Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Believe In Democracy

Believe In Democracy

The recent election in Israel has many commentators in a tizzy, and politicians wondering what to do next. Even Kofi Annan rejects the idea of a Hamas-led state. But I ask the question: what is so unusual about a democracy electing the wrong leaders?

This has happened many times before. Even Hitler achieved some election success before seizing the Chancellorship. This is democracy at work. Especially in a new democracy, where the people are not used to having real control over their government. The Philistenes are about to learn this the hard way. With a government that will not accept the idea of a peaceful world, they are about to be forced to withstand a serious diminution of international aid. Their government can not survive without this cash.

In today's world, people seem to need instant gratification. Like an infant, public opinion wants everything, and has no patience. But wanting is not the same as having. All the people living in the Palestinian Authority want is prosperity. They elected Hamas because they were tired of the corruption of Fatah. Seen in this light, maybe they had no good choice. But they, and we, will have to suffer the consequences of this election. Things will have to get worse before they can get better.

Democracy is not an event, it is a process. The Philistenes have just had their first free election. The people had no reason to believe that Fatah would give power up to Hamas, and indeed, that has not actually happened yet. But if they do, and Hamas takes control, the world community must restrict the total amount of needed aid to that government, unless and until it renounces terrorism and murder as legitimate state actions. And then, in the fullness of time, there will be another election. When that happens, we have every reason to believe that the electorate, now realizing that their votes count for something, will take the process a little bit more seriously. In the meantime, they will suffer. That is what it will take before those people can believe in democracy. Now, if only we can get the leaders in our own country to believe in it as well.

Wednesday, January 25, 2006

If Bush Was A Statesman...

If Bush Was A Statesman...

Osama has given the forces of freedom in Iraq a big chance, if only George Bush has what it takes to take it. Short and sweet: Declare that he will call Osamas bluff and, since we all are on the same page now, if Osama will guarantee Iraq peace and the chance to pursue their democracy during the "long term truce" the U.S. will have seen its goals realized, and can begin a withdrawal immediately.

Or does Bush really have a different agenda? We all know that Osama is a liar and a psychopath, and could not deliver on his offer in any case, but there might be quite a bit of hay to be made with this offer. Osama would decline it, since he wants war, not peace. But Bush could declare that our aims are limited, and thus further marginalize our homegrown traitors and leftists, not to mention the Euro-trash that is incessantly whining about American imperialism. But. Could Bush afford the chance that Osama might just take him up on the offer? Just asking....

Friday, January 20, 2006

Abortion Lies Are Revealed

For whatever reason, I, like most Americans not affiliated with the democrat party, have not given abortion much thought. As a younger man, I was single and active in 1972 when Roe v. Wade was decided by the Supreme Court. Although, as a resident of New York State abortion was already legal for me and mine, the national ramifications of the decision made for a lot of discussion on the subject. I was aware at the time of a host of abortions, whether they involved my friends, relatives, ar friends of friends. At the time, before the spectre of political correctness permeated the debate, it was clear that the reason for the vast majority of abortions was mere convenience. Financial considerations were rare, as the Great Society welfare programs made any out of wedlock births into a financial windfall, at least insofar as the thinking of the involved people were concerned. Health or other threat to the mother was very rare. If memory serves, maternal convenience was the determining factor in just about all abortions of which I was aware.

Since then, this debate has become politically charged in a way that we could not have forseen at the time. All sorts of automatic politically correct responses to most questions are now common. If we are to trust the common dialogue on the subject, the health of the mother is a paramount concern. Now that new abortion polling data is available, the uncomfortable truth of the debate shows its ugly head. Most Americans, almost two thirds, believe that abortion for convenience should be illegal. Absent a threat to the physical or mental health of the mother of child, the vast majority of the American people would vote to ban abortion as we know it.

Now I understand why the Left is so adamant that this decision be made in the courts. They know full well that theirs is an unpopular stand. It is gratifying that most Americans value human life much greater than the radical lesbian Left would have us believe. This goes hand in hand with their professed desire to make religious belief and observance unpopular. behold, their Godless and anti-human agenda is laid bare, and the people reveal themselves as wanting no part of it. Bravo, Americans! Let Roberts, Alito, Scalia, Kennedy, and Thomas review this portion of Leftist coercion on our national debate. Take the courts out of the enforced paradigm of blameless infanticide. Let the people decide. It appears that they are prepared to decide the issue correctly.

Another Incompetent Ruling

Another Incompetent Ruling

In yet another display of judicial incompetence, a judge in Maryland has ruled that a 33-year-old state law against gay marriage violates the Maryland Constitution's guarantee of equal rights. This is so blatantly untrue that we can easily see the ACLUs campaign against freedom at work. Any child can see that no discrimination is present here. No citizen, or even tourist, is prevented from marrying in Maryland. There would be no point to restricting homos, perverts, or criminals from entering into the bond of marriage. That is why no such discrimination exists. But such a truth does not allow for this attack on decency, which is the ACLUs stock in trade. The ACLU was founded in 1920 by a communist whose stated raison d'etre was the dismantling of the United States, and indeed all nations, in favor of international, stateless, communism. But in a world where the Emperor can be said to be wearing non-existent clothes, a law that says that anyone can avail themselves of marriage can be said to discriminate against a craven movement to destroy our nation.

Indeed, any gay person is able to marry, in Maryland or anywhere else. The only thing that these perverts can not have is the right to break the law in pursuit of the chaos that they seek. No one can prevent a gay man from marrying a gay woman. What the law does prevent is a gay man from marrying another gay man. But, since it also prevents a straight man from marrying another straight man, there is no discrimination. As I have posted before, I once would have sought to marry a straight friend of mine, in that case to facilitate his visa requirement to stay in the United States. That was, is, and should remain illegal, and I am thankful that the law prevented me from making that youthfull mistake. But under the ruling of this Maryland judge, there should be nothing to prevent a man from marrying his own son or daughter.

As the ACLU quotes the judge, Baltimore City Circuit Court Judge Brooke Murdock, in its own press release on their sucess in garnering this ruling,
The Court is not unaware of the dramatic impact of its ruling, but it must not shy away from deciding significant legal issues when fairly presented to it for judicial determination.
So this self-appointed decider of "significant issues" with "dramatic impact" is not shy. Well, neither is the appellate division of the Maryland courts. And if even these worthies balk at doing their duty, I have complete faith in the people of Maryland on this issue.

Why is it so important to these scum to destroy the institution of marriage? well, as the ACLUs co-founder Roger Baldwin candidly stated,
I am for socialism, disarmament, and ultimately, for abolishing the state itself [...]. I seek social ownership of property, the abolition of the properties class, and sole control of those who produce wealth. Communism is the goal. [....] I don't regret being part of the communist tactic. I knew what I was doing. I was not an innocent liberal. I wanted what the communists wanted and I traveled the United Front road to get it.
A true and self-appointed iconoclast, Mr. Baldwin's legacy carries forward in its present state today. Communism may have failed, but the State still exists, and is under attack. It would be pathetic if it were not so dangerous. While I am sure that Roger Baldwin's ideological heir Alec does not know the danger he courts, he courts it nonetheless. It is so trendy and fuzzy to want everyone to be equal. What will they say when the first pervert attempts to marry his 12 year old daughter, and have a child together, if they can cite law and stare decisis to gain judicial acknowledgement of their foul deed? Will they be so proud of their progressivism then?

Update For further reading on the communist background and leanings of the early ACLU, Eugene Volokh has put together some great material showing, in their own words, how anti-democratic and yes, even anti-American the founders of the ACLU really were.

Iran: NEXT

Over at Dean's World, Aziz P has a post up that is worthy of grave consideration. It refers to an article from The Atlantic that I have studied over the last year. A bit long perhaps, but well worth your time. It explores the question, "Will Iran Be Next?"

Thursday, January 19, 2006

Visual Illusion

In the interest of the exploration of the human mind, I invite you all to lok at this illusion. If the colors change, or disappear, you realize the humility with which we must approach our place in the universe. Even lefties can play, if not necessarily learn from it.