Hey! I'm Voting for Kucinich in the Primary!

Jebus, this one's hilarious!

Check out Kucinich behind the podium. And where's Carol? Did she drop out while I wasn't paying attention?

(Though I'd think Clark would trump Kerry's military experience.)

Artist, Robert Ariail, of South Carolina's The State.

The SciFi Channel Weighs in on the Recall

With an Arnie double-feature: Terminator II: Judgement Day, and Total Recall

They were advertising this last night. I literally laughed out loud.

And Another One

Ravenwood illustrates again that the power to regulate is the power to prohibit.

I don't have a problem with requiring a permit for concealed-carry* - I think that the legal history indicates that the contemporaries of the Founders (original intent) would not have found this Constitutionally objectionable (a majority of them, anyway.) BUT - it does raise the specter of government denying the right to self-defense through denial of due process, which is what Ravenwood's piece illustrates.

* Open carry on the other hand should not be legally restricted. All the early court cases were quite clear on this.

More Linkage

Once again Steven Den Beste whips out the million-candlepower spotlight in his peice on media influence entitled Demonstration of Power. Excerpts:

(M)any in the media think they are, or should actually be, our true leaders. They see their job not merely to serve as the eyes and ears of the public, but also as its brain. This isn't new, of course, and when it's managed well it's valuable. When news reporting is isolated from editorializing then it works quite well.

But when the two are no longer segregated, and when there's a concerted attempt to deceive the public through deliberate selection of what to report and by deliberate distortion in how it's reported, then it actually threatens our system.

Many in the press deny that anything like this happens. Some are naive, others are disingenuous. But it's beyond dispute that it happens.

When it happens in peace, it's a problem. But when it happens in war, it can threaten the existence of the nation.

--

In yesterday's election the people of this state voiced their opinion about how their government was being run. And from Kuntzman's point of view, they said the wrong thing. It appears that he thinks this is much too important an issue to be left to the people to decide. He feels that the press failed because it didn't work hard enough on supporting Davis by trying to prevent recall, or in trying to defeat Schwarzenegger.

As always, RTWT.

Publicola On a Rant

Fellow blogger Publicola has a lot to say, and does it well in this piece. Excerpts:

Republicans. Not worth a damn. Not the individuals who call themselves republicans, but The Republican Party. Only thing worse is the Democrat Party. But not by much.

--

In D.C. we have a republican in the White House who lowered taxes. That's it. That's all he's done that the Republican Party is supposed to stand for.

Not that he's not done anything else; he just hasn’t done anything else that's supposed to be 'republican'.

--

He (& the Republican Party in general) is too devoted to the idea of government fixing all our problems. They have totally abandoned the political philosophy that set them apart from the Democrat Party. Bush may not have caused this situation himself, but he is in a position to affect a positive change. He won't.

Much more - mostly about illegal immigration. Go read. It's worth your time.

Damn, but That Man Can WRITE

Thursday's Bleat. Excerpts:

South of the WTC site is the Deutsche Bank building, now wrapped in black fabric, abandoned. There was no one here, and there were no sounds. I’ve never ever been anywhere in Manhattan where it was this quiet. No horns, no voices, no car alarms, nothing. Absolute silence. The wind had picked up, and was rippling the shroud over the DB tower. All the ripples went up. It looked as if the building was still shedding souls, and they were running beneath the thin dark blanket, looking for the way out.

--

I walked around and saw the other giants of lower Manhattan - 40 Wall, Cities Service. The Woolworth building. One after the other - giant monoliths old and new, gargantuan towers assembled in the sky by human hands, each one just another piston stroke in the motor of American commerce.

--

The men who brought down the towers did nothing more than take a hammer to the tooth of a sleeping lion. Oh, you can do that.

But you can only do it once.

--

I think this was the New York trip I wanted all those years I was a dorkboy in Fargo, reading ancient New Yorkers and wishing I could be a bitter alcoholic at the Algonquin.

Just tell us when the book comes out, James. I'll be buying it.

Five Reasons Why it ISN'T

The Consumer Federation of America (which, as far as I can tell is a bunch of trial lawyers interested in suing anyone that can make them rich) has this nifty little two-page handout on why you should support the Firearms Safety and Consumer Protection Act. Let me fisk:

The Firearms Safety and Consumer Protection Act would give the Department of Justice consumer protection authority to regulate the design, manufacture, and distribution of guns and ammunition.

Right. Regulate them right out of existence.

Here are the top five reasons why this bill is good for America’s gun consumers:

1) This bill would protect gun consumers from being ripped off or injured.

Many gun consumers and bystanders have been injured or killed by defective or hazardously-designed guns. For example:

• One gun consumer took his .22 Ruger revolver with him on a fishing trip. He was sitting on a rock when the gun fell from his holster, struck a rock, and discharged. The bullet lodged in his bladder, damaging vital nerves and rendering him impotent.

The user's manual specifically recommends leaving the chamber under the hammer empty - precisely for this reason. I'd imagine that was an old-model Single-six. Gun enthusiasts know it, the instruction manual is pretty clear about it. And the manufacturer has since changed the design - voluntarily - and converted all of the older models that customers have sent in for conversion - for free. It's not the gun's fault, it's user error.

• Mike Lewy was unloading his Remington Model 700 rifle in his basement apartment. As he moved the safety to the fire position in order to lift the bolt handle to eject a chambered cartridge, the gun discharged. The bullet went through the ceiling and struck his mother, who was shot in the upper left leg and required hospitalization for more than a month.

User error again. Mike's an idiot. Rule #1 - always keep a firearm pointed in a safe direction. He didn't. Rule #5 - don't trust mechanical safeties - they can fail. He should have cleared the weapon outdoors, safely and not tried to do it where it wasn't safe.

• Carlton Norrell was changing a tire when a close friend, William Kerr, accidentally dropped his .41 Magnum Old Model revolver. The bullet struck Mr. Norrell in the temple and drilled in a straight line across the front of his skull. Mr. Norrell died eight days later.

A .41? I'm amazed he wasn't dead on the spot. These guys really have it in for Ruger single-actions, don't they? (And what's with the dropsies?) It's a design characteristic of old revolvers. ALL old revolvers. Ruger has since changed the design voluntarily (much to the disgust of purists, many of whom did not have theirs converted.) The modern copies of the Colt Single Action Army will do the same thing if you have a live round under the hammer. The transfer-bar ignition system and the hammer block are relative newcomers to gun design. Frame or hammer-mounted firing pins are found on all older revolvers (single or double-action), and there are a huge number of revolvers out there without either. It's not a design flaw, and you cannot convince me that a Federal bureaucracy would have accelerated the implementation of the design change. But this legislation could force, for example, Smith & Wesson to retrofit literally millions of old guns at their own expense, thus bankrupting the company. But we're not supposed to understand that.

This bill would give the Department of Justice authority to set safety standards; require gun manufacturers to repair, replace, recall, or refund the purchase price of defective guns; and to mandate warnings.

And the Department of Justice is qualified to set those standards, why? The gun industry already repairs, replaces, and recalls defective guns voluntarily. Read some of the gun magazines sometime. The recall notices are not common, but they are there. For example this recall of the Vektor pistol. Now THAT's a defective gun, and why the CFA didn't use it as an example is beyond me (unless, of course, no one was actually SHOT with one accidentally.) Now, why is it necessary for the Justice Department to get involved again?

This bill would also require that all guns be labeled to ensure that defective guns could be identified and traced.

They are already. By federal law all firearms are marked with a serial number that is recorded with the BATFE. But you're not supposed to know that.

Currently, the only protection gun consumers are afforded against manufacturers of defective guns is to file a lawsuit after the victim has been injured or killed.

Excuse me, but isn't that "the only protection" consumers have for defective products now? You're not changing anything except adding another layer of bureaucracy on top. But that's the point, isn't it?

2) This bill would provide gun consumers with much-needed information.

Currently there exists no coordinated data collection on gun injuries and deaths that includes vital information such as the specific type of gun, caliber and source. This legislation would create a Firearms Violence Information and Research Clearinghouse to collect and analyze data regarding gun-related death and injury. This kind of data is essential to identify guns that are exceptionally likely to be involved in gun-related injury or death, and to notify gun consumers of the risks associated with such guns.

Yes, I'm sure that would be it's only purpose. Let's spend a few hundred million to find out that most gun deaths are attributable to old Smith & Wesson .38's and inexpensive 9mm automatics (homicide and suicide), and that most accidental gun deaths are hunting related. That'll be swell.

3) This bill would give gun consumers a voice in the regulatory process.

Currently, gun consumers have no say in the few voluntary standards developed by the industry. This legislation gives gun consumers a voice in the regulatory process by allowing them to petition the Attorney General of the Justice Department to amend or enforce specific regulations.

Um, I'm a "gun consumer" and the last thing I want is a bill allowing the general public "a voice in the regulatory process." We're outnumbered by the general population and this is an open door to regulating firearms out of existence. Maryland, for example, is doing exactly that with its performance requirements that restrict what guns can be sold there. The requirements have cause Beretta, for example, to stop selling there. You know - Beretta. The company that makes the sidearm carried by US military forces worldwide. Not safe enough for Maryland.

4) This bill would shield gun consumers from unreasonably unsafe products.

Currently, no federal agency has the authority to ban firearms technology that poses an unreasonable threat to gun consumers and the public. The bill authorizes the Department of Justice to ban the manufacture and transfer of specific guns and related products only if the agency determines that no other remedy would prevent unreasonable risk of injury.

(Deep breath:)THEY'RE FIREARMS! THEY ARE DEVICES DESIGNED TO HURL SMALL METAL PROJECTILES AT HIGH VELOCITY IN THE GENERAL DIRECTION THE BARREL IS POINTED! Now, define "unreasonably unsafe." I'd imagine that, for the Department of Justice, that would eventually end up meaning "going BANG! when the trigger is pulled."

Currently, gun manufacturers get around federal limits by cosmetically altering restricted guns to pass a basic “sporting purposes” test. This bill authorizes the Department of Justice to set uniform standards for guns with legitimate sporting purposes to distinguish them from guns prone for criminal use, such as modified assault weapons.

THERE we go! Let me translate that for you: "The legislature wasn't able to pass a bill that really outlawed those eeeeevil assault weapons, so we need to set up a bureaucracy that can, without legislative oversight, ban any gun they decide looks too eeeeeevil. " For instance, the recently introduced Smith & Wesson X-frame .500 S&W Magnum revolver that got so many gun-grabbers panties in a wad would be fodder for this kind of "uniform standards" restriction.

5) This bill would safeguard access to guns with legitimate sporting purposes.

And last I checked, the Second Amendment doesn't say a damned thing about "sporting purposes."

Just say "NO" to the Firearms Safety and Consumer Protection Act. It's not about safety, and it's not about protecting firearm consumers. It's about restricting the right to arms some more.

That Reminds Me of a Joke

The Darwin Award post below reminds me of a joke I heard a while back. Seems that the Yellowstone Park Service made up a handout for hikers in the park that went a little something like this:

Advisory to Hikers

Yellowstone National Park is home to a wide variety of wildlife, some of which can be dangerous to hikers. Yellowstone has a significant population of two species of bear: the American Black Bear (Ursus americanus) and the Grizzly (Ursus arctos horribilis). Normally these bears will avoid people, but there are several practices the Park Service recommends to hikers to reduce the chance and the severity of an encounter.

STAY ON THE TRAILS - Bears tend to avoid the marked trail areas.

SCENT Bears are attracted to scent, so:

1) Dispose of all foodstuffs and wrappings in airtight containers, and preferably dispose of them in the Park provided bear-proof trash recepticles. If in primitive camping areas, burn or bury the materials rather than carry them on your person.

2) Refrain from wearing perfume or cologne when on the trail, and don't chew gum.

An encounter with a bear may result in an attack if the bear is startled or if young cubs are present. To reduce the possibility of surprising a bear, the park recommends attaching small bells to your boot laces. The unnatural noise of the bells may alert bears (which have an acute sense of hearing) that you are in the area, and they should avoid you.

DEFENSE IN CASE OF ATTACK

The National Park Service prohibits visitors from carrying firearms for self-protection. If attack seems imminent, the use of oleoresin capsicum sprays (pepper sprays) can be effective.

Do not run. Bears are much faster than humans and they can run you down.

Do not attempt to climb a tree. Bears climb better than humans as well, and can be quite tall when standing upright.

DROP TO THE GROUND AND PLAY DEAD - it is your best chance to avoid serious injury or death. If you do not appear to be a threat, the bear may leave you alone.

BEAR SIGN

If, while hiking, you come across bear spoor it may be helpful if you can identify what type of bear is in your vicinity. Using a stick or similar instrument, break up the spoor and identify the contents. Black bear spoor may contain partially digested berries, insect parts, and vegitation. Grizzly bear spoor may contain small bells and smell like pepper.

Hmmmm....

Read this.

Anthrax vaccine worse than getting the disease?

This Week's Darwin Award Nominees

Wasted Electrons comments on the recent deaths of two Malibu, California men who were advocates of grizzly bear protection. They were slain in Alaska.

By a bear.

I'd seen the reports of the mauling deaths, and I was willing to bet that these guys:

A) weren't armed, and

B) were probably environmental activists of some kind or other.

Now both of my assumptions are proven correct:

Killed were Timothy Treadwell, 46, and Amie Huguenard, 37, both of Malibu, California, said the National Park Service and the Alaska State Troopers.

Treadwell was the founder of Grizzly People, an organization devoted to the protection of grizzly bears and their habitat. According to the group's Web site, Treadwell's practice was to travel to bear country without weapons.

And in the effort to recover the bodies, Park personnel had to kill two aggressive bears.

So much for protecting bears.

Why do so many "animal activists" behave as though they believe wild animals are Disney audioanimatronics?

File this one under "Cosmic Justice."

Ayup

Mike Ramirez of the LA Times reminds us not to relax:

Given the Democratic hair-tearing over the recall, their simmering outrage over the Florida debacle of 2000, their bilious hatred of Dubya, and the overwhelming mediocrity of the current version of the Deep Space 9, I fully expect the 2004 campaign to be an unprecedented example of negative campaigning. Mud-slinging? You ain't seen mud-slinging yet.

It's going to be UGLY.

Either You Guys are Goofing Off at Work, or...

Another check of Sitemeter shows that some government employees are goofing off on the public dime (or should I be worried that they're not goofing off??? ;-) )

Just this morning I've had four visits from NIPR.mil (total time about 50 minutes), one from army.mil, and one from the Department of Justice servers. I often get visits from uscourts.gov, too. I've gotten visits from Sandia National Labratories, and a number of other .gov sites.

Get back to work, you slackers!

(Just kidding.)

UPDATE: I hope you were on your lunch break! According to Sitemeter, someone from the Argonne National Labs (anl.gov) spent 35 minutes perusing four pages of this blog around lunchtime. Welcome! Now get back to work! (I actually do support much government sponsored research, which explains why the Libertarians would never have me.)

In that Same Vein

Please go read Steven Den Beste's most recent post, Democratic Contradictions, because it's spot-on.

Keep shining that light, Steven. Maybe if it's brilliant enough we can fry a few cockroaches with it.

Some People Aren't Taking the California Recall Election Well

If you've never spent any time at the cesspit known as Democraticunderground.com (not a hotlink on purpose), I certainly don't recommend it, though with the right frame of mind it can be entertaining and even educational. For example these threads: (Cut-n-paste if you want to go there, but bear in mind that they censor viciously at times.)

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=155523

CJIowa

F--K Jay Leno

He is introducing Arnold at his "victory speech"??? This is what CNN is reporting.

That crosses the line. I will never watch his show again. NBC, is this allowable?

"Allowable?" Never heard of freedom of speech? Freedom of the press? Sounds like you want censorship.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=491262

trumad

California! The State of Fools!

AND please California DU'ers...don't say it's not so.... 10 million of your fellow CA'ers just went out and voted in a total fool Republican... Shame on you California, Shame on You!

What about democracy and the will of the people? Largest voter turnout in 21 years and they boot Grey and vote in Arnie. Isn't the democratic process supposed to reflect the will of the people?

Oh! But the majority are fools! I see. So the annointed minority (who, according to the Democratic Party have a hard time understanding how to use a punch-card ballot) are supposed to pick the rulers.

Democratically.

Um, how's that again?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=490751&mesg_id=490751

Prodemsouth

Boycott California if Arnold takes over!!

They are going to put money in CA, it needs to be off set. People in CA against recall boycott your own state as much as possible.

Yeah! You exercised your right to recall a bad DEMOCRAT governor! Stab yourself in the eye! That'll help!

There's LOTS more, but I'll close with this jewel:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=491176

screaming_meme

It is painfully clear democracy is DEAD in America

Hate to say it, but it's true. And this is just the beginning.

The Diebold machines and punchcards lent an easy victory to the billionaire in Enron's pocket. Who knows what his share of the spoils will be but we all know that the only thing that Arnold worships (beside his ego and Hitler) is cold, hard cash.

People of California, WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU? You were our shining hope of being a model of liberal tolerance, open-mindedness, environmentalism and socio-economic justice. Now you're throwing it away to elect a groping satyr with a bad accent as your leader. I weep for our future.

Let's see: According to Constitutional rules a recall petition was successfully pursued. In accordance with the law as set forth in that said Constitution, (judicial end-run attempt notwithstanding) a recall election took place with (apparently) much higher voter turnout than for the original gubernatorial election. A majority of voters rejected the sitting governor (democratically) and a majority voted in another candidate (democratically).

I don't know...

That reminds me of...

What was that word?

Oh! Yeah! DEMOCRACY!


"A groping satyr?" I wasn't aware that Wm. J. Clinton was even on the ballot...

Oh! You mean you actually believed that last-minute desperation hatchet job? How gullible! (But then you are a DU poster.)

What I don't get is whether this guy thinks Arnie won because of rigged Diebold machines or that moronic Californians just voted wrong on purpose.

Finally, let me analyse his anguished cry:

liberal tolerance - Oxymoron. Liberals only tolerate people who believe exactly as they do.

open-mindedness - Ditto. Don't confuse 'em with facts. Their mind is made up.

environmentalism - PETA, Earth-First, eco-terrorism, Kyoto-worshipping, etc. Actual science need not apply.

and socio-economic justice. - Making sure everyone is equally miserable.

I don't "weep for our future," but I'm glad this guy is. The future he wants gives me the willies.

(Lots more frothing-at-the-mouth over there, but I try to limit my exposure.)

UPDATE: Right Wing News had a stronger stomach than I and did more extensive surfing in the DU cesspit.

There's the makings of an entire essay right there. Just gotta find time to write it.

You've GOT to Read This Quote

(Nod to Acidman for the pointer)

Gun turn-ins may be turned off

Ceasefire Oregon's successful annual gun turn-in program may be coming to an end after taking in about 6,000 unwanted guns in the last 10 years -- including more than 350 at six sites in the Portland area last weekend.

Julie Wheeler, the nonprofit organization's volunteer organizer, said this year's event was postponed for five months because skyrocketing costs and the lousy economy made it hard to raise the $10,000 necessary to pay for it.

"The first nine turn-ins were held in May, the Saturday before Mother's Day," she said. "But because the economy is so bad this year, we had to wait until October."

Wheeler and other Ceasefire Oregon volunteers hope to replace the annual turn-ins with a year-round program that would encourage people to contact local law enforcement agencies directly. The final touches are being put on the program, which will be promoted through the group's Web site, www.ceasefireoregon.org.

She said there's no doubt that some form of gun collection program is worthwhile.

Many of the people who turned in guns Saturday for gift certificates would agree, including Judi Ellison, who handed over a 9 mm pistol she took away from several children in her neighborhood.

"I saw them playing with it, and I couldn't believe it. I took it away and hid it when they weren't looking," said Ellison, who brought the black semiautomatic to a collection point on Southeast 82nd Avenue.

But such events do have their share of critics, including Kevin Starrett, director of the Oregon Firearms Federation, which lobbies against new firearm regulations proposed in the Oregon Legislature.

Starrett said he has no problem with people getting rid of unwanted guns, but he believes that Ceasefire Oregon has a larger agenda -- taking guns away from law-abiding citizens. As Starrett sees it, the group uses the event to push antigun propaganda.

"All the publicity they generate demonizes guns, as if you can just do away with them and live happily ever after," he said.

That's been my complaint as well, but that's not the quote - wait for it!

Starrett said Ceasefire Oregon has a political action committee that lobbies on hot-button gun control issues, such as extending the federal ban on assault rifles that is scheduled to expire next year. The group's September newsletter included an article in favor of extending the ban titled "Assault weapons threaten our safety."

And Michael Moore says we own guns out of fear? But that's not it either - wait!

Wheeler said Ceasefire Oregon does not advocate that all guns should be confiscated. "We are for responsible gun ownership," she said.

Good, right. But then she says THIS:

She is, however, quick to make it clear what she thinks about guns:
"A gun is like a rattlesnake. You can try to keep it in a cage, but sooner or later it's going to get out and hurt someone."

Sweet freakin' Jebus. They're not just evil talismans, they're SELF-ANIMATED! "We're for responsible ownership of dangerous rattlesnakes."

There's more to the article, but that's the part that illustrates the mindset.

If she really believes that "a gun is like a rattlesnake" and will "get out and hurt someone," perhaps she would be mollified by checking out the Smith and Wesson Cam, where a Smith and Wesson Model 19 .357 Magnum revolver is under constant surveillance via webcam to see if it really will "get out and hurt someone!"

To the best of my knowledge, it's been sitting there for a couple of years!

(Yes, I know it's a joke.)

43 Days until National Ammo Week

Nov. 15-21

So, Did Anyone Actually Get Shot, Or Not?

The Media gets it right again:

CORRECTION

Monday, September 22, 2003; Page A02


A Sept. 21 item in the Metro in Brief column about a woman fatally shot in Prince George's County and a child who was wounded incorrectly reported the woman's age, the child's sex, the child's location at the time of the shooting, and the street on which the shooting occurred. A correct account of the incident appears in today's Metro in Brief column.

And we should believe this one...why?

Not with a Bang, but a Whimper?

Everybody bitches about how bad things are, politically. (Well, everybody but Bill Whittle.) And the bitching is pretty much evenly divided on both the left and the right. But I've noticed something I find disturbing. It appears to me that the Right is resigning. Giving up. Leaving the field.


For example: Toren Smith of The Safety Valve:

After thinking it over for a while, I think The Safety Valve has run its course. Frankly, I'm tired of getting all bent out of shape about the stupidities of the world, which seem to be getting worse and worse as time goes by. The last few months it seems every day brings worse news about the corruption of science, the destruction of society by PC-think, the complete and utter end of rational political discourse, and the hydra-like expansion of government powers. International politics has gone insane. California is heading into the socialist shit pit, and most of the US seems poised to follow sooner or later. I may escape temporarily to someplace like Texas, but sooner or later I'll probably have to head for Belize or the Caymans.

--

To hell with rubbing my face in all the downer crap that's out there. Yes, I know--even if you don't go looking for politics, politics will come looking for you. But I'm going to try crossing the street, at least for the time being. And if necessary I'll shoot the bastard with my carry piece. And in the meantime I'll let my friends like Kim and James and the rest of the gang off to the right in my blog links "gaze into the abyss."
They're clearly tougher than I am.

When you start quoting Nietzsche, you're pretty depressed.

And Toren's not alone. Porphyrogenitus comments on the battle with liberalism/socialism/post-modernism:

Everywhere your light touches you get the satisfaction of seeing the cockroaches scurry away. You move the light around the room, and you get to see cockroaches scurrying off. What you don't see, because you have moved on, is as your light moves, the roaches scurry right back into the places they left. You have changed nothing.

We have been shining a light on this problem for probably a quarter of a century or so now. We know two things. Firstly, that the people doing these things are, like all bullies, cowards as well - they are intellectual bullies, but also intellectual cowards. When the light is shined on them, they complain (their academic freedom is being violated, dissent is being suppressed, the whole litany. Never mind how they close the academy to perspectives that aren't theirs, how they silence views in the name of sensitivity and the like). But they also tend to back down - back down on speech codes, back down on anti-American course outlines, back down on whatever. Superficially.

Because, having felt we solved the problem, we dust off our hands and move on. Then the roaches go right back into place; the speech codes get put back into place, in a slightly different guise. The same old stuff is taught, with less overtly obvious descriptions in the course descriptions but the same lectures. And it spreads.

--

There is no good solution to this. I have always believed that if one is going to criticize someone else's proposed solution to a problem, one better have an alternative in mind. But I don't. I just know that neither Steven Den Beste's nor Victor Davis Hanson's are going to succeed.

--

Frankly, personally, I am increasingly resigned to the fact that these problems are without solution, to the point that I'm ----->][<----- that close to simply giving up, mothballing this site, and accepting that yes, we're watching Western Civilization self-destruct before our very eyes and there is nothing to be done about it, but in the meantime it's possible to. . .well, I'm not as old as the original "optimist" in that exchange. (And I don't live that well, regardless). I'll probably end my life in a Death Camp of Tolerance for expressing "divisive" views and making "insensitive" remarks.

He says more here:

So we get to the assertion that reason will hammer them. Have you been paying attention? These people have immunized themselves against Socratic methods by declaring reason to simply be the tool by which the White Racist Structure maintains power. They teach that reason is not to be trusted (it is one of the premises of Post-Modernism). How often have you seen them fairly represent and grapple with the real arguments of those on our side of the debate, rather than simply distorting them when it serves their end and/or declaring that these things are "really" just a mask for our fears that our social position is being challenged or the like? In other words, rather than dealing with reasoned arguments, they impute base motives to them as a matter of course so they can dismiss them.

--

In my opinion, it takes more courage to recognize that the methods that people have been using to combat this are not working than it takes to pretend otherwise. I have returned to where I was on Thursday, that I'm just going to do the best I can. But this isn't working - not just for me, but as a whole. It's having no lasting effect. Have the courage to realize that.

Those are just two recent, noteworthy examples of reasoning, logical, intelligent people who have - for want of a better phrase - given up on the ideological battle that has been waged since about 1900 when Marx and Engels' little thought experiment infected the body politic.

It took a little bit of time before the danger was really recognized, even though it hasn't been fully understood by enough people. For example, the battle has been illustrated in literature only since the 1940's: Orwell with Animal Farm and 1984, Rand with Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead just to name some big hitters.

The problem, and I think that most people still able to look can see it, is in our education system, and it's really taken a death-grip on the nation since the 1950's. Probably the most outspoken bell-ringer on this was Rand herself. Read her essay The Comprachicos for a chilling, explicit denunciation of what the education system was (even then!) doing to our children. (I would quote from it, but it is of a whole, and excerpting would not do it justice.) Now the products of those 1950's preschools (at that time for only the wealthy) are tenured college professors and public school administrators, and part of the problem. I comment about it in my numerous "Our Collapsing Schools" pieces. The Volokh Conspiracy has recently had a number of posts concerning the overwhelming leftist bias in higher academia. There were these recent posts about undergrad and doctoral student experiences on major U.S. campuses. But it's discussed in the blogosphere in a *shrug* "What can we do about it?" tone. The only solution seems to be home-schooling, but given the economic and social realities (single-parent families being but one) it's not a viable choice for many, and in fact the number of people who actually recognize the problem is, in reality, pretty small - because today's parents are products of that corrupting system. We're obviously pretty outnumbered.

So the question is: "Have we reached a critical mass?" Are there now so many people who have gone through the education mills and been taught not how to think, but not to think that we're outnumbered to the point that resistance is futile? Steven Den Beste (one of the brightest brains out there today, in my opinion) points to a NRO column by Rich Lowry concerning the current platform of the Democratic candidates for President. He says:

(Their) credo is often nonsensical and hypocritical, but it is clearly discernible. The Democrats of '04 believe:

That wars should be authorized, but never fought.

That the United Nations is the world's last, best hope, and every jot of its writ should always be respected, unless it inconveniences Saddam Hussein.

That nation-building is always a humanitarian and just cause, unless it is undertaken in Iraq.

That anyone who said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction prior to the war was lying, unless his or her name is Bill Clinton, Al Gore, Madeleine Albright, Bill Cohen, John Kerry, or Joe Lieberman, or the person ever served in the Clinton cabinet or as a Democratic senator.

That French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin is always right.

That President Bush isn't devoting enough resources to the reconstruction of Iraq, and that — in light of his $87 billion aid proposal — he is devoting far too many resources to the reconstruction of Iraq.

That George Bush maneuvered the United States into war in an act of manipulative genius, and also is very stupid.

And much more in the same vein. And he's right. And what about the Republicans? They seem to have surrendered too. As Brian Reidl in the same forum puts it:

The Republican party may have once stood for fiscal responsibility, but it has since succumbed to the temptation of playing Santa Claus to whatever voter blocks (farmers, seniors, soccer moms) it thinks will swing the next election. To those who see government spending mainly as a means to buy re-election, reducing waste is a thankless and potentially dangerous distraction.

In short, they've done what they feel they have to do to keep getting re-elected by a voting populace that wants bread and circuses. And national security, and a prescription drug plan, and Social Security and....

Have we reached the point Alexis de Tocqueville warned us of when he said "The American Republic will endure, until politicians realize they can bribe the people with their own money"? Was Alexander Tytler right, and we're on our way back into dependency and bondage?

Are we going with a whimper, and not a bang?

Perhaps more on this later. Some discussion would be appreciated.

Somehow I Doubt This, But Tomorrow WILL Be Interesting

Steve Breen, San Diego Union Tribune.

Kevin Tuma Says it Best: