's Court" Okay, I'm not feeling that great, so I've arranged a few play dates for you and some of the nicer children from the neighborhood. 1.  You'll enjoy hanging out with the new issue of Virtual Occoquan (featuring the best of the Salon blogs).  These kids: Inaugural Balls! - Rick Hutchison Republican Divorce - Karen Murphy Social Darwinism - Case Wagenvoord Bully For Us - Rob Salkowitz My Way On the Highway - Leslie Talbot and The Short Unhappy Life of 2004-MN4 - Mark Hoback   all seem nice, clean, and well-mannered.  Why don't you play tag or hide 'n seek with them for a while? 2.   Crooks and Liars has the video of George Clooney telling Bill O'Reilly to "put your considerable money where your considerable mouth is."  Now THAT's entertainment! 3.  BeatBushBlog offers some jokes for those of you who (like Glenn Reynolds) are interested in wing-wangs (okay, Glenn said he isn't, but calling them wing-wangs kind of disproves his point). (Note: I meant to post this link earlier, but those damned Memogate investigators stole Frederick's email to me!) 4.  I heard from a reliable source that Julia is "on fire," or "on a roll" or something.  You might want to check that out.  Bring hotdogs. 7:13:20 AM

Or Maybe We Could Watch a Filmstrip I'm feeling kind of run down and iron poor today, so let's do something easy. I know -- a mini Carnival of the Wingnuts! 1.  We can start by welcoming somebody new to our pages, young (he's 20 or 21, depending on the bio you read) John T. Plecnik.  John is a law student at Duke, and so I think he and Ben Shapiro would make a perfect match.  And you just know that like Ben, he is also saving himself. Anyway, John's column for this week is called "Hippies lose protest movement to campus conservatives."  Here are some selections from it: From Yale to the University of North Carolina, liberal academia is being challenged by a new generation of conservative leadership. Young John provides some example of these conservative challenges from the new generation -- they are mostly notable for having been the subjects of Mike Adams' columns over the past year or so.  Here's one of them: At UNC, a Christian student was lambasted by his professor in a class-wide e-mail for expressing his personal belief that homosexuality is immoral. Back in the day, the poor fellow might have been without recourse, quieted by his own fear. However, the student fought back, and with the help of U.S. Rep. Walter B. Jones (R-N.C.) the offending professor was punished for violating his civil rights. So, is this a story of an innocent Christian being attacked by a professor for expressing a personal belief about the immorality of homosexuality, and how the lone student fought back, eventually gaining the support of a Congressman? Sadly, not really. As we reported previously, what actually happened was that the student expresed his personal belief that homosexuality was "impure," "dirty," and "disgusting." After class, some students complained about the student's remarks, so the instructor sent an unfelicitous email to the class, saying among other things  that she wouldn't "tolerate any racist, sexist and/or heterosexist comments in my class."  The student showed the email to some fellow conservatives, and then a "conservative student activist" forwarded it to the student paper, which published it. It just so happened that the student activist was an intern with the Pope Center for Higher Education Policy -- as were other students who were involved in making a big deal about the incident.  The Pope Center is "a project of the John Locke Foundation."  The John Locke Foundation is a well-funded conservative NC think tank. After the email appeared in the student paper, Mike Adams, who is a columnist for Townhall, a project of the Scaife/Olin/Coors-funded Heritage Foundation, wrote about the poor, martyred student.  The incident was then widely discussed in conservative news outlets, to include the Moonie Church-funded conservative paper, the Washington Times; and Fox News, which is funded by the Church of Satan.  And then Congressman Walter "Freedom Fries" Jones (who is funded by RJR Nabisco, the NRA, and Tom DeLay) asked the Dept. of Education to investigate the instructor, since he was running for reelection and wanted to have something he could talk about on the radio (the university had already reprimanded her).  So, this isn't really a case of students rebelling against liberal bias, it's a case of students being used by a conservative group in order to put forward their own agenda.  (As seem to be the other incidents John cited.) But let's hear more from John: The protest spirit of free speech is alive and well on the American campus...but unlike the hippie generation, we protest liberal academia. Campus conservatives, for lack of a better word, are cool. College Republicans have become the antiestablishment fraternity, and their membership levels have exploded. What could be stodgier or more conformist than supporting John Kerry for president, being antiwar and anti-American? The vast majority of authority figures on campus would wholeheartedly agree with you. College conservatives, for lack of a better word, are tools. The hippie generation, now the keepers of the keys to the ivory tower, has become what it once hated most: the censor, the oppressor, "the Man." Today, it is they who advocate campus speech codes to quiet the politically incorrect. It is they who force feed propagandized curriculum, with classes on race-privilege and pornography. It is they who seek to remake an unwilling generation after their own intellectual image. And it's is the brash, young conservative foundations and think tanks who are fighting these oppressive hippies.  You know, they should make a movie about this: Rebel With a Grant From the Olin Foundation. 2.   Reader Andrew E. suggested that wingnut Nancy Salvato might be worthy of our consideration -- and he was right!.  Let's read a bit from her column "Raging Against the anti-NCLB Propaganda Machine," which offers a spirited defense of Rod Paige's decision to "to pay a pundit to promote a more 'truthful' message about NCLB to combat the misinformation campaign led by the NEA." The attempts to discredit No Child Left Behind as an unfunded mandate with impossible demands made on the states has been swallowed hook, line, and sinker, as truth by the mainstream media and “Educrats”. Yet, the misinformation floating around about NCLB ranks right up with the propaganda spewed out by the likes of Michael Moore in F 9/11, Dan Rather commentating about President Bush’s National Guard Service, and the Kerry campaign attacks on the Swift Boat Veterans For Truth. Um, yeah.  The NEA's misinformation about NCLB is just like how those nasty Kerry people kept spreading lies about those fine patriots of the Swift Boat Vets by pointing out how they were lying.  So, drawing on this analogy, I guess we can conclude that the Bush campaign (via the Swift Boat Vets) was forced to pay Sean Hannity a couple of million or so, just to counter all those untruths (because he believed in it anyway) -- you know, just to keep the playing field level.  And it was all Kerry's fault for not agreeing with the Swift Boat Vets, just as this current scandal is all the NEA's fault. Obviously the Secretary of Education, Rod Paige, felt that NCLB was so important that he had to get the word out about it. Well, one would hope that he felt that something he spent a quater of a million of tax-payer funds on was important. Had the tables been turned and Paige stood behind the NEA rather than call it a “terrorist organization”, a categorization of which I wholeheartedly agree, had he allowed the status quo to continue by giving boatloads of federal dollars to be used by the schools in a manner that wasn’t achieving excellence, he wouldn’t have had to pay a pundit to discuss NCLB. The media would have covered Paige more favorably, or with less ferocity –he was a Bush appointee, after all. I think Nancy's point is that had the tables been turned and the NEA had called Rod a terrorist, then Rod wouldn't have been forced to violate the law.  So, like I said, it's all the NEA's fault that Rod had to hire Armstrong.  (And Armstrong is, like, 3-degrees removed from any culpability at all.) Anyway, we liked Nancy's piece so much that we're offering you a two-for-one deal here: buy her column from Monday defending Rod and Armstrong, and get this one from today (The Ant and the Tsunami Victims: A Marxist Perspective) for free! Here's part of what you'll receive at no additional cost: Bring on the hate mail. I know I’ll be receiving plenty of it from the people who don’t want to hear what I’m going to say. To begin with, I’m tired of the hard working people in the United States playing Atlas to those who don’t plan beyond the moment or to those who believe that the rest of the world exists to bail them out when they encounter disaster. Why would anyone not want to hear Nancy say that hundreds of thousands of poor people in Eash Asia chose to be the victims of a natural disaster? It has just come to my attention that Kerry Sieh, a professor of geology at California Institute of Technology, “repeatedly warned Indonesian officials that an earthquake and tsunami would soon strike their shores.” Because these officials weren’t acting on the warnings, he and his teams began warning people directly. Unfortunately, he couldn’t reach all of the people in time. Now I have complete and utter sympathy for the people who have suffered and lost loved ones due to this tragedy, but I also feel resentment that because their government didn’t heed the warnings and that other countries have to bail them out. By reading the story Nancy refers us to, we learn that Professor Sieh decided to "bypass the national and local government and start warning people directly," so he and his team adressed church congregations and schools.  "His main advice was for people to live away from shorelines." He said that no one can predict when an earthquake will happen, but the area was at high risk for one happening "one day." So you can see why Nancy is resentful that we have to bail these people out -- geez, a professor of geology TOLD them to move, but they didn't. In a true free market, the cream rises to the top. Others will adjust to succeed. Those willing to work will survive one way or another. Those truly unable will be the beneficiaries of the generosity of a people driven to success. But if the cream doesn't feel generous, well, I guess the truly unable just won't survive, will they? We are not a welfare state. We are a free country and freedom means that you can build your house on a cliff or on the shore or even next to power lines. But with that freedom comes responsibility –for your self. Buy more insurance, find storage for your valuables on safer ground, but don’t expect me to pay for your lack of concern or foresight. If I choose to contribute a sum of money to a charity on your behalf, that is up to me. Not up to the government. Should a person be made to feel guilty for living like the Ant instead of running around like the Grasshopper, who in the original fable dies because he does not live in a collectivist society which exists to take care of him no matter what? The moral of that fable is lost when those sworn to uphold the Constitution no longer believe it protects a person’s individual right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Therefore, our government shouldn't be helping these people, because, like Pat Robertson said last week, they brought this on themselves by choosing not to live somewhere like Ohio.  And we shouldn't have to feel guilty if we as individuals don't want to help them either.  I mean, Jesus would totally agree with not giving aid to grasshoppers.  3.   And speaking of the tsunamis, here's new (to us) wingnut R.A. Hawkins, with A Tsunami Of Tstupidity (Slow Children At Play): After hearing the usual culprits weigh in on the tsunami relief effort in Thailand and the numerous other places that were hit, I was struck by the differences in some of the comments made. Not to my surprise, the United Nations and the normal collection of leftists abnormal psych examples in our government treated us to the usual race baiting and anti-Americanism that is so common these days.  [...]  These are the same people who have thwarted our every effort to clean up Iraq. So, it's U.N. motor mouths and leftists who have "thwarted our every effort to clean up Iraq."  I wonder what R.A. means by cleaing up Iraq .. and whether it involves torture and death squads. These are the same people who seem to think that writing a nasty letter to someone who doesn’t care will accomplish something. Why don’t these people do something that matters? I remember when we had people all over the world that could write some pretty good letters about world peace and then they would go out and light themselves on fire and leave us to deal with our Karma. Why don’t these sincere gesture based clowns do that? What a great suggestion!  I am going to pass it along to Don Wildmon and his AFA , Brent Bozell and his Parents Television Council, and a bunch of other people who writes nasty letters to those who don't care. For those of you who are living in gesture land and think Bush should have called immediately, let me explain a few things to you. Yes, Bush could have called sooner but what would he have said? “Boy that looks like it’s going to leave a stain. Is it as bad as it looks?” Gee, if that's all he would have said, I guess it's better that he stayed on vacation. The French were probably the very first to call. They usually do because nobody really expects them to do anything other than offer condolences. That is probably the case with about everyone that called immediately. Yeah, probably.  I bet every nation that seems thoughful and compassionate is actually just a big jerk who only called so that it wouldn't have to chip in on the gift. Bush on the other hand waited for preliminary information about how bad it was so we could determine not only what needed to be done immediately, but also what we could do immediately. "Immediately" in this case meaning "a few days later." For those of you in nice gesture land, that is one of the primary differences between a conservative and a gesture based weenie. Yes, gesture-based weenies call right away and probably don't actually help out (although R.A. hasn't really checked on this); while conservatives wait until they're done with more important stuff, like clearing brush, and then offer you, in your time of need, ten bucks and a coupon for a free drink when you buy a combo meal.  (Of course, the offer was later greatly increased, and your combo meal was supersized -- but presumably a gesture-based weenie said something about how crummy the conservative's gesture appeared.) Mark Twain once said, “You can take in a sick and starving dog, feed it and nurse it back to health and that dog will never bite the hand that feeds it. Therein lies the principal difference between man and dog.” To those of you in the United Nations, liberal media and the gesture land citizens of the world, I find it hard to trust you. You and your friends undermine us at every turn. Oh and get away from my leg! You aren’t even a real dog anyway. Not "even a real dog anyway!"  Damn, R.A. sure told them! 4:24:36 AM

Who Said It? Our previous mystery guests were: Pundit #1 (the one who talked about how we pour millions into education and yet kids are still being left behind -- but that will all change now, thanks to George Bush and NCLB) was Armstrong Williams.  "Always Confused" called this one (but, being confused, apparently got the numbering mixed up). Pundit #2 (the guy who advised smart young women to just stay home and have babies) was Vox Day, WorldNetDaily columnist, blogger, Mensa member, and co-author of Rebel Moon (and author of some Christian fantasy novels).   Once again, Clif demonstrated his astounding knowledge of wingnuts, and got this one.  UPDATE:  Vox Day spotted the quiz (but, alas, to late to join in).  He even read your comments.  Oh, and now that Pete isn't blogging anymore, Vox says he's looking for a new nemesis.  If you think you might want the job, you can submit applications at his site. Sorry to have confused some of you with that reference to tedious sci-fi novels -- so, to make it up to you, here is a quote from Orson Scott Card: Kerry claims to believe in God, and maybe he does -- but the God he believes in is one without any requirements. As a result, whatever Kerry's faith, he can do anything without feeling any shame at all. Bush believes in a God who has strict rules that he expects his children to follow -- even presidents who are running for office, and even if following those rules might make you lose. This is from a piece that excoriates the Left for showing "not even the slightest sign of ever having questioned their own opinions."  Poor Orson -- he used to seem much smarter (or maybe I was just younger). Anyway, Pundit #3 (the foreigner who chastised the Democrats for contesting close elections, and who also wrote the book America Alone: Our Country's Future as a Lone Warrior)  was Mark Steyn.  Congrats to bgn for identifiying this Canadian menace. Now, who said this? Hi Robert! Someone forwarded me a copy of the email you recently sent to a number of animal rights nuts, I mean, activists. In your letter, you called for my investigation by the ATF for “stockpiling weapons.” You really should watch what you say on these liberal mailing lists. Just for fun, conservatives sometimes join the lists using pseudonyms. And, sometimes, they even forward the emails to me. And then this pundit brags about the new weapons he's stockpiling.  (Although this guy isn't Doug Giles, I agree with Glenstonecottage that it's time we offered equal weaponry to the animals.) Bonus Pundit: Folks, I'm tired of this word 'neocon.' Let's get it out on the table. When you hear the word 'neocon' used by anybody, it just means Jews, Republican Jews. Hint -- he also said this: I am America's true anchorman doing play-by-play of the news, the leader of the new media ... And he said this about Iran-Contra: Whatever it was, it was brilliantly executed, I have to tell you. Take money from the Iranians and give it to the Contras? I loved it. I think the scheme was fabulous. It circumvented the Boland Amendment and all that. 1:30:34 AM