Friday, June 15, 2018

“whiteness as a real and alarming force”

If there is anything making me question moving back to the Mainland it is the Democratic Party’s promotion of Black vs White racial obsession.

From the NYT Magazine:

“The Trump era, however, has compelled an unprecedented acknowledgment of whiteness as a real and alarming force.“

“Chief among our remarked-upon habits is our...affinity for individuality, a supposed indifference to race that often reads more like ignorance of it.”

Funny: I thought indifference to race was a laudable goal. Apparently we are supposed to obsess about race. All other racial groups do, so why shouldn’t we? It is good that POCs do, so why is it bad for us? (Notice that in using the terms ‘we’ and ‘us’ I am speaking here exactly as the Democratic Party wants me to speak: not as an individual who tries to evaluate individual people on the basis of their character, but as a white person. ‘We’ in the Democratic Party’s parlance is the opposite of an inclusive term. It is based on racial exclusion. It does not evaluate people individually but on the basis of their membership in a racial group. Because, as the writer suggest, ‘our’ affinity for individualism is apparently an alarming thing.

I think that is a bad thing, but apparently I’m the bad person until I get with the program and think of myself and all others in terms primarily racial.

“White people are losing the luxury of non-self-awareness, an emotionally complicated shift that we are not always taking well. “

Do tell. Demand that everyone obsess about race and guess what: white people will be racially obsessed just like the writer. That’s a bad thing. A really bad thing. Unless you’re a Democrat, in which case white racial obsession is a really good thing so long as the obsession includes the ‘understanding’ that white people by ‘our’ nature are terrible.

“A majority of white Americans currently believe that their own race is discriminated against. News accounts fill with white resentment and torch-lit white-power marches.”

Discriminate enough against any race and members of that race will see themselves as discriminated against on the basis of race, but putting “torch-lit white-power marches” in the next sentence is a cute way of painting newly ‘racially aware’ whites -apparently the Democratic Party goal- as Kluxers. Which is apparently also how the Democrats want to see ‘us’.

The Democratic Party appears to want not race blindness but a race war. Think of their succeeding. Really: think about the personal consequences of a White/Black race war, with some Asians tossed in to keep things interesting.

I have a low enough opinion of Republicans, but Democrats are evil people. Instead of trying to unite Americans they consciously work at dividing Americans into mutually hostile racial groups, and have succeeded.

‘Race awareness’ and ‘race pride’ are explicitly racist concepts. They aren’t confined to white racists, either. Encouraging racial obsessiveness leads only to conflict.

This is going in a truly lousy direction unless one’s goal is to tear America apart. Which, I think, is the real goal, because they think individualist, capitalist America must be destroyed, replaced with racially obsessed collectivism.

More here:


Tuesday, April 10, 2018

"What is a country club approach to politics?"

My response to an inquiry:

"What is a country club approach to politics?"

'I am a lady or gentleman and I shall not engage with the rabble on their terms, no matter what it costs me."

One of the problems common to Republicans is their extreme hostility to fighting political street fights except by following Queensbury rules. There is only one rule in street fighting: 1) There are no other rules.

Remember the first Indiana Jones movie when a giant muscular Arab in the street twirls a scimitar to threaten Indiana Jones? Did Indiana pull out his own knife and fight the guy in fair fight? No. He pulled out a great big revolver and shot the guy. That's a street fight.

Gentlemen automatically lose street fights because they are more concerned with being gentlemen than they are with winning.

John McCain, Mitt Romney, all of Trump's primary opponents, were more committed to seeing themselves and being seen as gentleman than they were were in winning. They were all in street fights, so they all lost.

Romney was at a complete loss in 2012 when he, probably the most decent man to run for high office in our lifetimes, was routinely denounced as a Nazi, a hater and a despicable human being.

He had not the foggiest idea how to respond other than to maintain his gentlemanly attitude and deny it. He was the archetypal Nice Guy, and the old saying is 'Show me a nice guy and I'll show you a loser.' One NEVER wants to be called a nice guy by a street fighter, because he is explicitly calling one a loser. 'Explicitly' because all street fighters know the saying.

Trump was the only Republican to understand that he was in a street fight and to relish it. Like him or despise him, he was the only Republican with a shadow of a chance of defeating Clinton.

The upside is that while our opponents around the world are street fighters, even actual street fighters, Trump's delight in street fighting made him the only Republican qualified to take them on.

The Republicans finally nominated a street fighter, and by golly, he won.

How did that Romney presidency turn out? Oh....yeah....

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, January 31, 2018

Will California Secede?

In the face of The Donald whupping Crooked Hillary, there have been some noises about secession made by California Democrats.

My take: If California Democrats ever get serious about seceding, the Democratic National Committee will send organic polysexual ninja hit squads out there to kill every Democrat they have to in order to stop them.

Without Californian US Reps they could never hope to control the House, and without CA Democrat electors they would never again win the Oval Office.

I think the Republicans are smart enough to realize the security calamity and economic calamity of losing CA, so they would probably pat the Dems on the head and and say 'You go, girls!'

Labels: , ,

Thursday, January 25, 2018

The Dreamers' Legal Problems

Let's do something the politicians on both sides neglect or refuse to do: be clear about who is responsible for the Dreamers' legal problems. Without addressing that issue, we really cannot have an meaningful conversation, and without that, what's the point?

The Dreamers' parents bear one hundred percent of the responsibility for their being here illegally. Their parents knew they were bringing their children here illegally. Their parents knew their children would suffer severe and life long legal consequences, yet their parents brought them here anyway.

Giving the dreamers citizenship, or even legal status rewards their parents' illegal behavior. One gets more of what one rewards. Do we have so few native-born scofflaws that we need to subsidize the importation of yet more?

Change the conversation: Put the onus where it belongs: not on the federal government, but on the parents, and speak of rewarding bad behavior vs not rewarding bad behavior. Giving Dreamers citizenship rewards their parents' bad behavior. Do we want more bad behavior, or less? Should we praise and reward bad behavior, or make people ashamed they treated their own children so shabbily?

Labels: ,

Saturday, January 13, 2018



My phone blared the alert warning sound, and I'll tell you, that message got us from the living room to the walk-in closet in 30 seconds or less.

Couldn't find anything on line via my phone, at ten minutes wondered why the air raid sirens weren't going, another ten minutes or more before we found news sites saying oops, and forty minutes before the Dems bothered to use the same alert system to tell us they goofed.

We were home so no idea how it went elsewhere, but standing in the closet waiting for the walls to blow in was interesting enough.

Yet another case of the sheer incompetence of the Democratic Party of Hawaii, which has ruled here for over half a century.

Upside to the non-drill: we will move an emergency radio, water, and some food out of the kitchen and into the closet. This is pretty much the only emergency for which this makes sense, but for this one it does.

Downside: US Pacific Command headquarters is on the next ridge, and we overlook Pearl Harbor, so we may well be floating around the ionosphere before we know there is a real attack. So it goes. Do what we can.

Labels: , , ,

Friday, December 08, 2017

On Recognizing Jerusalem As The Capital Of Israel

I see the Arabs and Europeans are denouncing our recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, claiming it will affect peace negotiations. A problem I have with that assertion is that I don’t think the Arabs have ever negotiated in good faith, nor do they intend to do so. Ever.

If you haven’t read the Hamas Covenant of 1988, still in effect, doing so may enlighten you. The Covenant states that Hamas exists for the purpose of wiping Israel from the face of the earth and exterminating the Jews. Their founding document says so in as many words. They also plan on retaking all the lands once taken by the sword. Read Spain and Eastern Europe. They also plan on extending sharia to the rest of the world: again, they say so in as many words, Angela Merkel, et al.

Quote: “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it"

Quote: “This Covenant of the Islamic Resistance Movement (HAMAS), clarifies its picture, reveals its identity, outlines its stand, explains its aims, speaks about its hopes, and calls for its support, adoption and joining its ranks. Our struggle against the a step that inevitably should be followed by other steps. The Movement is but one squadron that should be supported by more and more squadrons from this vast Arab and Islamic world, until the enemy is vanquished and Allah's victory is realised.”

Quote: “The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine”. Doesn’t sound like they intend to leave a lot of room for Israel. At least not to me it doesn’t.

Quote: “The Day of Judgement will not come about until Moslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him.” So kill the Jews or else.

Quote: “The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. ...

This is the law governing the land of Palestine in the Islamic Sharia (law) and the same goes for any land the Moslems have conquered by force, because during the times of (Islamic) conquests, the Moslems consecrated these lands to Moslem generations till the Day of Judgement.”

I hope you’ll pardon me for thinking that Hamas has no intention whatsoever of leaving Israel in existence. Nor the Iberian Peninsula as a non-Muslim land. Nor Eastern Europe. Hi Angela Merkel, et al.

Quote: “Any procedure in contradiction to Islamic Sharia, where Palestine is concerned, is null and void.” No negotiating in good faith for the continued existence of Israel. Or Europe.

Quote: “Nothing in nationalism is more significant or deeper than in the cse when an enemy should tread Moslem land. Resisting and quelling the enemy become the individual duty of every Moslem, male or female.” Remember: Spain and Eastern Europe are Muslim land, folks. Once conquered, always consecrated. Just like Israel.

Quote: “There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors. The Palestinian people know better than to consent to having their future, rights and fate toyed with.”

Aka negotiating in good faith is a waste of time.

Quote: “The day that enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem. In face of the Jews' usurpation of Palestine, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised.”

Moslem land: all of Israel, all of Iberia, all of Eastern Europe, and eventually all of the world, Angela Merkel.

There is lots more, but if you read this far you probably get the idea: there never was and never will be any negotiating in good faith. They intend to not merely exterminate Israel but retake all parts of Europe once under their control, and to extend that control to the entire world.

So the assertion that our recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel will impede negotiation is a joke upon the credulous, Angela et al.

You can find the entire Hamas Covenant at the site of the Yale Law School Library. HERE.

Labels: , , ,

Tuesday, October 03, 2017

Why Should We Give The 'Dreamers' Citizenship?

If you think we should offer citizenship to illegal aliens, even just those who were brought here illegally by their parents, I think you should re-think the long term consequences of rewarding illegal behavior.

Do you think we have so few native born scofflaws in the country that we need to import foreign scofflaws to break our laws?

Should we reward the parents who knowingly broke the law by bringing their children here illegally by giving their children citizenship?

Do you think we should tell the law-abiding citizens and immigrants that they are fools for being law-abiding? Should we tell our children that obeying the law is optional?

Or should we tell the illegals bluntly that those who have legal problems now because their parents brought them illegally have no one but their parents to blame? That is who is responsible for the so-called Dreamers' problems: their parents, and those of you who think that bad behavior deserves to be rewarded.

The children aren't victims of the United States of America: they are victims of their parents' decision to break our laws.

If you think we would be a better country if we threw away the rule of law, and publicly reward law breakers for breaking laws, you go right ahead, but you are the problem, not the solution.

My brother-in-law came here legally, and eventually became a citizen. Are you going to stand up and tell him and the rest of law-abiding America that he was a fool for obeying the law? When you give citizenship to people who broke the law, that is exactly what you are doing, loud and clear.

How long will this be a good country when our legislators publicly announce to the law-abiding -and their children- that obeying the law is for fools?

Labels: , ,

If We Regulated Guns and Shooters Like Cars and Drivers

I replied to a fellow who thinks we should regulate guns and gun owners like cars and drivers. As in vastly increasing regulation. My response:

I'm in favor of regulating guns, ammo, and accessories like cars and drivers.

If we did, there would be no federal or state license required to manufacture or deal guns or ammo.

A simple written and practical test would get everyone 16 or over a license to operate aka carry in public, and that license would be good in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. No license or permission would be required to acquire a gun, whether one was a licensed user or not, nor would a user's license be required to operate a gun on private property.

One could transport an unloaded gun on public streets without a license, just as one can trailer or tow a car. No registration or fees would be levied on guns as long as they were kept on private property, or transported unloaded on public property.

If ammunition was for use on private property, there would be no excise tax, just as there is none on agricultural use of gasoline.

There would be no taxes or background checks or prohibitions of fully automatic weapons, just as there are none on fully automatic transmissions.

There would be no prohibition of gun types or calibers, just as there are none on engines sizes. There would be no regulation or prohibition of large capacity magazines, as there are none in gas tanks.

There would be no taxes other than standard sales taxes, nor background checks, nor prohibitions of mufflers aka sound suppressors aka silencers.

With a license to carry aka operate in public and a credit card, anyone could walk into a gun rental company and walk out with any gun she pleased and operate that gun in public.

Getting a gun operators license would be a rite of passage for the vast majority of teenagers.

People would need no licenses to make their own guns, even if they planned to sell them.

So yeah: I agree with you. We should regulate guns and gunners like cars and drivers.

Labels: , , , ,