Archive for July, 2010


“Old” is the New “New”

Remember how stupid it was when unhinged progressive types engaged in nail-biting and fear mongering over Bush’s “October Surprises” and incipient fascism? Remember how moderates and conservatives castigated them for being lunatics? Well, it should come as no real shock to learn that, now that the shoe is on the other foot, conservatives have decided that… you know… accusing the President of planning to purposely destroy the country to stay in power is maybe not so bad as they used to think.

Exhibit #1: “Get Wise to October’s Surprise“.

We all know it’s coming. In what shape, idea, form…..who’s to know? Evil always surprises. Its goals are constant, their objective never changes, but inevitably it always manifests itself as the savior of the day, the savior of man. The 2008 Democrat October surprise that ushered in the first hardcore radical post-American president was the “economic collapse.” Oh yes, that was a beaut.


But the party of haters, infiltrators, anti-capitalists, anti-freedom, anti-individual rights is going to have to pull off something really catastrophic to stay in power this November. And they will, because they despise the premise of America and they mean to replace it with statism, the source of untold, incomprehensible human misery for centuries.

… Okaaaaaay… The article goes on to quote Ayn Rand (natch!) and some imbecile named Jack Wheeler, who writes:

[Catastrophe] is being brought about on purpose by a political party that cares only for keeping and expanding its power, and looks upon prosperity as a threat to that power.

That party is now being threatened with being thrown out of power.  If that party is evil enough and fascist enough to cause an economic catastrophe, it is certainly evil and fascist enough to cause a physical catastrophe, an Ultimate October Surprise, that will frighten and enrage voters enough to preserve its power in November.

What could this be?  The most likely would be another 9/11, a massively horrific terrorist attack, perhaps even nuclear.  An attack for which no one or no group will claim responsibility, no Al Qaeda, no Osama bin Laden, no Timothy McVeigh – just a plethora of pointed fingers at a multitude of suspects, without any sufficiently hard evidence to implicate one in particular.

Now, if I hadn’t already given away the fact that this was written about President Obama and the Democratic Party, you might be forgiven for thinking that the above passage was cut-and-pasted from Democratic Underground or a Daily Kos diary circa August 2004. The rhetoric — hell, even the words are barely distinguishable from what foaming-at-the-mouth progressives were screaming about between 2000 and 2008.

Perhaps sensing this, the author attempts explain the difference

Conspiracy theorists who believe that our own government, led by President Bush, perpetrated the First 9/11 attack on America are fruitcake kooks.  A part of their brain is unhinged.  But if there is a Second 9/11 attack on America this October, and worse than the first, the fully rational response will be to accuse our own government, led by President Zero, of perpetrating it.

Oh, I see. If you believed that President Bush was trying to destroy the country, you were a “fruitcake kook” with an “unhinged brain.” But you believe that Obama is planning a second 9/11 or a nuclear attack on American soil, the only “fully rational response” will be to blame the Democrats of perpetrating it.

See how that works? When the left does it, it’s a sign of a mental disorder. When the right does it, it’s the only rational response to Obama’s ploy to turn the United States in to the Soviet Union circa 1937, with himself playing the part of a skinny Stalin.

Or something like that.

Listen, you don’t have to be an Obama cheerleader to see that this bilious sludge is just as disgusting and embarrassing as it was when the left was having wet dreams about assassinating President Bush. It’d be nice to see conservatives excoriate their own with the same vehemence as they did when the left was hoeing this same row, but I’m sure we all know how likely that is. If the left’s staggering hypocrisy on free speech and the right to protest has been all too apparent since November 2008, the right’s turnabout on spittle-flecked conspiracy theories, after eight years of piously denouncing them, is no less disappointing.

(Via LGF)


Wait. Huh?

It’s not often that I link approvingly to something posted on Daily Kos, but there’s a first time for everything. In a post entitled “Why liberals should love the Second Amendment,” Kos contributor Kaili Joy Gray argues that “[w]hen it comes to discussing the Second Amendment, liberals check rational thought at the door.”

Liberals, the poster writes

[c]an argue at length against the tyranny of the government. And they will, almost without exception, conclude the necessity of respecting, and not restricting, civil liberties.

Except for one: the right to keep and bear arms.


We believe the Founders intended for us to be able to say damn near anything we want, protest damn near anything we want, print damn near anything we want, and believe damn near anything we want. Individually, without the interference or regulation of government.

And yet, despite the recent Heller and McDonald decisions, liberals stumble at the idea of the Second Amendment as an individual right. They take the position that the Founders intended an entirely different meaning by the phrase “the right of the people” in the Second Amendment, even though they are so positively clear about what that phrase means in the First Amendment.

The poster goes through a laundry list of the most common objections to the Second Amendment — that in 1776 the Founding Fathers could never have imagined the sorts of firearms available today, that the 2nd Amendment is a “collective” right, etc. — and offers convincing rebuttals from an explicitly “liberal” perspective.

The comments, alas, are about what you’d expect on Daily Kos (evidently most white gun owners keep firearms to ward off  — and I quote — “mud people,” you see…). Regardless, I highly recommend reading through the article itself. Sometimes it’s nice to see that there are people out there on the “other side of the fence,” as it were, who nevertheless “get it” when it comes to the 2nd Amendment.


Happy July 4th from Indiana

Since I’m here doing an intensive Russian program, maybe it would be more appropriate to say “с днём независимости!” Then again, I think many of the residents here might not find that particularly patriotic…