Every year, my kids present me with a form from school, whcih I must read and sign, and return for my childs file.
I call it the “Non-Agression Pact”. The School Districts call it a “Zero Tolerance Policy for Violence”. It essentially says that anyone fighting in school, or on school property, would be subject to various levels of punishment, regardless of who initiated the violence. Kind of a Mutally Assured Destruction suicide pact kind of thing.
Being pointless to try to argue the administrators out of such a ridiculous policy, I simply sign the form. However, when I return the form to my child, I also give them verbal instructions; to whit:
“If you are the one that throws the first punch (or kick, as both my kids are belts in Tae Kwon Do), you are in far more trouble with me than anything the School can do to you.
If you are attacked, I expect you to fight back. I will stand by you, whatever the School dcecides to do to punish you for defending yourself.
If you DO NOT fight back, the consequences you face from me will be far worse than anything the school could possibly threaten you with.”
When the British Sailors and Marines were released from their illegal detention by Iran, the ranking officer said:
“Fighting back was simply not an option,” said (Royal Marine Captain Chris) Air of their capture.
So rather than show a spine, the Captain surrendered his command. It may have been that the Iranians would have backed down if faced with a resolute command. It may have been that a fire fight would have ensued (though that is doubtful, as the purpose of the exercise was to embarass the Brits, and flex some Iranian muscle, not to start a war). Instead, the Captain, and his command were taken hostage, and used as stooges for Iranians prooganda.
During the shooting spree at the Federal Way Mall a year or two ago, one man present actually had a concealed carry permit, and had his weapon with him, but refused to use it. He was wounded and crippled by the gunman, and yet the media declared him a Hero. Meanwhile, the shooter remained at large to menance others.
Now, we have the slaughter at Virginia Tech, and, with a very few excpetions, the vast majority of the people killed were gunned down like sheep. One professor, a 77 year old holocaust survivor, put himself in harms way to protect his students.
One man killed 32 people people, with hundreds of potential targets, and to this date, there are no reports of anyone trying to stop him.
This post isnt about gun control (for it or against it), it is about taking a stand against evil and your adversaries. It is about realizing that there are times when you must fight back - that sometimes violence is the most appropriate response.
How many lives could have been saved if someone had tackled this madman during his shooting spree? He was oine man with a gun - a group could have easily overpowered him, with a far lower death toll than actually occurred.
I though that Sept 11, 2001 had taught people two lessons: 1) You might as well fight back, because you are probably going to be killed anyway; and 2) the Cavalry is not coming over the hill to rescue you. The police (or military) cannot be on every street corner, in every hallway. You MUST take some responsibility for your own protection.
Nonvoilence and it’s cousin, Pacifism, are wonderful ideals. But you can only afford to have those ideals, if others stand ready to protect you while you espouse them. And, as we are painfully taught from time to time, our defenders are not always there, and we must stand up for ourselves.
Sometimes, you must fight back.
In case you hadn’t heard yet (courtesy Post Chronicle):
Don Imus is once again in hot water for what many perceive as a racist remark. The “Imus In The Morning” host ignited a Michael Richards-like racial uproar on his WFAN and MSNBC show this week when he labeled the Rutgers women’s basketball team “nappy-headed ho’s” after their loss in the NCAA Championship game to Tennessee.
So of course, the Poverty Pimps like Al Sharpton are out in force, gnashing teeth, and demanding a pound of flesh from Imus. There are even calls for his banishment from the entertainment world (though I am sure that all will be well, once Don opens his checkbook to some favorite “charities” of the PP’s, like the Jesse Jackson Shack Up Girlfriend account)…
Personally, I think Imus should be bounced from his show and banned from all TV and Radio.
Not for what he said in this case, but for a far worse sin.
He just isn’t entertaining…
Hat tip to Dafydd at Big Lizards for pointing out this most excellent post from Gates of Vienna, concerning something I alluded to in a recent post; Moral Equivalancy:
Everyone knows what Moral Equivalence is. We get a big dose of it every day from the newspapers, from the TV, from the teachers in our public schools, and from our government officials.
Moral Equivalence is the worldview tells us that there’s no real distinction between good and bad, between God and the Devil.
It says that there’s no difference between Us and Them.
We see the examples of it all the time. The Israelis and the Palestinians — the “cycle of violence” and the “peace process”. Islamic terrorists and the American military — they kill civilians, but, hey, so do we. The capitalists and the communists — sure, the Soviets were bad, but we interned Japanese-Americans! And look what we’re doing to the environment! And the poor people in our inner cities have no health insurance!
And so on and so forth, ad nauseam.
One of the prerequisites for a true Moral Equivocator is a deep-seated and ineradicable loathing for one’s own culture. And, since all the practitioners of Moral Equivalence are Westerners, this means a deep-seated loathing for Western Civilization. There is no act so despicable, no atrocity so abominable, that a Moral Equivocator cannot make it exactly the same as something that we Westerners do.
Call it a Reverse Philosopher’s Stone — it turns all the gold into lead.
They behead schoolchildren. We allow schoolchildren go without free dental care. Same thing.
Lot’s more great stuff in the post. Go check it out!
Former, and once again, Democrat presidential hopeful John Edwards has a new and exciting idea to make your life easier:
Courtesy of the Herald-Sun; Edwards wants IRS to complete up to 50 million tax returns
Edwards says the U.S. tax code is unnecessarily complicated and full of loopholes that favor the wealthy over the working class.
Under his plan, the IRS would gather tax information for 50 million Americans with relatively simple returns, including those who don’t need to file itemized deductions to record charitable contributions or capital gains.
The IRS would calculate their tax bill or refund and mail a final report to the taxpayer. That person would be able to just sign and return the form.
So, rather than try to do something about the complexity of the tax code, Edwards wants you to put your financial fate in the hands of the IRS.
I wonder if Edwards has ever visited the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration web site? One of the reports you can read there tells us that:
Overall, the IRS had a successful 2006 Filing Season. TAC assistors answered 73 percent of tax law questions correctly, compared to 66 percent in the prior filing season. The IRS reported that its telephone assistors continued to answer over 90 percent of taxpayers’ tax law and tax account questions correctly.
So, John Edwards wants us to hand over responsibility for preparing our tax returns to people that can’t even answer tax questions right 10% of the time?
But of course, no leftist politician wants to make taxes easier to understand. That’s why they instituted Tax Witholding, so you wouldn’t have to write a check to the IRS every payday, and FEEL how much they are taking out of your behind. Now, Edwards wants to take the pain out of filing you taxes too, so you will become even more detached from the money the government is taking from you.
And the frogs are still swimming in the pot, as the temperature slowly rises…
Though typically being something of an early adopter, I have stayed away from HD video disks to date, due to the format war that is going on right now, between the two “standards”: HD-DVD and Blu-Ray.
For those of us old enough to remember the original format war of VHS vs. Betamax, this is deja-vu all over again. Like that conflict, one format has slightly better technical specifications, but the other is more industry friendly, and less expensive. In the first format war, VHS eventually won out, even though Betamax was a superior format, with better run times on smaller tape catridges, with superior resolution.
In essence, the technical differences in HD formats (like most things) boils down to size… or at least capacity: HD-DVD (dual layer) stores about 8 hours of HD video; Blu-Ray stores about 9. Now, there are various tweaks being looked at, like triple or quad layer, but these would end up being Data functions, not Media for entertainment purposes. Unless you wanted to put the entire Lord of the Rings movie trilogy (extended versions) on one Disk…
And, to date, HD-DVD players are less expensive, even though there are more manufacturers supporting Blu-Ray at this time.
But what is really going to tip the scales for HD-DVD is Porn (courtesy of Yahoo/Reuters):
James McQuivey, a principal analyst at technology research firm Forrester, said in the VHS-versus-Betamax war, porn provided a significant boost for the winning format.
He also noted the adult entertainment industry has often paved the way with new uses of technology — such as streaming video on the Internet — and said porn could help tip the scales in the current DVD format battle.
“If the porn industry wanted to break the logjam of HD-DVD and Blu-ray, it could,” McQuivey said. “If they said ‘We are going to go with HD-DVD’ you would see a few million homes immediately go out and buy HD-DVD players. They have that power.”
It is a potential weapon that one side, at least, has ignored. Instead, Blu-ray backer Sony Corp.(6758.T) blocked manufacturers from producing porn DVDs in that format — a move that some say has pushed adult film studios into the camp of HD-DVD camp led by Toshiba Corp. (6502.T)
So, for those of you still on the fence, start looking for HD-DVD players. Blue-Ray will end up being an oddity in entertainment, only found on the Playstation 3.
I happened to be listening to Sean Hannity in the car this week (not a regular occurrence, as I typically listen to Cd’s, when not on the cell phone), and Hannity asked the burning question of our time (concerning the Democrat Party/Liberals and the War):
When are they going to GET it?
I have been mulling this over since, and the only conclusion I can come to is:
Never.
Now, I am not sure who, exactly, Hannity was talking about, but when I say this, I am specifically referring to the Anti-War/solid socialist left wing. In the tradition of the Loyalists during the Revolutionary War, and the Copperheads during the Civil War (more appropriately. the War of Northern Aggression), the Anti-War left has consistently been anti-capitalist, pro-socialist, and against the very idea that America should be more than one nation among a world of equals; that our system is no better than - but certainly much worse than - other systems.
The modern Anti-War left movement earned it’s spurs in the protests against the Viet Nam war. They were not against the conflict itself - just against America supporting the more capitalist South, over the Socialist North. Russian support for North Viet Nam was never an issue for these folks. And just as was predicted, when the Left finally came to power in America, in the wake of Watergate, they cut off aid and support for the South Viet Namese, and the dominoes began to fall. Laos and Cambodia joined Viet Nam as socialist paradises, where even having a reputation as an intellectual or teacher was a very real death warrant. More than 2,000,000 people died, so the left could feel good that they had stopped American interference in the conflict, and allowed the true expression of the people to be manifest in their adoption of socialism (at the point of a gun; After all, it was Chairman Mao - that socialist icon - who said that power flows from the barrell of a gun)…
In the 1980s these same activists morphed into the anti-nuke movement, whose railed and cried that America must appease the Soviet Union. That it was not our place to oppose Socialist movements. These same people actively supported Fidel Castro, Daniel Ortega, and any other bloody handed dictator they could find, if they only met the singular criteria of opposing American interests… Leftist politicians even made pilgrimages to visit these tyrants, regardless of the fact that the constitution does not give them any power to conduct foreign policy. The objects of their affection were more than happy to put up these uselful idiots as proof that the American people supported them, and it was only the evil and monstrous American Government that opposed their plans to bless all people with the benefits of a socialist state.
In the 1990s, with their fellow travellers in control of the executive branch, most of these folks drifted over to Environmentalism, to fill the void in their lives left when they didn’t have a Conservative executive to oppose, and as most people finally came to the realization that Socialism was not a rational (or safe) basis for government -except in Europe, where the gene pool became so shallow after two horrendous wars within two generations, that it is amazing they can still master the complexities of shoelaces and chewing gum. The left was so neutered politically, that they could not even oppose the use of military forces in the former Yugoslavian states. After all, America had no interests in the fight, and Europe was in charge of the war, not some evil American leader.
Then came the answer to their prayers for lives with more purpose: With the new century came a new conflict, and a conservative administration that did not simply absorbs the hits, and set about apologizing to our enemies for making them hate us so much that they had to sacrifice the lives of their sons to show us the error of our ways.
Now the Left again had a windmill to tilt against - in fact, the had two, becuase in the years in the political wilderness, they had discovered a new green veneer for Socialism, and a cause to push it down the peoples throat - Man Made Global Warming - but most importantly they again had a war to oppose - a war about overturning a tyrant to deliver a message, and keep him from using weapons of mass destruction. This was the very thing they had opposed a generation earlier: America using her power to impose her will on other nations. And again we have the policiticans from the frings - now in power again after being in the wilderness - conducting their own foreign policy, to the benfit of our enemeies; and doing to their best to maim and destroy our warfighting capability, while declaring their support for the troops.
To put it simply, in the view of this fringe (which I estimated at about 20% of the left in this country), America has no RIGHT to be superior to any other nation, or to impose our will on other, regardless of the cause. Only the UN, or EU are pure enough in spirit (now that the USSR is gone, and China has gotten the Greed bug), to lead the world, and America must bow to their will. While they won’t use the word anymore, the still espouse Socialism, with new guises: Environmentalism, Universal Health Care, Open Borders, etc… Yje basic tenant of their faith remains that the American system is inferior to all others. The solid backbone of their position is Moral Equivelancy - that all systems are equal (except ours, which is worse than all others).
Why they have this world view I cannot say. Perhaps for some it is environmental; certainly some people come to recognize the follies of their youth in time. For others it may be an inability to see and reason without a constant rush of emotion. For some, it could even be some form of mental illness.
Whatever the underlying cause, the effect is sure and reliable: Opposition to American interests, and American power. A desire to have America be just another nation among equals, and certainly no better. The misguided notion that equality of outcome is superior to equality of opportunity. The innate fealing of inadequacy that leads them to desire the government to tell them how to live their lives, when to sleep, what to eat, what not to smoke, and, when possible, to use the government to inflict their views an opinions on their fellow citizens “for their own good”, or in the name of “the children”. The need to be absolved of responsibility for their actions, but giving the government the power to leads their lives for them.. Becuase when we take action in our own interests, we are taking responsibility for the outcome. And the last thing in their lives the Left wants, is to be held responsible…
George Orwell was a Democratic Socialist (moderate Left, by English standards). The man had a gift for language and thought. When you read the following, substitute “anti-war” for Pacifist:
Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side you automatically help that of the other. Nor is there any real way of remaining outside such a war as the present one. In practice, ‘he that is not with me is against me’. The idea that you can somehow remain aloof from and superior to the struggle, while living on food which British sailors have to risk their lives to bring you, is a bourgeois illusion bred of money and security. Mr Savage remarks that ‘according to this type of reasoning, a German or Japanese pacifist would be “objectively pro-British”.’ But of course he would be! That is why pacifist activities are not permitted in those countries (in both of them the penalty is, or can be, beheading) while both the Germans and the Japanese do all they can to encourage the spread of pacifism in British and American territories. The Germans even run a spurious ‘freedom’ station which serves out pacifist propaganda indistinguishable from that of the P.P.U. They would stimulate pacifism in Russia as well if they could, but in that case they have tougher babies to deal with. In so far as it takes effect at all, pacifist propaganda can only be effective against those countries where a certain amount of freedom of speech is still permitted; in other words it is helpful to totalitarianism.
A couple of other Orwell quotes, along the same line:
England is perhaps the only great country whose intellectuals are ashamed of their own nationality. In left-wing circles it is always felt that there is something slightly disgraceful in being an Englishman and that it is a duty to snigger at every English institution, from horse racing to suet puddings. It is a strange fact, but it is unquestionably true that almost any English intellectual would feel more ashamed of standing to attention during God save the King than of stealing from a poor box. All through the critical years many left-wingers were chipping away at English morale, trying to spread an outlook that was sometime squashilypacifist, sometimes violently pro-Russian, but always anti-British.
The fallacy is to believe that under a dictatorial government you can be free inside. Quite a number of people console themselves with this thought, now that totalitarianism in one form or another is visibly on the up-grade in every part of the world. Out in the street the loudspeakers bellow, the flags flutter from the rooftops, the police with their tommy-guns prowl to and fro, the face of the Leader, four feet wide, glares from every hoarding; but up in the attics the secret enemies of the regime can record their thoughts in perfect freedom — that is the idea, more or less.
We have become too civilized to grasp the obvious. For the truth is very simple. To survive you often have to fight, and to fight you have to dirty yourself. War is evil, and it is often the lesser evil. Those who take the sword perish by the sword, and those who don’t take the sword perish by smelly diseases.
Early in life I have noticed that no event is ever correctly reported in a newspaper, but in Spain, for the first time, I saw newspaper reports which did not bear any relation to the facts, not even the relationship which is implied in an ordinary lie. I saw great battles reported where there had been no fighting, and complete silence where hundreds of men had been killed. I saw troops who had fought bravely denounced as cowards and traitors, and others who had never seen a shot fired hailed as the heroes of imaginary victories; and I saw newspapers in London retailing these lies and eager intellectuals building emotional superstructures over events that had never happened. I saw, in fact, history being written not in terms of what happened but of what ought to have happened according to various ‘party lines’.
It is, I think, true to say that the intelligentsia have been more wrong about the progress of the war than the common people, and that they were more swayed by partisan feelings. The average intellectual of the Left believed, for instance, that the war was lost in 1940, that the Germans were bound to overrun Egypt in 1942, that the Japanese would never be driven out of the lands they had conquered, and that the Anglo-American bombing offensive was making no impression on Germany. He could believe these things because his hatred for the British ruling class forbade him to admit that British plans could succeed. There is no limit to the follies that can be swallowed if one is under the influence of feelings of this kind. I have heard it confidently stated, for instance, that American troops had been bought to Europe not to fight the Germans but to crush an English revolution. One has to belong to the intelligentsia to believe things like that: no ordinary man could be such a fool.
Note that I do NOT label the anti-war crowd as unpatriotic - they are patriots, by their own lights. They believe that America is not the country that it should be. Nor are all of them anti-american; though they are opposed to American interests. But they do have an almost child like grasp of the human nature, and a complete unwillingness to realize that there are power hungry and aggressive people born into this world every day (well, except right wing politicians in America and Britian - they are all to willing to believe it in those cases). Some of these will rise to power in criminal organization, or governments, or shadowy groups that use religion as their means to achieve power and forse their will upon others. And someone has to be there to stop them.
The Europeans aren’t going to do it. The Russians are just as bad as the ones who need stopping. The Chinese forment what trouble the can to keep America occupied, while they move on their own agenda. Like it or not, America is the bulwark - the soldier on the wall, keeping the barbarians from extinguishing civilization (and not just Western civilization - what nation ever on this earth was as open and welcoming to other races, creed, and thoughts as America?).