Alright, the speculation for 2016 has already started. Pretty pointless because anyone who peaks now will be out of the race by the New Year. But since were already engaging in the mental masturbation, there is a chance for me to impart some of my limitless wisdom on the arguments now shaping up.
First, everybody put their egos back in their pockets. I keep hearing people over react to the prospect of a Paul, Bush or Romney. Do the Republican Party a favor; tout who you think it should be and don't tell us who should not be nominated. We have such propensity for shaping the argument for the opposition. "Eeeeeew! Not Bush! We've had enough Bushes." "Eeeew! Not Romney. He only knows how to lose!" Instead, don't pretend these guys came down with the last drop of rain and at the same time, promote your guy. My guy is Jindal. He is by far the most underrated, under appreciated player on the field today. He's got executive experience and knows what he's talking about.
Second, celebrate a strong field of recognizable names and punish severely the first one of them that seriously damages a Republican opponent. We have so much to dump on the Democrats that any 10 Republicans can debate all night on 100 points, makes gains for themselves and never utter a single ill word toward another Republican. But this will take vigilance on our part. When I say punish, I mean when they get done bashing another Republican, we take to the web and talk shows until that guy couldn't run for dog catcher. Our candidates should fear us as much as the government should fear their citizenry. Sadly neither entity is very scared of us right now because they know we (all of us in both parties) have had our heads up our asses since Reagan. So let's pull out heads out and exercise a bit of discipline for a year or two, eh?
Next, avoid small ball. (You better sit down my Christian friends. This will give you vapors.) By small ball I mean all those things that subset politicians use to make you think they really give a shit about your single-issue narrow-mindedness. Prayer in school, the ten commandments in front of Jerkwater city hall, American flags in HOA developments, gay marriage, Hollywood…these are drags to winning BIG in the general election. Shame your mayors and governors and state and local legislatures into dealing with those issues. That's their job. When national politicians jump on those band wagons, you are being played. That applies to all of them. Yes, even (brace yourself) Ted Cruz. I love the guy. I want him to run as well. He's the shit, to put it in Navy terms. But he doesn't give a rat's ass about any of the things I just listed. He pretends to now and then. But he is smart and he is a pragmatist. He knows that if he is to make a difference and really nail his name in the pages of history, it won't because he help Henry Overalls fly his VFW flag on his apartment balcony. It will be because he kept this gargantuan monster we call the US government from sliding over a fiscal cliff, and then he butchered the monster.
So think big and sting the other guy with your worst venom. Push fiscal conservatism, promote your Republican, get behind the nominee, then flay his Democratic opponent. That's how you win general elections.
Monday, October 27, 2014
Do You Want to WIN This Month? Well, Do you?!?!
Let's Start With Assumptions.
I'm going out on a limb and assuming that republican women take their voting franchise more seriously than men. So I will address the men here.
I am further assuming you want to know what it takes to sweep the midterms and create a different political environment.
Well, then, I tell you the secret…
Turn out!!!!!!!
Don't be a lame ass. Don't skip the polls on the way to work by convincing yourself the democracy will collapse if you are not at you desk at 0630. Hell, Valerie Jarrett's puppet hasn't been at his desk in six years. We're still afloat - barely. And don't tell yourself that there might be a line at the polls in the evening. Hell, most of those reading this have as much as a month to actually vote. So do it!
But why should you, really?
Well, do you want to stop the IRS from being used as a weapon against political enemies? TURN OUT! Sure the Republicans could do it too. But they don't know the post election surprise we are cooking up. Neither do you, although the more astute among you may have figured it out.
Do you want to smack the State Department whole hand in the side of the head and REALLY prevent another Benghazi? TURN OUT!
Do you want to track down and imprison the people who got Brian Terry killed by running guns to Mexico to create a political narrative? TURN OUT!
Do you want to shut down travel from West Africa? TURN OUT!
Do you want to shut down the Department of Education? They haven't educated a single child or done anything any state can do. In fact, everything they touch turns to shit. TURN OUT!
Do you want to shut down the Jarrett Administration? TURN OUT!
Do you want to see ISIS treated like the dogs shit they are? TURN OUT!
Do you want to see the senate actually vote on something of significance and find out just how many surviving dems will actually vote for a Republican initiative and not go home to their voters and explain why they chose to keep Obamacare alive? TURN OUT!
For that matter, do you want to see Obamacare replaced by tort reform and interstate, competitive insurance as opposed to crony capitalist insurance? TURN OUT!
D you want to stop worthless, stupid, race-baiting, sissy-boy punks from standing in front of polling places with clubs? TURN OUT! That's correct. To the members of the New Black Panthers; you are
worthless, stupid, race-baiting, sissy-boy punks!
I could go on all night. If you want to see all the garbage I just outlined continue, then by all means, be pussies and stay home. But if any of the above rings a bell, put on your big boy pants and vote.
I can hear it already. Some of you will say that I am just mean and that isn't doing anyone any good. We must be affirming and uplifting in order to get out the vote. Well, I feel your pain. And I have given the a lot of thought. My carefully considered response to you is…SHUT UP!!!!!!
Monday, October 13, 2014
What People Really, Really Want.
Isn't organized religion a handy contrivance? There isn't anything that you can say, not a single phrase you can mutter that can't be tied into a phrase or idea in any grand holy book. At the end of this article is a link. For those entrepreneurs studying for the religion business, this link is a very poor example of how to structure your sermons. It's rather pathetic in terms of even religious symbolism. If you want a high-calibre, self-serving sermon that's going to make you extra relevant in the eyes of your parishioners, you might want to consult Joel Olsteen. He's got morons thinking you can find god on the radio for $5.95 a month. Just a few platitude from a guy who learned his craft as his preacher Daddy's sound man, and you too can find Jeeeeeeesus.
But the reason I included this clip at the end is because it demonstrates what people will swallow and what you can convince them of under the guise of "spiritual leadership". Most of the people in the "pastor's" congregation that day knew that every word coming form his mouth was ridiculous. A few, I'm sure, actually bought it. There's always a few. But for all present, there was a reason to at least pretend they bought it.
At about 6:48 in the video, this "pastor" compares a punk and petty thief to that which is the model of perfection to Christians, the Christ figure himself. This, he tells us, is the result of his conversation with the holy spirit. His personal conversation that occurs because he is the guy on the podium and so much closer to the center of all existence than those to whom he speaks. (If a word this guy said were true, you'd have to assume that the holy spirit has a serious problem communicating.) The comparisons he draws are even more stupid than the premise itself. But, no matter, it was raw meat to those wanting to insinuate themselves into the narrative in front of the TV cameras. They wanted to be part of the hype supplied by this "pastor" and mob rat #7 and violent race baiter the "reverend" Al Sharpton. This was a media party. This was the place, among many others, where people were getting "permission" from the charlatans to behave in any manner they wished with regard to the law and social norms. And Al is a pro. He has enriched himself making irresponsible accusations and encouraging hate and violence. He lacks the nads to take part in it. But he didn't mind seeing a Jewish shop burned down after he fired up some hate in a mob a few years back.
And even now, so many weeks after people rioted, burned shops and stole merchandise (because some punk they neither knew or cared about broke a cop's face and ended up shot) the people of Ferguson look for any excuse the speak nonsense to power and try to provoke a confrontation with police.
There was a time when this would have been shocking. But it is now a rather tame example of what has become the norm.
If you can convince a large groups of people in the middle east that stomping babies and beheading people because they won't validate you and your stupid god, well then you could probably convince a few Americans to try it too. It has already happened here. If you can do that, then you could probably persuade your credulous followers to picket funerals and denounce soldiers because there are gay people in the military. It follows that you could also convince people, having not a shred of evidence, that a man dying of a virus with a 50% kill rate was the result of racism.* And if you can do all that, you can certainly use race baiting and emotional manipulation to get people to act like animals and tear their own town apart. All you need do is pretend a worthless bully is a precious flower and spew stupid chants like, "No justice, No peace!"
Why? Because that is what so many people want. They WANT to be lied to. They want to be led by the nose. They want to feel like they are moving with the mob and are therefore more important than they once were. They want to subjugate themselves to celebrity and call it religion. They want to vote for political whores (statesmen require the listener to think). They want to make as many decisions as possible based on pure emotion. And they never want actions to have consequences. So, when guys like mob rat #7 and the "pastor" tell them it is okay, they want to behave like mindless children.
To the looters and screamers in Ferguson, grow up. (It cannot be emphasized enough that the overwhelming majority of this cadre never knew the punk, Brown and don't really care about him.) Learn to resent those who would separate you from the rest of society based on your skin color and join the rest of us at the grownups' table. Tell Shaprton, Farrakhan, et al to piss up a rope and sell their debasing shit somewhere else.
To the responsible citizens of Ferguson, I can only wish you well and assure you that eventually the others will run out of cool shit to steal and give themselves migraines screaming mindless chants. When that day comes it will be up to you to rebuild you city. It probably goes without saying, "no matter what your skin color" because that isn't what makes you responsible or irresponsible.
To the rest of the country I can only suggest that you not draw the MSNBC lesson from Ferguson. Justice doesn't come from emotionalist rants and riots and mob mentality. It comes from deliberative responses to crime and social ills. By all means, monitor you police and government. But don't pretend you believe that the proper answer to the death of a punk is to praise the punk. Wait until there is evidence before you decide to burn down your own neighborhood.
*"Reverend" Jesse Jackson, in a desperate bid to rebuild his own relevance blames the death of an ebola patient on racism. But hey, he got on TV! The collection plate and the next Rainbow Push rally should net a tidy profit.
How the "pastor" made is nephew's funeral all about himself and other stupid stuff
But the reason I included this clip at the end is because it demonstrates what people will swallow and what you can convince them of under the guise of "spiritual leadership". Most of the people in the "pastor's" congregation that day knew that every word coming form his mouth was ridiculous. A few, I'm sure, actually bought it. There's always a few. But for all present, there was a reason to at least pretend they bought it.
At about 6:48 in the video, this "pastor" compares a punk and petty thief to that which is the model of perfection to Christians, the Christ figure himself. This, he tells us, is the result of his conversation with the holy spirit. His personal conversation that occurs because he is the guy on the podium and so much closer to the center of all existence than those to whom he speaks. (If a word this guy said were true, you'd have to assume that the holy spirit has a serious problem communicating.) The comparisons he draws are even more stupid than the premise itself. But, no matter, it was raw meat to those wanting to insinuate themselves into the narrative in front of the TV cameras. They wanted to be part of the hype supplied by this "pastor" and mob rat #7 and violent race baiter the "reverend" Al Sharpton. This was a media party. This was the place, among many others, where people were getting "permission" from the charlatans to behave in any manner they wished with regard to the law and social norms. And Al is a pro. He has enriched himself making irresponsible accusations and encouraging hate and violence. He lacks the nads to take part in it. But he didn't mind seeing a Jewish shop burned down after he fired up some hate in a mob a few years back.
And even now, so many weeks after people rioted, burned shops and stole merchandise (because some punk they neither knew or cared about broke a cop's face and ended up shot) the people of Ferguson look for any excuse the speak nonsense to power and try to provoke a confrontation with police.
There was a time when this would have been shocking. But it is now a rather tame example of what has become the norm.
If you can convince a large groups of people in the middle east that stomping babies and beheading people because they won't validate you and your stupid god, well then you could probably convince a few Americans to try it too. It has already happened here. If you can do that, then you could probably persuade your credulous followers to picket funerals and denounce soldiers because there are gay people in the military. It follows that you could also convince people, having not a shred of evidence, that a man dying of a virus with a 50% kill rate was the result of racism.* And if you can do all that, you can certainly use race baiting and emotional manipulation to get people to act like animals and tear their own town apart. All you need do is pretend a worthless bully is a precious flower and spew stupid chants like, "No justice, No peace!"
Why? Because that is what so many people want. They WANT to be lied to. They want to be led by the nose. They want to feel like they are moving with the mob and are therefore more important than they once were. They want to subjugate themselves to celebrity and call it religion. They want to vote for political whores (statesmen require the listener to think). They want to make as many decisions as possible based on pure emotion. And they never want actions to have consequences. So, when guys like mob rat #7 and the "pastor" tell them it is okay, they want to behave like mindless children.
To the looters and screamers in Ferguson, grow up. (It cannot be emphasized enough that the overwhelming majority of this cadre never knew the punk, Brown and don't really care about him.) Learn to resent those who would separate you from the rest of society based on your skin color and join the rest of us at the grownups' table. Tell Shaprton, Farrakhan, et al to piss up a rope and sell their debasing shit somewhere else.
To the responsible citizens of Ferguson, I can only wish you well and assure you that eventually the others will run out of cool shit to steal and give themselves migraines screaming mindless chants. When that day comes it will be up to you to rebuild you city. It probably goes without saying, "no matter what your skin color" because that isn't what makes you responsible or irresponsible.
To the rest of the country I can only suggest that you not draw the MSNBC lesson from Ferguson. Justice doesn't come from emotionalist rants and riots and mob mentality. It comes from deliberative responses to crime and social ills. By all means, monitor you police and government. But don't pretend you believe that the proper answer to the death of a punk is to praise the punk. Wait until there is evidence before you decide to burn down your own neighborhood.
*"Reverend" Jesse Jackson, in a desperate bid to rebuild his own relevance blames the death of an ebola patient on racism. But hey, he got on TV! The collection plate and the next Rainbow Push rally should net a tidy profit.
How the "pastor" made is nephew's funeral all about himself and other stupid stuff
Monday, September 29, 2014
The Weird Shit Humans Do - Part I (Kissing)
The best thing about hosting a political blog is that when I grow weary of covering the political zoo, when I despair of ever finding an actual statesmen in this intellectual wasteland, I can occasionally avert my attention and just have fun. To wit:
Have you ever sat back and taken stock of human behavior and interaction from a critical point of view?
Half of you just muttered, "Of course; stupid question." Sadly the other half just said, "Huh?"
Well, Supercyrano has been pondering this oddity that is the human being. And just for shits and giggles, I've decided to play with it here on the very blog that brought down Jay Carney…sort of. My own lip is curling just a little bit.
Now this is one that I have been pondering for a while. More than passing strange, is kissing. As a friendly greeting or display of familial love, it is odd enough. But as an action of passion, well, how did we hit on this? Who was the first person to say,"Hey, I'm felling a bit horny. Let's see if there is anything to it. Smash your mouth against mine and we'll gauge the result"?
Seriously, what an odd development. I have always assumed it was an outgrowth of us sniffing at each other as humans did before the Kennedy Administration. I still do that. I usually get kicked out of the bar, but I'm also drunk by that time so it's all good.
I did some reading on the subject of kissing. At Psychology today, Noam Shpancer (now there's a name for ya), PhD says, " A kiss brings us into close physical proximity with the other, close enough to smell and taste them. The face area is rich with glands secreting chemicals that carry genetic and immunological information. Our saliva carries hormonal messages. A person's breath, as well as the taste of their lips and the feel of their teeth, signals things about their health and hygiene, and thus their procreative suitability."
Dude! Are you trying to put me off kissing? Aren't doctors gross? How do they ever have sex?
So what, did people say way back when - before Whoopi Goldberg started shaving her eyebrows and Rosie O'Donnel started… shaving? "Oh! BLECK! No, Sweetie, I don't want you to be the mother of my uggles (caveman for babies). I am not happy with the taste of your dental bacteria and your salivary secretions." Of course, what sane man- even a caveman - would say that? Maybe that was when they invented the line: "It's not you, it's me."
But I digress.
When kissing, who but the most socially maladjusted, analyzes the other's spit and glandular output? We are just hungry for each other. We're not sampling. We're trying to find out just how much we are going to get away with tonight. At least the guy is. The woman is criticizing technique and calculating whether she might put off mimosas with the girls to give this schmo a shot at the title.
But why kissing? Why not thumb wrestling or the shot put? Why not balancing baseball bats on our noses.
Doctor Shpancer asserts that maybe, "we bring that person into our vulnerable personal space and agree to take the risk of catching an infection or disease."
Doc! Seriously! Okay, I'll go as far as checking for halitosis and maybe hoping her double mint is still tasting minty. But stop with the microbes!
You have to admit though, it is a damned funny activity. Maybe there's a stunt aspect to it. It is something you can do with no hands; "Look Ma! I'm only using my lips - AND I got my eyes closed!"
I would have to say though, that in the case of kissing, our hands may actually add a degree of difficulty to the execution. You have to know where to put your hands for maximum effect. While I pride myself on kissing ability, I used to get ahead of myself in terms of the hand placement continuum. For example, when kissing a person for the first time, it is unwise to showoff your one-handed bra hook technique, especially on a crowded subway platform. It cost me half a paycheck just to make bail. Oh, and you should probably know her name by this time.
So guys, I have found that the technique that works best (and avoids having to register as a sex offender) is to move slowly. Remain a bit tentative. This puts the prey, er - ahem! - uh, your date at ease. It lets her think that you are not the presumptuous pig that most of you are. As your lips meet, try the "one - two" technique. One hand goes to the waist, the other to the side of the neck and just touching the jaw line. First waist, then neck. Try it in the mirror a few times until you are comfortable with it. Then wipe down the mirror.
Now we move the actual kiss itself. There is a lot to avoid here. The biggest is simply not getting carried away. There are people out there who think passionate kissing consists of placing your mouth over the lower half of the intended's face and lashing the tongue about like it was a whale tail. NO! Bad dog! All this does is freak out your date and leave her nose, chin and some clothing dripping with unwanted spit.
Video examples: Don't be this guy!
Another 'fail' is treating the tongue as a separate player in the project. This is where one partner avails the tongue even slightly, and the other forgets the lips and tries to suck the tongue right out of partner number one's face. A well-delivered kiss is like a French desert recipe. Tongue and lips must work together, balanced and subtle to have the desired effect.
Back when I was a world renowned lover, the technique that led the fewest arrests was to combine the peck and passion technique with the one - two maneuver. You should proceed thus. When you are ending a date or at a quiet moment when she registers clear affection, lean in slowly while holding her gaze. A quick kiss (the peck), then One (hand to the waist). Now, inhale through the nose. You don't want to pass out. Next, open your lips ever so slightly against your partners lips. If still in the game, she will do likewise. Now touch your tongue lightly to her lips. Now Two (hand to neck). This starts the passion segment. Close your eyes. Your date should respond and your tongues should just touch. She may even lean into you; pure heaven. Now you may kiss more urgently and firmly. Just don't drool or giggle into her mouth.
Whether you use my ideas here or find something nice that makes your best girl feel good, just remember that the most successful kisser is the one who seeks to give pleasure. The pleasure returned will be exponentially greater.
I was hoping to follow this with a segment on fondling and necking. But the judge signed a gag order, in force until the trial is over. Ah, well. On the bright side, I may get off with time served.
Let's Play Smashy Face!
Now this is one that I have been pondering for a while. More than passing strange, is kissing. As a friendly greeting or display of familial love, it is odd enough. But as an action of passion, well, how did we hit on this? Who was the first person to say,"Hey, I'm felling a bit horny. Let's see if there is anything to it. Smash your mouth against mine and we'll gauge the result"?
Seriously, what an odd development. I have always assumed it was an outgrowth of us sniffing at each other as humans did before the Kennedy Administration. I still do that. I usually get kicked out of the bar, but I'm also drunk by that time so it's all good.
I did some reading on the subject of kissing. At Psychology today, Noam Shpancer (now there's a name for ya), PhD says, " A kiss brings us into close physical proximity with the other, close enough to smell and taste them. The face area is rich with glands secreting chemicals that carry genetic and immunological information. Our saliva carries hormonal messages. A person's breath, as well as the taste of their lips and the feel of their teeth, signals things about their health and hygiene, and thus their procreative suitability."
Dude! Are you trying to put me off kissing? Aren't doctors gross? How do they ever have sex?
So what, did people say way back when - before Whoopi Goldberg started shaving her eyebrows and Rosie O'Donnel started… shaving? "Oh! BLECK! No, Sweetie, I don't want you to be the mother of my uggles (caveman for babies). I am not happy with the taste of your dental bacteria and your salivary secretions." Of course, what sane man- even a caveman - would say that? Maybe that was when they invented the line: "It's not you, it's me."
But I digress.
When kissing, who but the most socially maladjusted, analyzes the other's spit and glandular output? We are just hungry for each other. We're not sampling. We're trying to find out just how much we are going to get away with tonight. At least the guy is. The woman is criticizing technique and calculating whether she might put off mimosas with the girls to give this schmo a shot at the title.
But why kissing? Why not thumb wrestling or the shot put? Why not balancing baseball bats on our noses.
Doctor Shpancer asserts that maybe, "we bring that person into our vulnerable personal space and agree to take the risk of catching an infection or disease."
Doc! Seriously! Okay, I'll go as far as checking for halitosis and maybe hoping her double mint is still tasting minty. But stop with the microbes!
You have to admit though, it is a damned funny activity. Maybe there's a stunt aspect to it. It is something you can do with no hands; "Look Ma! I'm only using my lips - AND I got my eyes closed!"
Remember, I AM a Professional.
I would have to say though, that in the case of kissing, our hands may actually add a degree of difficulty to the execution. You have to know where to put your hands for maximum effect. While I pride myself on kissing ability, I used to get ahead of myself in terms of the hand placement continuum. For example, when kissing a person for the first time, it is unwise to showoff your one-handed bra hook technique, especially on a crowded subway platform. It cost me half a paycheck just to make bail. Oh, and you should probably know her name by this time.
So guys, I have found that the technique that works best (and avoids having to register as a sex offender) is to move slowly. Remain a bit tentative. This puts the prey, er - ahem! - uh, your date at ease. It lets her think that you are not the presumptuous pig that most of you are. As your lips meet, try the "one - two" technique. One hand goes to the waist, the other to the side of the neck and just touching the jaw line. First waist, then neck. Try it in the mirror a few times until you are comfortable with it. Then wipe down the mirror.
Now we move the actual kiss itself. There is a lot to avoid here. The biggest is simply not getting carried away. There are people out there who think passionate kissing consists of placing your mouth over the lower half of the intended's face and lashing the tongue about like it was a whale tail. NO! Bad dog! All this does is freak out your date and leave her nose, chin and some clothing dripping with unwanted spit.
Video examples: Don't be this guy!
Another 'fail' is treating the tongue as a separate player in the project. This is where one partner avails the tongue even slightly, and the other forgets the lips and tries to suck the tongue right out of partner number one's face. A well-delivered kiss is like a French desert recipe. Tongue and lips must work together, balanced and subtle to have the desired effect.
Back when I was a world renowned lover, the technique that led the fewest arrests was to combine the peck and passion technique with the one - two maneuver. You should proceed thus. When you are ending a date or at a quiet moment when she registers clear affection, lean in slowly while holding her gaze. A quick kiss (the peck), then One (hand to the waist). Now, inhale through the nose. You don't want to pass out. Next, open your lips ever so slightly against your partners lips. If still in the game, she will do likewise. Now touch your tongue lightly to her lips. Now Two (hand to neck). This starts the passion segment. Close your eyes. Your date should respond and your tongues should just touch. She may even lean into you; pure heaven. Now you may kiss more urgently and firmly. Just don't drool or giggle into her mouth.
Whether you use my ideas here or find something nice that makes your best girl feel good, just remember that the most successful kisser is the one who seeks to give pleasure. The pleasure returned will be exponentially greater.
I was hoping to follow this with a segment on fondling and necking. But the judge signed a gag order, in force until the trial is over. Ah, well. On the bright side, I may get off with time served.
Sunday, September 14, 2014
The Man Who Lost Egypt, et al
In the aftermath of WWII, the world stood, jaws agape and watched China taken by a notoriously hated band of overbearing Communists. This while an ally of the most powerful force on the planet (with tons and tons of war material left from war production that could have aided that ally), fled to a small island and lost their country. Worse, in the next war, these same Communists made life miserable for our troops in Korea. A fading echo of that day is the charge against Truman for being the man who "lost China." At the time, his losing China and getting in over his head in Korea, got Truman ousted in favor of a man who understood the realities of the world.
The very next day the rehabilitation of Truman began. It continued, buoyed by his folksy charm and longevity and through exceedingly kind historians. The pillar that would probably be his permanent image makeover was the McCoullough work, Truman.
But the fact is, that through the latter years of his tenure, Harry was in over his head.
Fast forward to the present administration. They have the historical advantage of two cautionary tales, Truman and Chamberlain. By being more assertive than Truman and by not being a complete rube a la Chamberlain (the Munich Accords) Obama could have coasted through all 8 years by having a credible threat of American might in his pocket. But he did exactly the opposite.
---More below---
First, he went on an apology tour. By denigrating his country, however honorable he thought the message, all he inspired was contempt. Predictably, the world snickered behind its collective hand and realized immediately that as long as this guy was around, America could be played.
He then, after ignoring Al Maliki for months on end, and doing nothing about a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) in Iraq, sent Joe Biden over to try to create one, with just over thirty days left before the deadline. Just picking Biden for the job twigged our friends and enemies alike that we were not serious. We were LEAVING. So Obama declared victory (you can't declare them, they have to be earned) and yanked us out precipitously. This virtually assured us that the 4000 or so of our guys who died over there died for nothing. And things would get worse; more in a bit.
Meantime, in Libya, Syria, Tunisia and Egypt, forces that had been impotent for decades found themselves in a world where they could at least try to seize power and nothing would stop them.
Libya:
In February of 2011, following the lead of Tunisia and rumblings in Syria, elements of Al Qaeda in North Africa, the Muslim Brotherhood (both Muslim terms for excrament) and a smattering of regular Libyans rose up to depose Gaddafi. The two choices available to the US were 1) Support Gaddafi. This was not tempting despite the fact that he had handed over his chemical weapons and nuke research, was kissing the west's asses and making oil deals or 2) Do nothing and play power broker later. Obama/Jarrett chose…
You guessed it. Door number three! We'll sit on our hands and see if a short-term political advantage opens up. Such an opening wasn't forthcoming. So it was on to door number four - lead from behind and help the little people of the "people's revolution," not knowing who we were helping. Actually, the administration probably did know if they were listening to the intelligence community they are so happy to sell out to cover their own screw ups. Anyway, with ill-informed people calling for Gaddafi's ouster, Obama facilitated just that by neutering the Libyan forces and letting our REAL enemies take charge of more than half the country. He compounded this error by, in keeping with his apology tour philosophy, insisting on a "small footprint" in Libya. So small in fact, that Hilary denied the diplomatic functionaries in that hell hole the requisite security to assure their survival. One needs NO HINDSIGHT to know this. There is a paper trail. Libya was lost. Obama's incompetence is the reason.
In the meantime, Cairo really heated up. Inspired by their ally's success in Libya, the Muslim Brotherhood turned up the temperature in Egypt. What does the Gang Who Couldn't Shoot Straight do? Why not, double down! This time in a show of feckless naiveté or mercenary political cynicism, Obama nakedly sided with the MB. We threw Hosni Mubarak under the bus.
Let's tease this out a bit.
Truman, our standing lesson to all presidents since, came to DC through the careful handling of more than nefarious political hacks back in Missouri. As a local political operative he learned how to schmooze. In congress he learned how to wheel and deal over a game of poker. It wasn't hard to get what you wanted from someone on a stroll around Key West, especially since they came there for a deal to begin with. But on the world stage, requiring nuance and a certain level of acceptance of things "un-American"…despite the labors of his advisors, Harry was not equipped. How could he help this Chiang fellow, by golly, he just didn't like him very much.
Mubarak has always been seen on the left as barely tolerable. He was politically tough. His kind of tough, in a barely civilized Middle East was seen by many as a necessary evil. He kept the policies of his predecessor, Anwar Sadat. Let's see…why is that important? Well, it was Sadat that turned his back on the Soviets and towards the West. He made major capital improvements in Egypt. He achieved, defended and enforced a peace deal with Israel and ignored the Muslim Brotherhood's calls for the primacy of the Religion of Silly and backward policies. When the MB had him killed, they thought they'd have more power and this young Mubarak would be their face man. They were wrong. Mubarak, correctly, crushed the angry zealots and kept them under his boot for 40 years. Yeah, cruel, I know. Anyway, the Left in the West made occasional noise about Mubarak's tactics from time to time, but never had a suggestion as to how to treat the slime we now see running roughshod through Libya, Syria, Iraq and all over Africa without using strong-arm tactics. You see, the slime controls its people with the use of tactics worse than Mubarak's and breathtakingly stupid promises dug up in the Koran to keep their movement going. Compared to them, Mubarak is the humanitarian of the century - and a bloody Einstein.
And so, ignorant of history, Obama opted for gaining two or three days of good polls with his political base and let Egypt slide into the hands of people who would like to run Egypt the way ISIS runs Northern Iraq. But there was hope. Despite this administration's incompetence, the Egyptian citizens quickly realized that the MB was not the answer to Egypt's needs and dumped them. Did our State Department recognize the opportunity and throw in with the more moderate group taking power? With el-Sisi? No. That would have lost a point or two in the polls among the Occupy Wall Street daisies.
So a few weeks ago, when the seeds of this blog started to take shape, we stood by like the ugly chick at the dance and watched el-Sisi make not only one, but two head-to-head state visits to Putin's Russia. The easiest and most important ally to maintain in an important region was giving up on us and turning toward a man who doesn't think the Cold War is over. El-Sisi will receive weapons and advise on how Russia does things. And Putin is the power broker in that region now. If Egypt hadn't gone over, Putin's position would have been fluid, at best. Further, we see an Egypt that isn't going to consult with us before making its own military moves in North Africa; in itself, not an offense. But it is the clearest demonstration of the diminishing cache the U.S. has left in the world.
Meanwhile, back in Iraq, the most uncivilized, backward bunch of psychotic religious rubes are racing around Iraq in our tanks and troop carriers, with buckets of money and firing our weapons at civilians and military alike while Obama dithers. Here's a little scoop for you…He's known about the merry band of lunatics for years. So, our guys died for nothing. The bad guys knew Obama was leaving.
So, until the history books re-romanticize the image of this president, but forever among those who respect real history, Obama will be the man who lost influence in Syria, stood helplessly as countries in Africa fell victim to Al Qaeda, blew opportunities in Iran, and lost Ukraine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and - most needlessly - Egypt. Through their towering incompetence and political opportunism (a la Mussolini) this administration has done untold damage all over the world and throughout the domestic body politic. But losing Egypt after throwing away the gains of two wars will be seen as the foreign policy humdinger.
A middle school child would have better heeded the lessons from Chamberlain/Truman than this president has.
Note: Before publishing this essay, A tentative, murky, half-measure plan was announced by the administration to deal with ISIS, now the wealthiest terrorist group in history. It's going to take more than knocking out mortar tubes and individuals to end this bunch. Stay tuned.
The very next day the rehabilitation of Truman began. It continued, buoyed by his folksy charm and longevity and through exceedingly kind historians. The pillar that would probably be his permanent image makeover was the McCoullough work, Truman.
But the fact is, that through the latter years of his tenure, Harry was in over his head.
Fast forward to the present administration. They have the historical advantage of two cautionary tales, Truman and Chamberlain. By being more assertive than Truman and by not being a complete rube a la Chamberlain (the Munich Accords) Obama could have coasted through all 8 years by having a credible threat of American might in his pocket. But he did exactly the opposite.
---More below---
First, he went on an apology tour. By denigrating his country, however honorable he thought the message, all he inspired was contempt. Predictably, the world snickered behind its collective hand and realized immediately that as long as this guy was around, America could be played.
He then, after ignoring Al Maliki for months on end, and doing nothing about a Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) in Iraq, sent Joe Biden over to try to create one, with just over thirty days left before the deadline. Just picking Biden for the job twigged our friends and enemies alike that we were not serious. We were LEAVING. So Obama declared victory (you can't declare them, they have to be earned) and yanked us out precipitously. This virtually assured us that the 4000 or so of our guys who died over there died for nothing. And things would get worse; more in a bit.
Meantime, in Libya, Syria, Tunisia and Egypt, forces that had been impotent for decades found themselves in a world where they could at least try to seize power and nothing would stop them.
Libya:
In February of 2011, following the lead of Tunisia and rumblings in Syria, elements of Al Qaeda in North Africa, the Muslim Brotherhood (both Muslim terms for excrament) and a smattering of regular Libyans rose up to depose Gaddafi. The two choices available to the US were 1) Support Gaddafi. This was not tempting despite the fact that he had handed over his chemical weapons and nuke research, was kissing the west's asses and making oil deals or 2) Do nothing and play power broker later. Obama/Jarrett chose…
You guessed it. Door number three! We'll sit on our hands and see if a short-term political advantage opens up. Such an opening wasn't forthcoming. So it was on to door number four - lead from behind and help the little people of the "people's revolution," not knowing who we were helping. Actually, the administration probably did know if they were listening to the intelligence community they are so happy to sell out to cover their own screw ups. Anyway, with ill-informed people calling for Gaddafi's ouster, Obama facilitated just that by neutering the Libyan forces and letting our REAL enemies take charge of more than half the country. He compounded this error by, in keeping with his apology tour philosophy, insisting on a "small footprint" in Libya. So small in fact, that Hilary denied the diplomatic functionaries in that hell hole the requisite security to assure their survival. One needs NO HINDSIGHT to know this. There is a paper trail. Libya was lost. Obama's incompetence is the reason.
In the meantime, Cairo really heated up. Inspired by their ally's success in Libya, the Muslim Brotherhood turned up the temperature in Egypt. What does the Gang Who Couldn't Shoot Straight do? Why not, double down! This time in a show of feckless naiveté or mercenary political cynicism, Obama nakedly sided with the MB. We threw Hosni Mubarak under the bus.
Let's tease this out a bit.
Truman, our standing lesson to all presidents since, came to DC through the careful handling of more than nefarious political hacks back in Missouri. As a local political operative he learned how to schmooze. In congress he learned how to wheel and deal over a game of poker. It wasn't hard to get what you wanted from someone on a stroll around Key West, especially since they came there for a deal to begin with. But on the world stage, requiring nuance and a certain level of acceptance of things "un-American"…despite the labors of his advisors, Harry was not equipped. How could he help this Chiang fellow, by golly, he just didn't like him very much.
Mubarak has always been seen on the left as barely tolerable. He was politically tough. His kind of tough, in a barely civilized Middle East was seen by many as a necessary evil. He kept the policies of his predecessor, Anwar Sadat. Let's see…why is that important? Well, it was Sadat that turned his back on the Soviets and towards the West. He made major capital improvements in Egypt. He achieved, defended and enforced a peace deal with Israel and ignored the Muslim Brotherhood's calls for the primacy of the Religion of Silly and backward policies. When the MB had him killed, they thought they'd have more power and this young Mubarak would be their face man. They were wrong. Mubarak, correctly, crushed the angry zealots and kept them under his boot for 40 years. Yeah, cruel, I know. Anyway, the Left in the West made occasional noise about Mubarak's tactics from time to time, but never had a suggestion as to how to treat the slime we now see running roughshod through Libya, Syria, Iraq and all over Africa without using strong-arm tactics. You see, the slime controls its people with the use of tactics worse than Mubarak's and breathtakingly stupid promises dug up in the Koran to keep their movement going. Compared to them, Mubarak is the humanitarian of the century - and a bloody Einstein.
And so, ignorant of history, Obama opted for gaining two or three days of good polls with his political base and let Egypt slide into the hands of people who would like to run Egypt the way ISIS runs Northern Iraq. But there was hope. Despite this administration's incompetence, the Egyptian citizens quickly realized that the MB was not the answer to Egypt's needs and dumped them. Did our State Department recognize the opportunity and throw in with the more moderate group taking power? With el-Sisi? No. That would have lost a point or two in the polls among the Occupy Wall Street daisies.
So a few weeks ago, when the seeds of this blog started to take shape, we stood by like the ugly chick at the dance and watched el-Sisi make not only one, but two head-to-head state visits to Putin's Russia. The easiest and most important ally to maintain in an important region was giving up on us and turning toward a man who doesn't think the Cold War is over. El-Sisi will receive weapons and advise on how Russia does things. And Putin is the power broker in that region now. If Egypt hadn't gone over, Putin's position would have been fluid, at best. Further, we see an Egypt that isn't going to consult with us before making its own military moves in North Africa; in itself, not an offense. But it is the clearest demonstration of the diminishing cache the U.S. has left in the world.
Meanwhile, back in Iraq, the most uncivilized, backward bunch of psychotic religious rubes are racing around Iraq in our tanks and troop carriers, with buckets of money and firing our weapons at civilians and military alike while Obama dithers. Here's a little scoop for you…He's known about the merry band of lunatics for years. So, our guys died for nothing. The bad guys knew Obama was leaving.
So, until the history books re-romanticize the image of this president, but forever among those who respect real history, Obama will be the man who lost influence in Syria, stood helplessly as countries in Africa fell victim to Al Qaeda, blew opportunities in Iran, and lost Ukraine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and - most needlessly - Egypt. Through their towering incompetence and political opportunism (a la Mussolini) this administration has done untold damage all over the world and throughout the domestic body politic. But losing Egypt after throwing away the gains of two wars will be seen as the foreign policy humdinger.
A middle school child would have better heeded the lessons from Chamberlain/Truman than this president has.
Note: Before publishing this essay, A tentative, murky, half-measure plan was announced by the administration to deal with ISIS, now the wealthiest terrorist group in history. It's going to take more than knocking out mortar tubes and individuals to end this bunch. Stay tuned.
Saturday, August 9, 2014
Is This the End of Hamas? Civilized Humans Hope So.
“We can forgive the Arabs for
killing our children. We cannot forgive them for forcing us to kill their
children. We will only have peace with the Arabs when they love their children
more than they hate us.”
Western Ignorance on Parade
It is most disturbing to witness
the rise in blind, rabid anti-Semitism that oozes out of the sewer every time
Israel is put in the unfortunate position of having to defend itself in the
same way any country would. I had a most unsettling discussion with someone a
few weeks back. Being of part English
and part Indian ancestry, she is a sweet and attractive, spunky girl with
amazing eyes.
She is also a dupe in the all too
common and predictable propaganda war launched against Israel every time that
nation even discusses its own defense. She is daily drinking the pro
Palestinian Kool-Aid.
What is most astounding this time,
is how the young people are taking to it.
In Europe they are unashamedly shouting things like, “Jews to the
ovens!” in their silly, shallow, uninformed demonstrations. It’s like Occupy
Wall Street meets the SS. In Canada,
from whence my correspondent hails, one of their social mentors is (get this)
Doctor David Duke. What the hell did he get a degree in, Militant Mouth-Breathing?
Those under 40 may be
forgiven for not knowing this name. That
cohort and the next are not setting the world on fire with their ability to
read and understand even recent history.
But those who remember the battle for the right in this country just a
few years ago, remember Duke as a rabid racist politician. A punk of the first order and still the
archetype the left conjures when they want to distort what it means to be a thinking conservative in this country.
The irony lost on my debate opponent is that Duke would look on her as being a lower form of life than even his dreaded
Jew. Anybody who thinks David Duke gives the least shit about Palestinians or Jordanians or Anglo-Indians almost deserves to be treated as a rube.
Equally disturbing is how gleefully
the press dives into the fray, reporting from the Middle East how “terrible”
the toll is on the poor Gazans and politicians talk of proportioned response;
more on this later.
But at times like this, it is easy
to see how a Hitler can rise to power and how a Mussolini was such a darling of the American and European left * in the thirties.
When you are ignorant of facts and are ruled by your emotions, it is
easy to be led down rosy paths into the jaws of the dragon.
But there is hope. As we look upon the excrement that fills the
ranks of the organizations fighting in the name of the religion of peace, even
Hollywood elites are starting to throw up in their mouths a little bit. With a few glaring exceptions, even these
champions of previous senseless violence are starting to admit that beheadings
and human shields are nothing more than cowardly and psychotic.
The Historical Backdrop
Consider first, the history of this
silly region. Broken into pieces by
self-important “intellectuals” such as Woodrow Wilson and his League of
Nations, the region was supposed to look upon us as their mentors and suddenly
become advanced and civilized. There was
nothing wrong with us deciding what area would and would not become a
nation. It was theirs to simply accept the
new world order and behave. Resentments
roiled immediately and kept the area in turmoil until the end of World War
II. In 1948, the second League of
Nations, the U.N. (just as incompetent as the first) had to consider, among
many things, what to do about a declaration dating back to the 1920s, giving
the Jews a homeland. Everyone was holding
their breath to see what the US would do.
To his credit, Truman gave it more thought than Clinton gave our
recognition of Bosnia, another fuse lit by the intellectual west, recreating
pre WWI Europe.
George Marshall, then Secretary of
State advised against recognizing Israel at that time, threatening to literally
withhold his vote for Truman if the US did so.
In Israel, David Ben-Gurion was practically begging the leaders of the new
country NOT to establish a country based on religion, but to make Israel a
purely secular nation. Sadly, the US recognized
an Israel that chose to be a Jewish (religiously speaking) state.
[The author, with the advantage of
historical hindsight, believes that Marshall was right. Marshall was a realist and knew that forcing
the issue of recognition would morally bind us to the region and not lead to
stability. Further, the author is an
atheist who cares nothing for religion on any level. Ben-Gurion was also right. He took power with a heavy heart. He knew that identifying Israel with ancient
superstition was no way to enter a hostile world. It gave enemies just one more bullshit excuse
to foster hate based on their own outrageous superstition.]
The simple fact is, we did
legitimize Israel. We did enter into
alliances with them. We are bound,
unless those alliances are scrapped, to assist them and we have. And with one completely legitimate exception,
the Six-Day War, 1967, Israel has made it easy for us to help them. After seeing the pointlessness of cross-border hit and runs of the 1950s, they don’t attack
first. If you look at the
history of the battles, skirmishes and terrorist attacks that have occurred
since the canal crisis, Israel has always responded to attack.
They don't unleash an unprovoked offensives against a neighbor.
In 1967, with five countries massing on their
border, and Nasser stupidly announcing his determination to destroy Israel,
Israel knew they were in big trouble.
The decision was made to fire the first shot and try to put an end to
the attacks with this the third war since ‘48.
It was then that they took control of the West Bank, the Golan Heights
and East Jerusalem from Syria and Jordan and the Sinai and Gaza from Egypt.
Here is where the arrogance of the
modern West comes into play. For eons it
has always been accepted that territory gained through war, especially through
wars where the aggressor was the loser, was the rightful territory of the
victor. It is only in very recent times
that Western culture has made a practice of giving territory back to the
vanquished. Israel was and is under no
moral obligation to simply relinquish one square inch of the occupied territories. However, since 1967, they have repeatedly
offered to trade land for a sustainable peace with anyone who would take them
up on it.
Long before the 1973 war, Israel
was back to the don’t-shoot-first policy.
On the morning Yom Kippur, Golda Meir was in consultation with her
cabinet. Moshe Dayan, no daisy he, said
that he thought war might not actually be immanent. This despite having five
countries poised to attack in huge numbers.
Another cabinet member told her that she should attack immediately. He surmised, as history was soon to verify,
that not striking first would result in the loss of many more lives than
necessary. Meir considered her
options. She decided against pre-emption
for fear that if there was a war, they would lose any support they might still
have.
What a disgusting matrix this must
have been on which to make a military decision.
The whole world knew that the Arabs were poised to attack and knew they
probably would. But if Israel fired the
first shot,“friends” might have abandoned Israel. Kissinger had made this pretty clear later
the same morning. Gaza is the same
insanity, writ small.
Sadat and Begin: Pragmatic Heroes
The first success with land for
peace came with the Camp David Accords.
Anwar Sadat and Menachem Begin, two old war horses who had last seen
each other while shooting across a dining room at each other in the bad old
days, had negotiated the return of the Sinai to Egypt. The treaty that resulted has lasted 40
years. It was almost ruined during the
year that religious **nut bags ran Egypt.
But it still stands.
Israel has also abandoned a part of the West Bank in accordance with the Hebron Agreement and the Wye River Memorandum. Israel's reward for the latter was Arafat announcing a new intafada. Sometimes, the liberal view of rich people is correct. In this case, Arafat, a billionaire from skimming money that belonged to his constituents, behaved very pigheadedly. You see, in the case of many among the Palestinian leadership, real peace and coexistence is not as profitable as constant conflict and living off foreign aid. But the PA still controls those areas that Israel gave up.
A later land for peace deal also didn’t go well. In a deal with the
Palestinian Authority, Israel gave Gaza back.
Here is where my niece and the western press lose all credibility and
all connection to reality. Who doesn’t
remember Israeli troops dragging Israelis (many of them religious nutbags as
well), kicking and screaming from the homes they had built in Gaza? But they did it. I was among the people scoffing at the
idea. I thought the PA would balk on
their deal and Gaza would become a problem again. I was wrong.
The PA, weak and utterly corrupt, was ousted by Hamas. Now it was an even bigger problem.
It is important to understand
that these terrorists organizations are, to a man, corrupt. Most of these “freedom fighters” would do a
drug deal as quickly as blow up a pizza parlor. And many have done similarly. But in Hamas’ case they were more disciplined
and cold-blooded than the PA. Taking
over Gaza was easy. And when they did,
kidnappings, tunneling, and rocket firing commenced.
Israel warned Hamas repeatedly that
the rockets must stop. And they did for
a time. Hamas had made a deal for some
better rockets and needed to rearm. In
the latest round of unpleasantness, larger rocket raids started along with some
cross border incursions through tunnels.
That was enough. Israel made a
decision to put an end to these attacks. As is always the case, Israel responded to aggression. The fact that this aggression was breathtakingly pointless and a danger to every Gazan is beside the point.
Let's Be Honest…
You’ve heard this analogy several
times, but imagine if you will, a world where Quebec succeeded in breaking free
of Canada. Picture further, a band of
angry members of wehatevermont.com setting up rockets in Montreal. They place them in hospital basements, schools
and malls and fire them into Vermont from the same areas. Some hit fields, some
hit cows and some hit people. The US
government would probably issue one extremely stern warning. With the firing of one more rocket, the
drones and fighters would be in the air.
Using laser-guided munitions, they would hit every launcher they could
find. If rockets were spotted in schools
and hospitals, there would be a warning for people to leave those areas. But the warnings would not go on for a week
as they did in the case of Israel/Gaza! With the Montreal example, the whole world, with the exception of nut bags, would agree
that the people responsible for collateral deaths were the un-evolved scum that
put the rockets in public places. But not
if you are Israeli. Right now it is
fashionable to wax fascist and disparage Israel for correctly disposing of this
violent batch of vermin. Maybe, in their
absence, a return of the West Bank becomes a possibility. Israel has put it on the table several times
before.
So, what of this concept of
proportioned response? The next time you
hear this phrase, blow raspberries at anyone saying it. I will tell you what things like
“proportioned response”, “limited war” and “winning of hearts and minds” will get you. It gets you decades of violence,
ever-increasing hatreds and military failure.
Vietnam was a limited war.
Afghanistan was a limited war, Iraq was a limited war. By what twisted
logic do you defend yourself by using the same force being applied? Does it extend morally to personal self-defense? Should one carry an assortment of weapons to
be sure that if attacked, they respond with a weapon of the same caliber and range or blade length as is
used by the attacker?
Let’s return to my
wehatevermont.com example. While the
rockets are falling on Vermont, is the United States obliged by the
International Council of the Unforgivably Stupid (ICUS) to scrounge up some
rockets of the same range, explosive weight and accuracy as their
attackers? The rockets would fly
virtually forever. There would be no end
to the exchange of fire.
No, the United States is first
obliged to decide on whatever response the United States deems
appropriate. If the decision is to
fight, they are morally obliged to use the most powerful weapons possible with
considerations for minimizing collateral death as possible, and bring the
conflict to an end in as few days as possible. It is beyond immoral to cause
these things to drag on for years. In
total, many more people get killed over time than would be killed in an
effective, overwhelming response to being attacked. Israel doesn’t have long wars. They don’t believe in an endless string of
half-measures resulting in an endless string of casualties and no results. The West, on the other hand, seems enamored
with the idea.
This week, another healthy cease-fire was
predictably ended with Hamas firing more rockets. This is suicide. I believe that Netanyahu has decided that
this will be the end of Hamas in Gaza.
That might create some
breathing room for Israel.
But Golda was right. There cannot
be peace until the tormentors love their children more than they hate Israel.
* The Forgotten Man, Shlaes, Harper Collins, 2007
** I go on about the "religious nut bags" in the Middle East. I make no apologies for it. Muslim punks who (intentionally) blow up civilians and celebrate the act are the lowest form of religious nut bag. The fanatic Jews who go into the Occupied Territories and say that god had instructed them to build settlements in the exact spot that is sure to cause conflict are also religious nut bags. But I would be remiss to overlook the wealth of god kooks we have right here at home. There is a truly distasteful form of nut bag that preaches an end times battle and admonishes his people to pray for the battle so Jesus can return and rule the earth. (Why would god have to kill a bunch of people to do that?) These same hateful cretins scoff at people who are waiting for the twelfth caliphate. While laughable, it is no less so than Jesus doing a sequel. They revel in the possibility that we could create even greater carnage in the Middle East. Because these lowest of charlatans have a voice in a country as advanced as ours, so do their opposite number who support Jihadis. Do you see where this is going? We MUST call out, regardless of whatever creed we claim, call out the bloodthirsty maggots that get a near sexual thrill at the idea of holy war and hold them up to ridicule.
If things continue apace on a crescent from Afghanistan to Iran, Iraq, Syria, Israel and north to Ukraine, you may one day be asked to kill people for Christ (the enemy being godless). I hope that if such a dark day comes, we will all weigh our duty to our country and make the best decision possible as to how we will serve. And I hope just as fervently, that we will all, with one voice tell the nut bags to shove the Jesus talk up their asses. Killing people for god lost its luster a few millennia ago.
** I go on about the "religious nut bags" in the Middle East. I make no apologies for it. Muslim punks who (intentionally) blow up civilians and celebrate the act are the lowest form of religious nut bag. The fanatic Jews who go into the Occupied Territories and say that god had instructed them to build settlements in the exact spot that is sure to cause conflict are also religious nut bags. But I would be remiss to overlook the wealth of god kooks we have right here at home. There is a truly distasteful form of nut bag that preaches an end times battle and admonishes his people to pray for the battle so Jesus can return and rule the earth. (Why would god have to kill a bunch of people to do that?) These same hateful cretins scoff at people who are waiting for the twelfth caliphate. While laughable, it is no less so than Jesus doing a sequel. They revel in the possibility that we could create even greater carnage in the Middle East. Because these lowest of charlatans have a voice in a country as advanced as ours, so do their opposite number who support Jihadis. Do you see where this is going? We MUST call out, regardless of whatever creed we claim, call out the bloodthirsty maggots that get a near sexual thrill at the idea of holy war and hold them up to ridicule.
If things continue apace on a crescent from Afghanistan to Iran, Iraq, Syria, Israel and north to Ukraine, you may one day be asked to kill people for Christ (the enemy being godless). I hope that if such a dark day comes, we will all weigh our duty to our country and make the best decision possible as to how we will serve. And I hope just as fervently, that we will all, with one voice tell the nut bags to shove the Jesus talk up their asses. Killing people for god lost its luster a few millennia ago.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)