David Foster

Arrogance

by

The meldown of old-media credibility continues. Here we have a CNN reporter, covering a “tea party” event, who instead of conducting a normal interview with a participant, debates him, quite rudely (IMNSHO) and in a manner that makes it very clear where her own preferences lie. Be sure to read this unbelievable interchange and, if you have time, also watch the video.

In addition to the obvious lack of objectivity, note also the primitive quality of her arguments…”you’re eligible for a $400…” [stimulus payment, I presume she means], and “did you know that the state of Lincoln gets fifty billion dollars out of these stimulus — that’s fifty billion dollars for this state, sir!” Heck, why not make it five hundred billion and then you’ll really have an unbeatable proposition!

Note also the remarks of Representative Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.), who blasted the “tea party” protests as “despicable” and shameful.”

“It’s despicable that right-wing Republicans would attempt to cheapen a significant, honorable moment of American history with a shameful political stunt,” she added. “Not a single American household or business will be taxed at a higher rate this year. Made to look like a grassroots uprising, this is an Obama bashing party promoted by corporate interests, as well as Republican lobbyists and politicians.”

I’ve written about Rep Schakowsky before, in conjunction with the CPSIA issue and her unbelievably obnoxious letter to an individual who has been trying to point out the problems with this badly-drafted legislation and the damage that it is doing to small businesses and to consumers. Apparently, Schakowsky is as irritated by Americans expressing their opinions on economic policy and taxation as she was by a businessperson expressing a knowledgeable opinion about regulatory policy.

I note that Schakowsky’s degree is in elementary education. Nothing wrong with that, but what in her education and/or experience gives her the confidence to believe so absolutely that her ideas about economics are so entirely correct that disagreement with them is “despicable” and “shameful”?

When talking about terrorists and other national security threats, Democrats are all about “nuance” and “shades of gray.” When talking about American citizens who disagree with them on economic matters, the shades of gray go away, and everything must be portrayed in pure primary colors.

(Schakowsky link via Neptunus Lex.)

Goon Squad

by

Then there was the sound of glass shattering. A window was broken by more opponents outside. As the situation escalated, Tancredo left. Those who went to hear him speak were clearly upset. “”Obviously there wasn’t a point,” one attendee said. “He wasn’t going to be allowed to speak.”

“Protesters” shut down a speech by former Congressman Tom Tancredo at the University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill. (More coverage here.)

I am reminded of something that Laurie Zoloth, a campus Jewish leader, said after observing political thuggery at San Francisco State University:

This is the Weimar republic with Brownshirts it cannot control.

There is a definite Fascist tinge to much of the activity and belief structure of today’s “progressive” movement. Political violence and intimidation are being increasingly normalized in academia, and will inevitably spread to other parts of our society.

See my goon squad thread; also be afraid: the rise of political violence and intimidation in America

Money and Power

by

There are two passions which have a powerful influence in the affairs of men. These are ambition and avarice—the love of power and the love of money. Separately, each of these has great force in prompting men to action; but, when united in view of the same object, they have, in many minds, the most violent effects.

—Benjamin Franklin

(also posted at Photon Courier as part of my Worth Pondering series)

Deadly Naivete – Updated

by

Jeffrey Goldberg, reporting in the Atlantic on an interview with Israel’s new prime minister:

“The Obama presidency has two great missions: fixing the economy, and preventing Iran from gaining nuclear weapons,” Netanyahu told me. He said the Iranian nuclear challenge represents a “hinge of history” and added that “Western civilization” will have failed if Iran is allowed to develop nuclear weapons.

In unusually blunt language, Netanyahu said of the Iranian leadership, “You don’t want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs. When the wide-eyed believer gets hold of the reins of power and the weapons of mass death, then the entire world should start worrying, and that is what is happening in Iran.”

Unfortunately, our current leadership in Washington does not see this issue with anywhere near the clarity that Netanyahu does…indeed, Obama seems more upset by American nuclear weapons than by the prospect of nuclear weapons in the hands of the Iranian regime. The same is true of a substantial number of Americans, especially those who consider themselves to be political “progressives” and who work in the media and in academia.

Ralph Peters: One of the most consistently disheartening experiences an adult can have today is to listen to the endless attempts by our intellectuals and intelligence professionals to explain religious terrorism in clinical terms, assigning rational motives to men who have moved irrevocably beyond reason. We suffer under layers of intellectual asymmetries that hinder us from an intuititive recognition of our enemies.

Paul Reynaud–who became Prime Minister of France just two months before the German invasion of 1940–incisively explained what was at stake at that point in time, and why it was so much greater than what had been at stake in 1914: People think Hitler is like Kaiser Wilhelm. The old gentleman only wanted to take Alsace-Lorraine from us. But Hitler is Genghis Khan.

Obama and his acolytes seem to think we are dealing with Kaiser Wilhelm-like figures in Iran and North Korea. It is a shallow and dangerously naive way of looking at the world.

Why do people who are highly educated, and often fairly intelligent, so often fail at comprehending and predicting the behavior of thugs and fanatics?

Read more