At Kos, Thought Experiment Lacks any Thought
Jan 8, 2007 Uncategorized
Over at the Daily Kos a writer named Heathlander has a post entitled Iran has a right to attack Israel. Now this is supposed to be a though experiment but the problem is little thought was used to formulate the post and the opinions of Noam Chomsky are used to justify the conclusion. There are suppositions that are not based in fact nor are they supported by evidence.
The exercise starts by stating that since the US and Israel have talked about military options with regard to Iran than this is preventive war and is illegal. If international law states this is illegal than only after an attack was launched would a crime be committed. Talking about doing it does not make it illegal. However, to give the benefit of the doubt, perhaps the author meant to indicate that if we carried through with it, then it would be illegal. I am not writing to debate international law so I will assume that the writer is correct in the statement that a preventive attack is illegal.
Heathlander goes on to indicate that since the US and Israel are talking about attacking Iran for having trying to build nuclear weapons (an assertion the author says he does not believe but accepts as true for his post) then Iran is well within its right to attack either or both countries because they are planning military action. In other words, if the justification for the US and Israel is the threat of Iran with nukes then the threat from the US and Israel are enough to allow Iran to attack. The author indicates that the Iranian President said a few things to the effect that the Zionist regime must be destroyed. This, in and of itself, is a blatant attempt to diminish the threat posed by Iran to support the argument. The Iranian president did not make some vague reference or even a few vague references. He clearly stated that Israel should be wiped off the map and he said it more than a few times. Therefore, the idea that it was a few vague items is misleading, and deliberately so.
Therefore, the idea that Iran has a right because we threatened them is false, it is circular logic. The fact is Iran made clear threats against a country. When your sworn enemy says that he wants to destroy you then you can not ignore it. I wonder if someone told Heathlander that they were going to come to his house and rape his wife and then kill his family, would he ignore it. Would he ignore such a threat (especially if communicated by someone with a history of violent, anti-social behavior) or would he notify the authorities? Well, Israel and the US have taken this case to the UN, which is supposed to be a higher authority (though they are worthless anti-Semites). Now, given the rapist scenario, I am sure Heathlander would notify the police and then be ready in case the rapist/murderer showed up. If that guy came close to Heathlander’s house then I assume Heathlander would take any action necessary to protect his family (I am also assuming Heathlander is a male).
It is evident that Heathlander is trying to indicate that vague actions by the Iranians have been trumped up and used by the US and Israel to plan for war and that gives Iran the right to attack first. Perhaps, if Iran had not made real and clear threats against Israel there would be no need for the plan to intervene in the first place. In any event rather than being a thinking exercise, it is an exercise in circular logic that solves nothing. However, for the record I would like to say that if Iran feels it has the right to attack then let them do so. I would expect we could take care of that, of course only if we stopped listening to the mindless prattle that comes from people like those at Kos and just take the war to the enemy balls to the walls. If Iran attacks anyone, I will not hold my breath waiting for condemnation from the worthless people at the UN or the liberals here in America. They would all claim it was Iran’s right and then impose sanctions on those who responded in kind.
This thought experiment was interesting but it lacked thought. Since Heathlander seems to believe that one may only attack when attacked or attack is imminent (the premise we accepted as true) then I wonder why everyone in the world keeps demanding that Israel stop fighting with Hezbollah and Hamas. You see, these groups of terrorists keep shooting rockets into Israel and in my book that is being attacked. But, as soon as Israel responds the libs and the UN cry about a disproportionate response, loss of life, damage to buildings, blah, blah. They never condemn the sand fleas that start the mess, only the Jews who respond in order to defend themselves.
Here is a thought experiment for you. Let’s suppose the enemy wants to kill us and they have no regard for human life. Then, let’s suppose we attack them with everything and be as brutal as they have been so that we can kill them all and then live in peace. As for the “innocent” civilians who get killed, as Kos would say, “screw them.”
As an aside, the last time I wrote something about the Kos site someone commented that Kos served in the military or does that [military service] only matter for Republicans. As I stated in that comment thread, I thank everyone for their service but their service does not make them right (just as mine does not make me right). However, I believe that statement was made as if Kos was some General and had insight. I saw the picture of him and he was a Private. Privates know a lot about cleaning latrines, peeling potatoes, and shining boots. They are not the voice of authority on much of anything. Since I was promoted five more times, I will just stick with, thanks for your service now get back to that latrine.
Big Dog salute to Little Green Footballs
Tags: Commentary
I’m a Ca ca
Jan 7, 2007 Political
Back when George Allen was running for the Congress a little sand flea named S.R. Sidarth followed him around filming him until that one fateful day when Allen called him Macaca. The film of this was played all over and soon the allegations of racism started when some liberal decided that this word, Macaca, was a racial slur in some remote part of the world where people use their hands instead of toilet paper. A big deal was made of it by the left and its sock puppets in the MSM. The same people who equated this word with racism failed to equate the words written by Allen’s opponent (James Webb) as an endorsement of pedophilia.
Well, S.R. Sidarth applied to get into a class at the University of Virginia. The class, Campaigns and Elections, is taught by Larry Sabato, a man reported to be a very partisan Democrat. I will reproduce the entire essay that Sidarth wrote to get in the class:
“I am macaca.â€
Hope that was not too wordy or that it did not put you to sleep. Believe it or not, Sabato accepted this and allowed the “man” to attend his class. I am pretty sure that the fact that Macaca hurt a Republican played into this. I am willing to bet that John O’Neill would not get in with an essay that read “I am Kerry Swiftboater.” To be fair, Edmund Jordan, the guy who outed Mark Foley might get in with an essay entitled “I am page boy” but that would only be because Foley was a Republican.
So it is time to visit this whole Macaca thing. Sidarth was supposed to be offended when another called him Macaca but it is OK for him to refer to himself that way. This rule must have been written by the same folks who say it is OK for a black person to call another a nigger but a white person better not. Speaking of that, I wonder if those two folks who were offended by Michael Richards could get in with an essay consisting entirely of the words “I am nigger”?
The political scene has changed because of this as pointed out by Mary Grabar at TownHall.com. She points out that after Macaca (and I will refer to him as that from now on because he said that is who he is) filmed this and it received a lot of play, Democrats all over were stalking Republicans with video cameras in order to catch them in a slip-up. In some cases the Republican candidates were provoked to see if they would slip up. On the surface there is nothing wrong with this (well the provocation is probably over the top) but the problems arise when media outlets only show the snippets that portray the candidate in a bad light. Grabar points out that when an abrasive person was shouting at Allen and was tackled, the tackle is the only thing that people saw on the news. If it is going to be filmed it should be played in its entirety so that viewers can make up their own minds based upon everything available. Unfortunately, the MSM pines for the days when it molded the thoughts of America and will do anything to relive those glory days. Unfortunately, there are many people in this country who have mush for brains and are more than willing to let the MSM tell them how they should think.
Grabar has a well written piece with a lot of information about Macaca as well as the trend to use college kids to provoke candidates. I would like to run for one of those offices. I would never win nor would I want to. I am way too smart to be in Congress. I would just like to be able to put the smack down on liberal college kids who think they are smarter than anyone else. I would have those little bed wetters crying for mommy and daddy to come take them home and feed them a soy milk bottle. I really wish I were the one running when the Macaca thing happened. Macaca would not be introduced into the American lexicon but a lot of other things would.
What candidates need to do is have their own camera crews to document everything that takes place so that the half truths and distortions of the MSM and the liberals can be debunked. Admittedly, those films would not find their way to the MSM but there are a few conservative stations and plenty of conservative blogs ready to show the entire truth, not some mo’ ca ca put together by the liberals and the monkeys in the Democratic Party.
Tags: Commentary, Political
Who is Rosie to Question Someone’s Morals?
Dec 21, 2006 Uncategorized
There is a nasty fight brewing between Donald Trump and Rosie O’Donnell over remarks Rosie made about Trump and his decision to allow Miss USA to remain in that capacity. Rumors were flying that Trump would make Miss USA, Tara Conner, step down after she was seen partying it up and drinking (she was underage at the time). Instead, Trump gave her a second chance to carry out her responsibilities so long as she went into rehab. I think Trump took a good decision and allowed this young lady to learn from a mistake and to get treatment for a problem. Rosie took exception to this and stated:
“He’s the moral authority,” O’Donnell said, after flipping her hair to mimic Trump’s .famous combover. “Left the first wife – had an affair. Left the second wife – had an affair. . . . But he’s the moral compass for 20-year-olds in America. New York Daily News
First of all, Trump never claimed to be the moral compass for all 20 year olds in America. He took a decision about a person over whom he exercises control. It is no different than giving an employee a second chance after the employee makes a mistake (which Trump has done on his show, The Apprentice). I want to know how it is that Rosie is in any position to criticize a person as to whether that person is a moral compass or not. Given that O’Donnell lives an immoral life and has sex with another woman it smacks of hypocrisy for her to mention another person’s indiscretions. O’Donnell and the gay supporters can make any claim they want but to many people the gay lifestyle is immoral. Interestingly, Rosie questions Trump’s morality based on his alleged affairs but I have never, ever heard her give the same criticism to Clinton. She swoons over both Clintons and the liberal mantra was that his affair was an issue between him and his wife. How dare Rosie not give the same consideration, especially considering the way she lives her life.
I agree with Trump that O’Donnell is a bully (I will not make reference to the fat part because I could care less about how big she is. It probably fits the Butch in her). O’Donnell is rude, tasteless and condescending. She believes that she knows more than everyone else and that we are all wrong. She criticizes the Bush Administration for what she considers abuse of the Constitution but she does not believe that anyone had rights under the Second Amendment (except, of course, her armed body guard).
I do not like O’Donnell and I think the world needs fewer people like her. She is obnoxious, self centered, and ignorant. I think it is obvious why she prefers women, what man would want her.
Maybe Rosie is making a play to run the Miss USA pageant. I guess they won’t let that happen because she might try to sample the contestants.
Tags: Commentary
America Needs to be CAIRfree
Dec 20, 2006 Uncategorized
I have written several pieces about the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and their hidden agenda of replacing imposing Islam on America. They are a terrorist supporting front group for anti-American Muslims who desire to turn this country into another land of terror mongering Islamic fanatics and they are doing it in a clandestine fashion so as to look like victims and purveyors of freedom. Now CAIR has its towels in a wad over something that a Representative from Virgina said about the newly elected Muslim, Keith Ellison, swearing in on a Koran.
Responding to constituent e-mails about Rep.-elect Keith Ellison’s decision to use the Koran at his ceremonial swearing-in, a Virginia congressman is warning that “many more Muslims” will be elected demanding to use the Koran unless immigration is tightened.
Republican Rep. Virgil Goode made the comments in a letter sent to hundreds of constituents about Minnesota’s Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress.
Goode said the United States needs to totally halt illegal immigration and reduce legal immigration. Fox News
Seems CAIR does not like this and they are demanding an apology from Representative Virgil Goode of Virginia. CAIR does not believe this type of sentiment is right and they are demanding an apology. A spokesperson from Goode’s office said there will be no apology. There should be no apology since Goode is an American citizen and is entitled to his opinion. Since he is saying that we need to get tougher on immigration it is obvious he understands the problem and what is at stake. CAIR never calls for apologies from any Muslim who speaks ill of America or its citizens. When was the last time CAIR asked Iranian President Ahmadinejad to apologize for the things he has said about the destruction of America?
Screw CAIR, which is what Goode’s office basically said when they said there would be no apology. Ellison might be entitled to swear in on the Koran, of that I am unsure but what I want to know is exactly what he is swearing to. Is he swearing to uphold the Constitution or is he swearing to uphold the tenets of that book of violence and its demand that non Muslims be converted or killed. If it is the latter he will suffer that fate before the “non believers” do. I do not know what the precedent is but we should find out what Joe Lieberman swears in on. Of course, the Torah is comprised of the first five chapters of the Old Testament but since all three religions share a common ancestry it is not asking too much for Ellison to swear in on a Bible, or the Old Testament.
CAIR had this to say:
“Representative Goode’s Islamophobic remarks send a message of intolerance that is unworthy of anyone elected to public office,” said CAIR National Legislative Director Corey Saylor. “There can be no reasonable defense for such bigotry.” CAIR
No reasonable defense? So what, you guys want to cut off his head? Screw you CAIR! I agree with Representative Goode and if lived in his district I would vote for him again and again. He is right on and he has the testicular fortitude to say what is true and correct. You come in here and try to change hundreds of years of tradition and use that book of violence and the life history of the pedophile Mohammad in an effort to undermine our way of life. I believe in religious tolerance but I am only as tolerant as the people from the other religion and you people are INTOLERANT. How about you all hold your breath until he apologizes?
So, once again, SCREW YOU, Mohammad and your book of hatred. We need to rid this country of your organization and its support of terrorism as well as its desire to force your so called religion of peace on us.
The Dog has spoken. Any questions?
Related story:
Fox
Tags: Commentary, Terrorism
Will Republicans Abandon Their Principles?
Dec 19, 2006 Political
It appears that the wheeling and dealing is in full swing now that the Democrats have taken control. It is a given that George Bush will try to get some sort of amnesty/guest worker program through now that he has a Congress sympathetic to that cause. This will, of course, be a disaster and give us more of the same in that millions more will sneak in awaiting their chance at such generous give-aways. Now a new devil is appearing on the horizon and that devil is names taxes.
The Washington Times is reporting that George Bush is considering raising taxes and that there are Republicans on board with the idea. There are tax watch dog groups calling for the President to iterate his pledge not to increase taxes but the President has been silent on this. White House Press Secretary Tony Snow would not rule out tax increases when asked about the subject. It seems that Republicans are abandoning their principles because they were beaten in the last election.
Increasing taxes will not help the country. We already pay more in taxes than is needed to run the country. If more money is extorted from us then it will give Congress more money to waste, and waste it they will. Congress will look at the increased revenue as a child looks at presents on Christmas and they will abuse the hell out of the money that they get. There will be more pork spending not less and there will be more programs that are developed and paid for with the increased revenue. An increase in taxes will also hurt the economy and will decrease the already pathetic rate at which Americans save money.
It is high time Americans said no to taxes and it is high time for us to hold the line against those who would extort our money especially given their track record of waste and abuse. The time is at hand for us to refuse to pay more in taxes and it is time for us to demand fiscal responsibility from those in Congress. If Congress keeps its thirst for more money it will not be long before we have another revolution. That just might be what we need to stop the illegal exploitation of the American worker.
Now is the time for people to start planning. Put as much money as you can in non taxable accounts. Contribute as much as you can to plans that take the money pre-tax so you will have less taxable income at the end of the year. We must find creative (yet legal) methods to keep our money from becoming the government’s money. We worked for it and we deserve to keep it.
There is talk that this is a move to sure up Bush’s legacy. I don’t give a damn about his legacy and if he raises taxes he will have the same one as his father who broke a no new tax promise and lost pathetically to Bill Clinton. Bush can not be reelected but members of Congress can. I will not vote for nor will I support any member of Congress who votes to raise taxes. This includes ANY Republican who wants to be President. You raise my taxes and you will not have my vote nor will you have my support. Those of us involved in America’s Victory 08 will not support candidates who vote to raise taxes regardless of how they stand on other issues.
If they want to fix Social Security then privatize it so people, not the government, can control their retirement. If they want to reduce the deficit then cut out unnecessary spending and programs. If they want to reduce the deficit they can consolidate similar programs and they can stop sending money to foreign countries. We are not the world’s welfare department. If they really want to reduce the amount of money they need then they can cut ALL pork barrel spending.
These are the conservative values that will make this country strong and we as taxpayers should not settle for anything less.
Tags: Commentary, Political