Even if Hillary's story was true....
"If getting shot at by sniper fire qualifies you to be president, then there are thousands of guys in the military right now who are way more qualified than Hillary Clinton to be our next president."
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
Hitchens speaks truth to potential power....
But is it "inflammatory" to say that AIDS and drugs are wrecking the black community because the white power structure wishes it? No. Nor is it "controversial." It is wicked and stupid and false to say such a thing. And it not unimportantly negates everything that Obama says he stands for by way of advocating dignity and responsibility over the sick cults of paranoia and victimhood.
But is it "inflammatory" to say that AIDS and drugs are wrecking the black community because the white power structure wishes it? No. Nor is it "controversial." It is wicked and stupid and false to say such a thing. And it not unimportantly negates everything that Obama says he stands for by way of advocating dignity and responsibility over the sick cults of paranoia and victimhood.
At Protein Wisdom, Obama's advisors get some helpful hints.
Retired Air Force General Scott...Gration’s big idea is eliminating nuclear weapons globally — a position that would be considered monumentally reckless but for its near-impossible utopianism. Obama has said only that “he would seek a world without nukes but would never disarm unilaterally.” Mars has no nukes, so Obama can cross that one off the to-do list.
Retired Air Force General Scott...Gration’s big idea is eliminating nuclear weapons globally — a position that would be considered monumentally reckless but for its near-impossible utopianism. Obama has said only that “he would seek a world without nukes but would never disarm unilaterally.” Mars has no nukes, so Obama can cross that one off the to-do list.
Monday, March 24, 2008
The cast of Battlestar Galactica appeared on David Letterman to read the "Top 10 Reasons to Watch the 4th Season of Battlestar Galactica". Guess which number Number 6 read?
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Old photos show flaws in steel of I-35W bridge
Did these flaws cause the collapse? Beats me - I'm no engineer. However, that article prompted me to click on to a fascinating retrospective called "13 Seconds in August" regarding the collapse of the same bridge. A long post-collapse photo is provided with a number next to each vehicle which fell with the bridge. By clicking on each car or truck, you can see a biography of the vehicle's occupants where it is known, and in some cases, video interviews with the survivors.
Did these flaws cause the collapse? Beats me - I'm no engineer. However, that article prompted me to click on to a fascinating retrospective called "13 Seconds in August" regarding the collapse of the same bridge. A long post-collapse photo is provided with a number next to each vehicle which fell with the bridge. By clicking on each car or truck, you can see a biography of the vehicle's occupants where it is known, and in some cases, video interviews with the survivors.
This post on normblog got me to thinking (as most of his posts do).
If the people of Iraq (or many American Democrats for that matter) don't believe that Iraq has been liberated, does that mean that they actually haven't been?
Certainly, the Iraqi people have suffered horrors of war which would not have occurred had it not been for the American invasion. But do we say that blacks weren't freed from slavery despite another hundred plus years of segregation, humiliation, lynchings and myriad other horrors? Do we say that G-d did not release the Israelites from slavery in Egypt, despite the fact that countless millions have been murdered and tortured over the millennia?
Iraq was indeed liberated by the United States. However, some have confused liberation with the end of suffering. Freedom is not a guarantee; it is a series of doors behind which opportunity, and potentially tragedy, knock.
On my nightstand now - The Man in the White Sharkskin Suit: My Family's Exodus from Old Cairo to the New World.
Friday, March 21, 2008
The other problem I have with Roger Cohen's Op-Ed is his ignoring of the violence that took place in South Africa (justified or not) under the banner of the African National Congress, and South African history in general.
Cohen writes, "When I was a teenager, my relatives advised me to enjoy the swimming pools of Johannesburg because “next year they will be red with blood.” But the inevitable bloodbath never came. Mandela walked out of prison and sought reconciliation, not revenge."
According to his biography, Cohen's teenage years were roughly from 1969-1973. Now, Mandela did walk out of prison in 1990, but what happened in the 20 years prior to that? Was there no violence? I'm sure the victims of the Soweto massacre wouldn't say so. Or victims of the Church Street Bombing. Or the thousands of others who suffered in tit-for-tat attacks and sabotage that occurred during those years.
Maybe it wasn't as bloody as the American Civil War, but to suggest that blood wasn't spilled in the struggle against apartheid is ridiculous.
By the way, here's a report about Nelson Mandela's ANC per the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
While it was A.N.C. policy that the loss of civilian life should be ''avoided,'' there were instances where members of its security forces perpetrated gross violations of human rights in that the distinction between military and civilian targets was blurred in certain armed actions, such as the 1983 Church Street bombing of the South African Air Force headquarters. . . .
In the course of the armed struggle, the A.N.C., through its security forces, undertook military operations which, though intended for military or security force targets, sometimes went awry for a variety of reasons, including poor intelligence and reconnaissance. The consequences in these cases, such as the Magoo's Bar and Durban Esplanade bombings, were gross violations of human rights in respect of the injuries to and loss of lives of civilians.
Individuals who defected to the state and became informers and/or members who became state witnesses in political trials . . . were often labeled by the A.N.C. as collaborators and regarded as legitimate targets to be killed. The commission does not condone the legitimization of such individuals as military targets and finds that the extrajudicial killings of such individuals constituted gross violations of human rights.
Maybe I'm missing something as Cohen's family is South African and he has been there on numerous occasions, while I myself have never even been there, but I think not.
Cohen writes, "When I was a teenager, my relatives advised me to enjoy the swimming pools of Johannesburg because “next year they will be red with blood.” But the inevitable bloodbath never came. Mandela walked out of prison and sought reconciliation, not revenge."
According to his biography, Cohen's teenage years were roughly from 1969-1973. Now, Mandela did walk out of prison in 1990, but what happened in the 20 years prior to that? Was there no violence? I'm sure the victims of the Soweto massacre wouldn't say so. Or victims of the Church Street Bombing. Or the thousands of others who suffered in tit-for-tat attacks and sabotage that occurred during those years.
Maybe it wasn't as bloody as the American Civil War, but to suggest that blood wasn't spilled in the struggle against apartheid is ridiculous.
By the way, here's a report about Nelson Mandela's ANC per the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.
While it was A.N.C. policy that the loss of civilian life should be ''avoided,'' there were instances where members of its security forces perpetrated gross violations of human rights in that the distinction between military and civilian targets was blurred in certain armed actions, such as the 1983 Church Street bombing of the South African Air Force headquarters. . . .
In the course of the armed struggle, the A.N.C., through its security forces, undertook military operations which, though intended for military or security force targets, sometimes went awry for a variety of reasons, including poor intelligence and reconnaissance. The consequences in these cases, such as the Magoo's Bar and Durban Esplanade bombings, were gross violations of human rights in respect of the injuries to and loss of lives of civilians.
Individuals who defected to the state and became informers and/or members who became state witnesses in political trials . . . were often labeled by the A.N.C. as collaborators and regarded as legitimate targets to be killed. The commission does not condone the legitimization of such individuals as military targets and finds that the extrajudicial killings of such individuals constituted gross violations of human rights.
Maybe I'm missing something as Cohen's family is South African and he has been there on numerous occasions, while I myself have never even been there, but I think not.
Right now, the most popular article on the NY Times website is Roger Cohen's Op-Ed peace on race relations, "Beyond America's Original Sin". As with Obama's speech the other day, during a first read-through, it gave me a warm fuzzy feeling inside as we are told that all we have to do is drop our irrational fears, talk to each other, and then everything will be all right.
However, two things bothered me. The first was the suggestion that somehow President Bush's "us-against-them formulas" are somehow responsible for maintaining a culture of racial discrimination. Here Mr. Cohen is confusing policy differences with racism. President Bush has spoke very clearly on numerous occasions about how wrong it is to demonize Muslims for 9/11 and how wrong racism is in general. If the press fails to concentrate on it, or feels that he is being false about his feelings, that's another story.
I quote below from the President's speech honoring African American History Month, given on February 12, 2008.
It is important for all our citizens to know the history of the African American struggle for equality. We must remember that the slave trade brought many Africans to America in chains, not by choice. We must remember how slaves claimed their God-given right to freedom. And we must remember how freed slaves and their descendants helped rededicate America to the ideals of its founding.
Our nation has come a long way toward building a more perfect union.
A more perfect union!?! Wasn't that the title and theme of Barack Obama's speech? Plagiairist!
The fact is, the President is not afraid to look stupid if he's trying to show his appreciation for other cultures....
By the way, if you have read this and didn't bother clicking through to the President's full speech, you're missing how he welcomes the Reverend Al Sharpton to an event, refers to Sharpton's daughter as his wife, and then performs a nice reovery.
Part two of why I disagree with Roger Cohen's op-ed piece in my next post.
However, two things bothered me. The first was the suggestion that somehow President Bush's "us-against-them formulas" are somehow responsible for maintaining a culture of racial discrimination. Here Mr. Cohen is confusing policy differences with racism. President Bush has spoke very clearly on numerous occasions about how wrong it is to demonize Muslims for 9/11 and how wrong racism is in general. If the press fails to concentrate on it, or feels that he is being false about his feelings, that's another story.
I quote below from the President's speech honoring African American History Month, given on February 12, 2008.
It is important for all our citizens to know the history of the African American struggle for equality. We must remember that the slave trade brought many Africans to America in chains, not by choice. We must remember how slaves claimed their God-given right to freedom. And we must remember how freed slaves and their descendants helped rededicate America to the ideals of its founding.
Our nation has come a long way toward building a more perfect union.
A more perfect union!?! Wasn't that the title and theme of Barack Obama's speech? Plagiairist!
The fact is, the President is not afraid to look stupid if he's trying to show his appreciation for other cultures....
By the way, if you have read this and didn't bother clicking through to the President's full speech, you're missing how he welcomes the Reverend Al Sharpton to an event, refers to Sharpton's daughter as his wife, and then performs a nice reovery.
Part two of why I disagree with Roger Cohen's op-ed piece in my next post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)