"All that is necessary for evil to thrive is for good men to do nothing..." - Edmund Burke
[Of course, in this case it's women, and for both pictured here, "opportunism" triumphs "good"- ed.].
Sunday, November 14, 2004
Birds of A Feather
In November, 1999, at a West Bank ceremony, Hillary sat mute next to Suha Arafat as she accused Israel of poisoning Palestinian women and children. That did not stop her from giving Suha a kiss after her delusional rant. (hat tip: Kitty Litter)
"All that is necessary for evil to thrive is for good men to do nothing..." - Edmund Burke
[Of course, in this case it's women, and for both pictured here, "opportunism" triumphs "good"- ed.].
"All that is necessary for evil to thrive is for good men to do nothing..." - Edmund Burke
[Of course, in this case it's women, and for both pictured here, "opportunism" triumphs "good"- ed.].
Saturday, November 13, 2004
Psychological Defense Mechanisms - UPDATE
Events warrant that I update a post from August, 2004 that I called Psychiatry 101: Psychological Defense Mechanisms. In it I described the major psychological defense mechanisms that individuals and societies use to cope with reality. The essence of that post is below. What I have done is to update some the examples (new ones in red) to include some of the recent spate of insane behaviors since the re-election of President Bush. - Dr. Sanity
In reading back over my posts, I notice that I talk frequently about "psychological defense mechanisms". I thought it might be a good idea to review that topic--both for my own clarity and to make sure everyone understands what I mean. My own thinking about defense mechanisms has been heavily influenced by two books I read at the beginning of my psychiatric career many years ago: George Vaillant's "Adaptation to Life"; and Anna Freud's "The Ego and Mechanisms of Defense". You will have to forgive me: I am a professor, and I like to lecture-- as if you haven't been able to tell that from reading my posts!
What are psychological defense mechanisms? They are psychological strategies used individuals (and by extension--groups of indidivuals and even entire nations at times) to cope with reality and to maintain his/her self -image intact. A healthy person will use many different defenses throughout life. A defense mechanism becomes pathological when it is used persistantly and leads to maladaptive behavior that will eventually threaten the physical and/or mental health of the individual.
Having said that, there are psychological defenses that are:
1) almost always pathological - when they prevent the individual from being able to cope with a real threat and obscure his/her ability to perceive reality;
2) immature - used in childhood and adolescence, but mostly abandoned by adulthood, since they lead to socially unacceptable behavior and/or prevent the adult from optimal coping with reality;
3) neurotic - common in everyone, but clearly not optimal for coping with reality since they lead to problems in relationships; work; and problems in enjoying life; and finally,
4) mature defense mechanisms - used by "healthy" adults, they optimize one's ability to have normal relationships; enjoy work, and to take pleasure in life.
Let's look at these different types of defense mechanisms, which as you see above I have listed in a heirarchy from least effective to most effective.
The defenses I have selected to discuss are the most typical, and are frequently discussed in the psychiatric and psychological literature.
Level 1 Defense Mechanisms - Almost always pathological; for the user these three defenses permit someone to rearrange external reality (and therefore not have to cope with reality); for the beholder, the users of these mechanisms frequently appear crazy or insane. These are the "psychotic" defenses, common in overt psychosis, in dreams, and throughout childhood. They include:
Denial - a refusal to accept external reality because it is too threatening. There are examples of denial being adaptive (for example, it might be adaptive for a person who is dying to have some denial (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE )
Distortion - a gross reshaping of external reality to meet internal needs (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE)
Delusional Projection - frank delusions about external reality, usually of a persecutory nature (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE)
Level 2 Defense Mechanisms are seen frequently in adults and are common in adolescents. For the user these mechanism alter distress and anxiety caused by reality or other people; while for the beholder, people who use such defenses are seen as socially undesirable, immature, difficult and out of touch. They are considered "immature" defenses and almost always lead to serious problems in a person's ability to cope with the world. These defenses are seen in severe depression, personality disorders, and adolescence. They include:
Fantasy - tendency to retreat into fantasy in order to resolve inner and outer conflicts (EXAMPLE)
Projection - attributing one's own unacknowledged feelings to others; includes severe prejudice, severe jealousy, hypervigilance to external danger, and "injustice collecting". (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE , EXAMPLE (remember that projection is a primitive form of paranoia, so it is common in today's world)
Hypochondriasis - the transformation of negative feelings towards others into negative feelings toward self, pain, illness and anxiety (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE)
Passive Agressive Behavior - aggression towards others expressed indirectly or passively (EXAMPLE)
Acting Out Behavior - direct expression of an unconscious wish or impulse to avoid being conscious of the emotion that accompanies it (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE)
Level 3 Defense Mechanisms are often considered "neurotic" but are fairly common in adults. They can have short-term advantages in coping, but they often cause long-term problems in relationships, work, and enjoyment of life for people who primarily use them as their basic style of coping with the world. They include:
Intellectualization - separation of emotion from ideas; thinking about wishes in formal, affectively bland terms and not acting on them (EXAMPLE)
Repression - seemingly inexplicable naivete, memory lapse, or lack of awareness of physical status; the emotion is conscious, but the idea behind it is absent (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, and, of course, Scarlet "I won't think about that today" O'Hara from Gone With The Wind)
Reaction Formation - behavior that is completely the opposite of what one really wants or feels (e.g, taking care of someone when what one really wants is to be taken care of; studying to be a pilot to cover-up being afraid to fly). Note - this can work in the short term as an effective strategy to cope, but will eventually break down. (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE)
Displacement - separation of emotion from its real object and redirection of the intense emotion toward someone or something that is less offensive or threatening in order to avoid dealing directly with what is frightening or threatening (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE)
Dissociation - temporary and drastic modification of one's personal identity or character to avoid emotional distress (EXAMPLE)
Level 4 Defense Mechanisms are common among most "healthy" adults and are considered the most "mature". Many of them have their origins in the "immature" level, but have been honed by the individual to optimize his/her success in life and relationships. Use of these defenses gives the user pleasure and feelings of mastery. For the user, these defenses help them to integrate many conflicting emotions and thoughts and still be effective; and for the beholder their use by someone is viewed as a virtue. They include:
Sublimation - transformation of negative emotions or instincts into positive actions, behavior, or emotion (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLES, art, sports, hobbies, or even one's choice of profession)
Altruism - constructive service to others that brings pleasure and personal satisfaction (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE) Suppression - the conscious decision to delay paying attention to an emotion or need in order to cope with the present reality; able to later access the emotion and accept it. (EXAMPLE)
Anticipation - realistic planning for future discomfort (EXAMPLE)
Humor - overt expression of ideas and feelings (especially those that are unpleasant to focus on or too terrible to talk about) that gives pleasure to others; (humor lets you call a spade a spade, while "wit" is actually a form of displacement) (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE)
Since all of these defense mechanisms can be used by adults to adapt to life, the question is: When is a defense mechanism considered really "adaptive" and when is it considered "pathological"? What we call "mental illness" is actually a manifestation of an individual's pathological adaptive resposne to events in his/her life.
Here is what makes a defense "pathological":
In reading back over my posts, I notice that I talk frequently about "psychological defense mechanisms". I thought it might be a good idea to review that topic--both for my own clarity and to make sure everyone understands what I mean. My own thinking about defense mechanisms has been heavily influenced by two books I read at the beginning of my psychiatric career many years ago: George Vaillant's "Adaptation to Life"; and Anna Freud's "The Ego and Mechanisms of Defense". You will have to forgive me: I am a professor, and I like to lecture-- as if you haven't been able to tell that from reading my posts!
What are psychological defense mechanisms? They are psychological strategies used individuals (and by extension--groups of indidivuals and even entire nations at times) to cope with reality and to maintain his/her self -image intact. A healthy person will use many different defenses throughout life. A defense mechanism becomes pathological when it is used persistantly and leads to maladaptive behavior that will eventually threaten the physical and/or mental health of the individual.
Having said that, there are psychological defenses that are:
1) almost always pathological - when they prevent the individual from being able to cope with a real threat and obscure his/her ability to perceive reality;
2) immature - used in childhood and adolescence, but mostly abandoned by adulthood, since they lead to socially unacceptable behavior and/or prevent the adult from optimal coping with reality;
3) neurotic - common in everyone, but clearly not optimal for coping with reality since they lead to problems in relationships; work; and problems in enjoying life; and finally,
4) mature defense mechanisms - used by "healthy" adults, they optimize one's ability to have normal relationships; enjoy work, and to take pleasure in life.
Let's look at these different types of defense mechanisms, which as you see above I have listed in a heirarchy from least effective to most effective.
The defenses I have selected to discuss are the most typical, and are frequently discussed in the psychiatric and psychological literature.
Level 1 Defense Mechanisms - Almost always pathological; for the user these three defenses permit someone to rearrange external reality (and therefore not have to cope with reality); for the beholder, the users of these mechanisms frequently appear crazy or insane. These are the "psychotic" defenses, common in overt psychosis, in dreams, and throughout childhood. They include:
Denial - a refusal to accept external reality because it is too threatening. There are examples of denial being adaptive (for example, it might be adaptive for a person who is dying to have some denial (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE )
Distortion - a gross reshaping of external reality to meet internal needs (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE)
Delusional Projection - frank delusions about external reality, usually of a persecutory nature (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE)
Level 2 Defense Mechanisms are seen frequently in adults and are common in adolescents. For the user these mechanism alter distress and anxiety caused by reality or other people; while for the beholder, people who use such defenses are seen as socially undesirable, immature, difficult and out of touch. They are considered "immature" defenses and almost always lead to serious problems in a person's ability to cope with the world. These defenses are seen in severe depression, personality disorders, and adolescence. They include:
Fantasy - tendency to retreat into fantasy in order to resolve inner and outer conflicts (EXAMPLE)
Projection - attributing one's own unacknowledged feelings to others; includes severe prejudice, severe jealousy, hypervigilance to external danger, and "injustice collecting". (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE , EXAMPLE (remember that projection is a primitive form of paranoia, so it is common in today's world)
Hypochondriasis - the transformation of negative feelings towards others into negative feelings toward self, pain, illness and anxiety (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE)
Passive Agressive Behavior - aggression towards others expressed indirectly or passively (EXAMPLE)
Acting Out Behavior - direct expression of an unconscious wish or impulse to avoid being conscious of the emotion that accompanies it (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE)
Level 3 Defense Mechanisms are often considered "neurotic" but are fairly common in adults. They can have short-term advantages in coping, but they often cause long-term problems in relationships, work, and enjoyment of life for people who primarily use them as their basic style of coping with the world. They include:
Intellectualization - separation of emotion from ideas; thinking about wishes in formal, affectively bland terms and not acting on them (EXAMPLE)
Repression - seemingly inexplicable naivete, memory lapse, or lack of awareness of physical status; the emotion is conscious, but the idea behind it is absent (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, and, of course, Scarlet "I won't think about that today" O'Hara from Gone With The Wind)
Reaction Formation - behavior that is completely the opposite of what one really wants or feels (e.g, taking care of someone when what one really wants is to be taken care of; studying to be a pilot to cover-up being afraid to fly). Note - this can work in the short term as an effective strategy to cope, but will eventually break down. (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE)
Displacement - separation of emotion from its real object and redirection of the intense emotion toward someone or something that is less offensive or threatening in order to avoid dealing directly with what is frightening or threatening (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE)
Dissociation - temporary and drastic modification of one's personal identity or character to avoid emotional distress (EXAMPLE)
Level 4 Defense Mechanisms are common among most "healthy" adults and are considered the most "mature". Many of them have their origins in the "immature" level, but have been honed by the individual to optimize his/her success in life and relationships. Use of these defenses gives the user pleasure and feelings of mastery. For the user, these defenses help them to integrate many conflicting emotions and thoughts and still be effective; and for the beholder their use by someone is viewed as a virtue. They include:
Sublimation - transformation of negative emotions or instincts into positive actions, behavior, or emotion (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLES, art, sports, hobbies, or even one's choice of profession)
Altruism - constructive service to others that brings pleasure and personal satisfaction (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE) Suppression - the conscious decision to delay paying attention to an emotion or need in order to cope with the present reality; able to later access the emotion and accept it. (EXAMPLE)
Anticipation - realistic planning for future discomfort (EXAMPLE)
Humor - overt expression of ideas and feelings (especially those that are unpleasant to focus on or too terrible to talk about) that gives pleasure to others; (humor lets you call a spade a spade, while "wit" is actually a form of displacement) (EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE, EXAMPLE)
Since all of these defense mechanisms can be used by adults to adapt to life, the question is: When is a defense mechanism considered really "adaptive" and when is it considered "pathological"? What we call "mental illness" is actually a manifestation of an individual's pathological adaptive resposne to events in his/her life.
Here is what makes a defense "pathological":
- the defense is used in a rigid, inflexible, and exclusive manner
- the motivation for using the defense comes more from past needs than present or future reality
- the defense severely distorts the present situation
- use of the defense leads to significant problems in relationships, functioning, and enjoyment of life
- use of the defense impedes or distorts emotions and feelings, instead of rechanneling them effectively
Research has shown (see Adaptation to Life) that use of the "mature defenses" (Level 4) I listed is related to:
1) excellent adjustment as an adult, 2) happiness(by self-report), 3) job satisfaction, 4) rich friendships, 5) fewer hospitalizations over life, 6) better overall health, 7) a lower incidence of mental illness.
Use of the "immature Defenses" (Levels 1, 2, 3) is related to:
1) poor adjustment as an adult; 2) higher divorce rates and marital discord, 3) poor friendship patterns, 4) higher incidence of mental illness, 5) greater number of sick leave days taken, 6) poorer health generally.
You can see from some of the examples of these defenses I have chosen that defense mechanisms are not limited to individuals. Societies also sometimes need to protect their self-images and cope with events in the world. They need to explain why their society is failing; why they are not as important in the world as they feel they should be, etc. etc. Why the ideologies they embrace aren't successful.
Societies, like individuals, can adopt mature defenses and deal with reality; or they can deny reality and look elsewhere for the source of their problems. Many countries, like individuals, prefer to put the blame for their own failures onto an outside source, since that is safer for the self-image. A "healthy" country, like a healthy individual will evaluate the facts and utilize mature defenses to cope with and change the situation they find themselves in. They are not afraid of their aggressive impulses because those impulses are reigned in by reason and not indulged in lightly. When necessary, healthy societies look inward. When necessary, they focus outward.
Let me say a word about INSIGHT. Every day individuals as well as societies must make choices. When those choices and the subsequent behavior they generate are guided by unconsicous motives, feelings, and thoughts it is easy for behavior to spiral out of control. Insight--i.e., self-awareness into one's motives, thoughts, and feelings is essential for a mature human being to function optimally. We are all human and thus have at our disposal ALL of the defense mechanisms listed above. Which ones we use can either be UNCONSCIOUS--meaning we remain unaware of the origins of our thoughts, feelings and behaviors--or, though insight and self-awareness we can make those same processes CONSCIOUS--and thus, provide ourselves with a fail-safe control option that helps us to remain civilized. Until and unless the individual or the society recognize the psychological processes that can alter their perception of reality, they are doomed to function in an unconscious, unaware--that is to say, animalistic--manner.
Getting Real With The Religion of Peace
So, it turns out that according to Drudge, Osama Bin Laden has obtained a fatwa from one of the thuggish Saudi Sheiks giving a green light to using nuclear weapons against the U.S. (hat tip: Little Green Footballs)
I don't know if this is true or not, but if it is, then all that is standing in Bin Laden's way is the purchase of a nuclear weapon (assuming he hasn't already got one and was just waiting for religious approval for his actions). This religious approval has been discussed in the Islamic world for some time now (see HERE).
I wonder if Mr. Bin Laden understands the concept of "mutually assured destruction"? I wonder if Mr. Bin Laden understands that the response to a nuclear attack on the U.S. would dwarf our response to 9/11? I wonder if Mr. Bin Laden understands that he would be the instrument that would be responsible for the end of Islam as a religion on the planet? I wonder if Mr. Bin Laden cares about anything except death and destruction?
I propose we begin this discussion NOW. Before this madman acts on what is surely his intent, if not his capability. I propose that this discussion be completely OPEN and PUBLIC, and that it be made clear to the Islamic world what would happen if this madman's plan comes to fruition. I propose that we make sure that the world understands exactly what our response would be to such a heinous act before that act is completed. And then I propose that PROACTIVELY, we formute a plan to make sure that OBL is killed and that we stop futzing around dealing with these Islamic megalomaniacs wherever they may be --whether in caves or halls of government. It is time to get real with the "religion of peace".
I don't know if this is true or not, but if it is, then all that is standing in Bin Laden's way is the purchase of a nuclear weapon (assuming he hasn't already got one and was just waiting for religious approval for his actions). This religious approval has been discussed in the Islamic world for some time now (see HERE).
I wonder if Mr. Bin Laden understands the concept of "mutually assured destruction"? I wonder if Mr. Bin Laden understands that the response to a nuclear attack on the U.S. would dwarf our response to 9/11? I wonder if Mr. Bin Laden understands that he would be the instrument that would be responsible for the end of Islam as a religion on the planet? I wonder if Mr. Bin Laden cares about anything except death and destruction?
I propose we begin this discussion NOW. Before this madman acts on what is surely his intent, if not his capability. I propose that this discussion be completely OPEN and PUBLIC, and that it be made clear to the Islamic world what would happen if this madman's plan comes to fruition. I propose that we make sure that the world understands exactly what our response would be to such a heinous act before that act is completed. And then I propose that PROACTIVELY, we formute a plan to make sure that OBL is killed and that we stop futzing around dealing with these Islamic megalomaniacs wherever they may be --whether in caves or halls of government. It is time to get real with the "religion of peace".
Friday, November 12, 2004
RICH LOSER
Polipundit calls this the "best NRO cover ever". I agree! I wonder when Soros is going to report to that monastery?
Doesn't your heart just bleed for poor George Soros??? I know mine does (Heh).
Doesn't your heart just bleed for poor George Soros??? I know mine does (Heh).
The Moral Values Myth
Charles Krauthammer's column explodes the myth that "moral values" decided the election. He points out --rightly, I believe, that the entire "moral values" myth:
was a necessary invention, a way for the liberal elite to delegitimize a conservative victory. And, even better, a way to assuage their moral vanity: You never lose because your ideas are sclerotic or your positions retrograde, but because your opponent appealed to the baser instincts of mankind.
Nowhere can this moral and intellectual superiority be seen better than in a sclerotic column by Paul Krugman, or a diatribe by Maureen Dowd; or in the retrograde rantings of a Michael Moore. The incredible psychological denial exhibited by the Democrats and the Left that causes them to continually fail to grasp reality; will lead them to march right back to the 20th century--and in some cases even further back in time.
When Bill Clinton talked about a "Bridge to the 21st Century", little did anyone realize that the next incarnation of democratic manhood would arrive at the 21st Century over that bridge, only to find it distasteful and scary. Rather than face the challenge, Kerry and Company turned briskly around and marched right back in the other direction.
To coin a new motto: It's the IDEAS, stupid.
was a necessary invention, a way for the liberal elite to delegitimize a conservative victory. And, even better, a way to assuage their moral vanity: You never lose because your ideas are sclerotic or your positions retrograde, but because your opponent appealed to the baser instincts of mankind.
Nowhere can this moral and intellectual superiority be seen better than in a sclerotic column by Paul Krugman, or a diatribe by Maureen Dowd; or in the retrograde rantings of a Michael Moore. The incredible psychological denial exhibited by the Democrats and the Left that causes them to continually fail to grasp reality; will lead them to march right back to the 20th century--and in some cases even further back in time.
When Bill Clinton talked about a "Bridge to the 21st Century", little did anyone realize that the next incarnation of democratic manhood would arrive at the 21st Century over that bridge, only to find it distasteful and scary. Rather than face the challenge, Kerry and Company turned briskly around and marched right back in the other direction.
To coin a new motto: It's the IDEAS, stupid.
Thursday, November 11, 2004
Liberal Groupthink
There is a really terrific article in the Chronicle of Higher Education today (via Memeorandum) that discusses the "liberal groupthink" prevalent on university campuses. Here is an excerpt:
After Nixon crushed McGovern in the 1972 election, the film critic Pauline Kael made a remark that has become a touchstone among conservatives. "I don't know how Richard Nixon could have won," she marveled. "I don't know anybody who voted for him." While the second sentence indicates the sheltered habitat of the Manhattan intellectual, the first signifies what social scientists call the False Consensus Effect. That effect occurs when people think that the collective opinion of their own group matches that of the larger population. If the members of a group reach a consensus and rarely encounter those who dispute it, they tend to believe that everybody thinks the same way.
The tendency applies to professors, especially in humanities departments, but with a twist. Although a liberal consensus reigns within, academics have an acute sense of how much their views clash with the majority of Americans. Some take pride in a posture of dissent and find noble precursors in civil rights, Students for a Democratic Society, and other such movements. But dissent from the mainstream has limited charms, especially after 24 years of center-right rule in Washington. Liberal professors want to be adversarial, but are tired of seclusion. Thus, many academics find a solution in a limited version of the False Consensus that says liberal belief reigns among intellectuals everywhere.
Such a consensus applies only to the thinking classes, union supporters, minority-group activists, and environmentalists against corporate powers. Professors cannot conceive that any person trained in critical thinking could listen to George W. Bush speak and still vote Republican. They do acknowledge one setting in which right-wing intellectual work happensnamely, the think tanksbut add that the labor there is patently corrupt. The Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, the Manhattan Institute, and the Hoover Institution all have corporate sponsors, they note, and fellows in residence do their bidding. Hence, references to "right-wing think tanks" are always accompanied by the qualifier "well-funded."
I first encountered "groupthink" when I worked at the NASA Johnson Space Center. The term describes the process by which a group can make bad or irrational decisions. In a groupthink situation, each member of the group attempts to conform his or her opinions to what they believe to be the consensus of the group. At NASA the decision-making process was ultimately held to account in the Challenger disaster in 1986; and the concept of groupthink was cited to explain how NASA managers and culture subtly discouraged any thinking/dissent that went against its decision-making--thus leading everyone to conclude that things were "safe" when they actually weren't.
In a similar manner, the intellectual elites on campuses all over the country, have insulated themselves from any dissent or even mere questioning of their ideas. They control the curriculum, the reading list, and the grading. Students are not only NOT encouraged to think for themselves, they are actively DISCOURAGED and pablum-fed the "truth" as their liberal professors see it.
The only argument I have with the Chronicle of Higher Education article is: what took you so long to notice???? This state of affairs is hardly a recent development on campus. When I was in college at the University of California, Riverside back in the late 60's, early 70's, it was already very noticeable. The Vietnam war was raging, and any student who dared to defy the picket lines (as I did) could count on the scorn and contempt of their professors and fellow students. My saving grace was one or two professors who actually agreed with me that closing down the university to protest the war seemed counterproductive. Nowadays, as one of the very few conservative/libertarian faculty, I rarely meet ANY faculty whose views are to the right of "extremely liberal".
The blogsphere has coined the term "liberal cocoon" to describe this phenomenon in the media and in academe; and it is that "cocoon" --a lack of intellectual diversity--that leads to groupthink. Shouldn't our universities be more than a multicultural menagerie fostering conformity in thinking? I want my daughter to be exposed to a diversity of IDEAS in her schooling; far more than I want her to be exposed to different cultures (She can travel and freely expose herself to whatever cultures interest her, if she chooses). First, I want her to be free to THINK, DISCUSS, and QUESTION.
If you have a son or daughter about to go to college, I think it would be a great idea to have them read this article. As Miguel de Cervantes wrote, " forewarned is forearmed; to be prepared is half the battle."
After Nixon crushed McGovern in the 1972 election, the film critic Pauline Kael made a remark that has become a touchstone among conservatives. "I don't know how Richard Nixon could have won," she marveled. "I don't know anybody who voted for him." While the second sentence indicates the sheltered habitat of the Manhattan intellectual, the first signifies what social scientists call the False Consensus Effect. That effect occurs when people think that the collective opinion of their own group matches that of the larger population. If the members of a group reach a consensus and rarely encounter those who dispute it, they tend to believe that everybody thinks the same way.
The tendency applies to professors, especially in humanities departments, but with a twist. Although a liberal consensus reigns within, academics have an acute sense of how much their views clash with the majority of Americans. Some take pride in a posture of dissent and find noble precursors in civil rights, Students for a Democratic Society, and other such movements. But dissent from the mainstream has limited charms, especially after 24 years of center-right rule in Washington. Liberal professors want to be adversarial, but are tired of seclusion. Thus, many academics find a solution in a limited version of the False Consensus that says liberal belief reigns among intellectuals everywhere.
Such a consensus applies only to the thinking classes, union supporters, minority-group activists, and environmentalists against corporate powers. Professors cannot conceive that any person trained in critical thinking could listen to George W. Bush speak and still vote Republican. They do acknowledge one setting in which right-wing intellectual work happensnamely, the think tanksbut add that the labor there is patently corrupt. The Heritage Foundation, the American Enterprise Institute, the Manhattan Institute, and the Hoover Institution all have corporate sponsors, they note, and fellows in residence do their bidding. Hence, references to "right-wing think tanks" are always accompanied by the qualifier "well-funded."
I first encountered "groupthink" when I worked at the NASA Johnson Space Center. The term describes the process by which a group can make bad or irrational decisions. In a groupthink situation, each member of the group attempts to conform his or her opinions to what they believe to be the consensus of the group. At NASA the decision-making process was ultimately held to account in the Challenger disaster in 1986; and the concept of groupthink was cited to explain how NASA managers and culture subtly discouraged any thinking/dissent that went against its decision-making--thus leading everyone to conclude that things were "safe" when they actually weren't.
In a similar manner, the intellectual elites on campuses all over the country, have insulated themselves from any dissent or even mere questioning of their ideas. They control the curriculum, the reading list, and the grading. Students are not only NOT encouraged to think for themselves, they are actively DISCOURAGED and pablum-fed the "truth" as their liberal professors see it.
The only argument I have with the Chronicle of Higher Education article is: what took you so long to notice???? This state of affairs is hardly a recent development on campus. When I was in college at the University of California, Riverside back in the late 60's, early 70's, it was already very noticeable. The Vietnam war was raging, and any student who dared to defy the picket lines (as I did) could count on the scorn and contempt of their professors and fellow students. My saving grace was one or two professors who actually agreed with me that closing down the university to protest the war seemed counterproductive. Nowadays, as one of the very few conservative/libertarian faculty, I rarely meet ANY faculty whose views are to the right of "extremely liberal".
The blogsphere has coined the term "liberal cocoon" to describe this phenomenon in the media and in academe; and it is that "cocoon" --a lack of intellectual diversity--that leads to groupthink. Shouldn't our universities be more than a multicultural menagerie fostering conformity in thinking? I want my daughter to be exposed to a diversity of IDEAS in her schooling; far more than I want her to be exposed to different cultures (She can travel and freely expose herself to whatever cultures interest her, if she chooses). First, I want her to be free to THINK, DISCUSS, and QUESTION.
If you have a son or daughter about to go to college, I think it would be a great idea to have them read this article. As Miguel de Cervantes wrote, " forewarned is forearmed; to be prepared is half the battle."
WMD Found in Fallujah ?
NPR is reporting that sarin gas has been found in Fallujah by coalition forces. (hat tip: Captain's Quarters). This story is developing....
Puh-Leez
Oh Boy! Oh Joy! Michael Moore is making a new film Fahrenheit 9/11- 1/2 (hat tip: Polipundit) I can hardly wait! Why, its bound to be chock full of Moore's usual bullshit, which--if nothing else--is always good for a laugh. Here's a small sample:
"Fifty-one percent of the American people lacked information (in this election) and we want to educate and enlighten them. They weren't told the truth. We're communicators and it's up to us to start doing it now. The official mourning period is over today and there is a silver lining -- George W. Bush is prohibited by law from running again."
The issues (for the next film) have not changed because of the election. "They are Iraq and terrorism." Moore will also continue preparing his other film, Sicko, on the national health care industry.Moore says he and Weinstein are going ahead on the Oscar campaign for Fahrenheit 9/11 in the Best Picture category and other categories.
Communicators? Communicators? HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa. Give me a F***ing break.
"Fifty-one percent of the American people lacked information (in this election) and we want to educate and enlighten them. They weren't told the truth. We're communicators and it's up to us to start doing it now. The official mourning period is over today and there is a silver lining -- George W. Bush is prohibited by law from running again."
The issues (for the next film) have not changed because of the election. "They are Iraq and terrorism." Moore will also continue preparing his other film, Sicko, on the national health care industry.Moore says he and Weinstein are going ahead on the Oscar campaign for Fahrenheit 9/11 in the Best Picture category and other categories.
Communicators? Communicators? HaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHaHa. Give me a F***ing break.
Arafat, The Monster
Lest anyone get carried away by the (distasteful)outpouring of praise and honor; weeping and wailing over the death (finally) of Yasser Arafat, Jeff Jacoby in the Boston Globe throws a splash of cold water in the face:
God bless his soul? What a grotesque idea! Bless the soul of the man who brought modern terrorism to the world? Who sent his agents to slaughter athletes at the Olympics, blow airliners out of the sky, bomb schools and pizzerias, machine-gun passengers in airline terminals? Who lied, cheated, and stole without compunction? Who inculcated the vilest culture of Jew-hatred since the Third Reich? Human beings might stoop to bless a creature so evil -- as indeed Arafat was blessed, with money, deference, even a Nobel Prize -- but God, I am quite sure, will damn him for eternity.
As I posted in October: With Arafat's death, the Palestinians may actually have a real future, instead of the dark despair offered by an unrepentant terrorist. The Earth will continue in its orbit; the sun will continue to shine (only brighter); and all the stars will twinkle at the rebirth of hope in a small, dark part of the universe.
God bless his soul? What a grotesque idea! Bless the soul of the man who brought modern terrorism to the world? Who sent his agents to slaughter athletes at the Olympics, blow airliners out of the sky, bomb schools and pizzerias, machine-gun passengers in airline terminals? Who lied, cheated, and stole without compunction? Who inculcated the vilest culture of Jew-hatred since the Third Reich? Human beings might stoop to bless a creature so evil -- as indeed Arafat was blessed, with money, deference, even a Nobel Prize -- but God, I am quite sure, will damn him for eternity.
As I posted in October: With Arafat's death, the Palestinians may actually have a real future, instead of the dark despair offered by an unrepentant terrorist. The Earth will continue in its orbit; the sun will continue to shine (only brighter); and all the stars will twinkle at the rebirth of hope in a small, dark part of the universe.
Wednesday, November 10, 2004
Iron Souls
The Dutch awaken to the threat in their country after the horrible murder of Theo Van Gogh by Islamic extremists (hat tip: Tim Blair)
For the Dutch, this murder is not only sinister: it is symbolic. Van Gogh - distantly related to Holland's most celebrated artist - was shot on his bicycle, another national emblem. As he writhed on the ground, the murderer cut his throat without mercy and left him with two knives protruding from his body: a method that is apparently common in North Africa, but unheard of here. Just in case there was any doubt about the symbolism of this butchery, a note was found pinned to his chest, containing death threats against three other public figures....
Now, with the manifestation of a violent form of intolerance in their midst, the iron has entered their souls. After decades of welcoming immigration and preaching multiculturalism, they now propose to expel failed asylum-seekers and to assimilate those who settle, rather than permit de facto religious segregation. If neo-conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, the Dutch are fast becoming a nation of neo-conservatives.
While the Arab-European League accused the Dutch immigration minister of giving a "Hitler speech" at a rally in protest at van Gogh's murder, the Dutch know who the real Hitlers are. Even the most liberal society is illiberal when it is a question of survival. The Dutch see those who dream of Europe under a revived caliphate as a threat to their way of life. The prospect of Islamist imams imposing sharia law on Dutch cities amounts, they feel, to a new Nazi occupation. (emphasis mine)
And I wonder where are the cries of outrage and horror from Hollywood about Van Gogh's murder? They have remained completely silent as one of their own was obliterated by the real Nazi's of this century--the Islamofascist terrorists. While Barbra and Ben, Janeane , Susan and Tim, and all the other liberal celebrities have all been VERY vocal about the "Evil Bush-Hitler", the sounds of silence emanating from them about this heinous crime are deafening.
Once, the specter of the National Socialist swastika threatened to darken the soul of the world; now it is the specter of the crescent moon of Islam that threatens all of value on this earth. The brutal execution of Theo Van Gogh has stimulated the Dutch to examine the evil they had once openly welcomed into their midst, and it should stimulate the rest of the world to do the same.
Am I being too harsh on Islam? Perhaps. Where are the so-called "moderates" from that religion? They, too remain silent as the "extremists" slowly but surely take over their faith. They denounce the response to terror, but never the terror itself. It is the fatal flaw in their religion, and in their heart of hearts they know it.
Like the Hollywood types who reflexly espouse Leftist causes, never understanding the inherent contradictions of their ideology; the "moderate" Muslims, without critical thought, give support and credibility to the extreme elements that profess to represent Islam. By their silence, they enable the terrorists among them.
The time is coming, though, when any arguments of moderation and tolerance will be completely meaningless. Then both the Left and Islam will have to examine the premises on which their ideology /religion are based. When they realize that they have been enabling and excusing Islamofascist totalitarianism; while aiming their vitriolic hate at the only people in the world currently trying to stop its spread.
Christopher Hitchens understands this. In his recent op-ed piece he points out:
But all faiths are not always equally demented in the same way, or at the same time. Islam, which was once a civilizing and creative force in many societies, is now undergoing a civil war. One faction in this civil war is explicitly totalitarian and wedded to a cult of death. We have seen it at work on the streets of our own cities, and most recently on the streets of Amsterdam. We know that the obscene butchery of filmmaker Theo van Gogh was only a warning of what is coming in Madrid, London, Rome, and Paris, let alone Baghdad and Basra.
The time is coming when dissembling, excusing and denying that there is a problem will no longer be possible. The time is coming when even Hollywood will have to wake up, stop being childish, and choose sides. Will they choose Freedom? Or, in their blindness and lack of insight, will they choose to support the very evil they mistakenly claim President Bush represents. Will they follow the lead of the moronic Michael Moore, who eagerly accepts the accolades of tyrants and murderers because he despises an American president? What side will Hollywood come down on? What side will those moderate Muslims come down on?
Theo Van Gogh exercised his right to free speech in a free country and produced a documentary that dared to criticize Islam's treatment of women. Will his death continue to be ignored by those who say they believe in free speech, but can't recognize it because they are too busy issuing their own fatwas? Will it cause moderate Muslims to retreat even further into denial? Will it herald another victory for those who desire to destroy the soul of Humanity and imprison it in eternal darkness?
Or will "iron enter the souls" of the free people around the world and help them stand up to dictatorship and oppression--whether it comes cloaked in the seductive garments of liberal enlightenment; or, in the holy garments of an anachronistic religion devoted only to death.
May Theo Van Gogh rest in peace. And may the foul malignancy that perpetrated or tacitly approves his murder be swiftly and surgically removed forever from civilized society.
For the Dutch, this murder is not only sinister: it is symbolic. Van Gogh - distantly related to Holland's most celebrated artist - was shot on his bicycle, another national emblem. As he writhed on the ground, the murderer cut his throat without mercy and left him with two knives protruding from his body: a method that is apparently common in North Africa, but unheard of here. Just in case there was any doubt about the symbolism of this butchery, a note was found pinned to his chest, containing death threats against three other public figures....
Now, with the manifestation of a violent form of intolerance in their midst, the iron has entered their souls. After decades of welcoming immigration and preaching multiculturalism, they now propose to expel failed asylum-seekers and to assimilate those who settle, rather than permit de facto religious segregation. If neo-conservatives are liberals who have been mugged by reality, the Dutch are fast becoming a nation of neo-conservatives.
While the Arab-European League accused the Dutch immigration minister of giving a "Hitler speech" at a rally in protest at van Gogh's murder, the Dutch know who the real Hitlers are. Even the most liberal society is illiberal when it is a question of survival. The Dutch see those who dream of Europe under a revived caliphate as a threat to their way of life. The prospect of Islamist imams imposing sharia law on Dutch cities amounts, they feel, to a new Nazi occupation. (emphasis mine)
And I wonder where are the cries of outrage and horror from Hollywood about Van Gogh's murder? They have remained completely silent as one of their own was obliterated by the real Nazi's of this century--the Islamofascist terrorists. While Barbra and Ben, Janeane , Susan and Tim, and all the other liberal celebrities have all been VERY vocal about the "Evil Bush-Hitler", the sounds of silence emanating from them about this heinous crime are deafening.
Once, the specter of the National Socialist swastika threatened to darken the soul of the world; now it is the specter of the crescent moon of Islam that threatens all of value on this earth. The brutal execution of Theo Van Gogh has stimulated the Dutch to examine the evil they had once openly welcomed into their midst, and it should stimulate the rest of the world to do the same.
Am I being too harsh on Islam? Perhaps. Where are the so-called "moderates" from that religion? They, too remain silent as the "extremists" slowly but surely take over their faith. They denounce the response to terror, but never the terror itself. It is the fatal flaw in their religion, and in their heart of hearts they know it.
Like the Hollywood types who reflexly espouse Leftist causes, never understanding the inherent contradictions of their ideology; the "moderate" Muslims, without critical thought, give support and credibility to the extreme elements that profess to represent Islam. By their silence, they enable the terrorists among them.
The time is coming, though, when any arguments of moderation and tolerance will be completely meaningless. Then both the Left and Islam will have to examine the premises on which their ideology /religion are based. When they realize that they have been enabling and excusing Islamofascist totalitarianism; while aiming their vitriolic hate at the only people in the world currently trying to stop its spread.
Christopher Hitchens understands this. In his recent op-ed piece he points out:
But all faiths are not always equally demented in the same way, or at the same time. Islam, which was once a civilizing and creative force in many societies, is now undergoing a civil war. One faction in this civil war is explicitly totalitarian and wedded to a cult of death. We have seen it at work on the streets of our own cities, and most recently on the streets of Amsterdam. We know that the obscene butchery of filmmaker Theo van Gogh was only a warning of what is coming in Madrid, London, Rome, and Paris, let alone Baghdad and Basra.
The time is coming when dissembling, excusing and denying that there is a problem will no longer be possible. The time is coming when even Hollywood will have to wake up, stop being childish, and choose sides. Will they choose Freedom? Or, in their blindness and lack of insight, will they choose to support the very evil they mistakenly claim President Bush represents. Will they follow the lead of the moronic Michael Moore, who eagerly accepts the accolades of tyrants and murderers because he despises an American president? What side will Hollywood come down on? What side will those moderate Muslims come down on?
Theo Van Gogh exercised his right to free speech in a free country and produced a documentary that dared to criticize Islam's treatment of women. Will his death continue to be ignored by those who say they believe in free speech, but can't recognize it because they are too busy issuing their own fatwas? Will it cause moderate Muslims to retreat even further into denial? Will it herald another victory for those who desire to destroy the soul of Humanity and imprison it in eternal darkness?
Or will "iron enter the souls" of the free people around the world and help them stand up to dictatorship and oppression--whether it comes cloaked in the seductive garments of liberal enlightenment; or, in the holy garments of an anachronistic religion devoted only to death.
May Theo Van Gogh rest in peace. And may the foul malignancy that perpetrated or tacitly approves his murder be swiftly and surgically removed forever from civilized society.
U.S. Marines Anniversary
Today is the 229th anniversary of the United States Marine Corps ! I want to take a moment to honor the Marines, particularly those who are now engaged in the Battle for Fallujah. Here is a good site to get in the mood to celebrate the Marines.
I also want to honor the memory of my father, who proudly served in the US Marines during WWII. He saw action on Iwo Jima, and some of my earliest memories of him were him going through is photo album with me from that time. Until his death earlier this year, the Marines were one of the most important parts of my father's life. When he died the local unit performed a very moving flag ceremony at his funeral. Once a Marine, Always a Marine. Semper Fi!
Happy Anniversary !
May You Always Be There To Protect America, and May We Always Honor You For Your Sacrifice....
U.S. Marine PFC (sometimes Sgt.) Frank Santy - World War II
UPDATE: Thought I'd post the words to the Marine Corps Hymn (courtesy of Captain's Quarters):
From the halls of Montezuma, to the shores of Tripoli,
We fight our country's battles in the air, on land and sea.
First to fight for right and freedom, and to keep our honor clean;
We are proud to claim the title of United States Marine.
Our Flag's unfurled to every breeze from dawn to setting sun.
We have fought in every clime and place, where we could take a gun.
In the snow of far off northern lands and in sunny tropic scenes,
You will find us always on the job, the United States Marines.
Here's health to you and to our Corps, which we are proud to serve.
In many a strife we've fought for life and never lost our nerve.
If the Army and the Navy ever look on heaven's scenes,
they will find the streets are guarded by United States Marines.
I also want to honor the memory of my father, who proudly served in the US Marines during WWII. He saw action on Iwo Jima, and some of my earliest memories of him were him going through is photo album with me from that time. Until his death earlier this year, the Marines were one of the most important parts of my father's life. When he died the local unit performed a very moving flag ceremony at his funeral. Once a Marine, Always a Marine. Semper Fi!
Happy Anniversary !
May You Always Be There To Protect America, and May We Always Honor You For Your Sacrifice....
U.S. Marine PFC (sometimes Sgt.) Frank Santy - World War II
UPDATE: Thought I'd post the words to the Marine Corps Hymn (courtesy of Captain's Quarters):
From the halls of Montezuma, to the shores of Tripoli,
We fight our country's battles in the air, on land and sea.
First to fight for right and freedom, and to keep our honor clean;
We are proud to claim the title of United States Marine.
Our Flag's unfurled to every breeze from dawn to setting sun.
We have fought in every clime and place, where we could take a gun.
In the snow of far off northern lands and in sunny tropic scenes,
You will find us always on the job, the United States Marines.
Here's health to you and to our Corps, which we are proud to serve.
In many a strife we've fought for life and never lost our nerve.
If the Army and the Navy ever look on heaven's scenes,
they will find the streets are guarded by United States Marines.
It Almost Slipped Away
Charles Krauthammer analyzes the ups and downs of the Election.
The 2004 election hinged on Iraq, in three political incarnations: Iraq, the war; Iraq, the first presidential debate; Iraq, the media magnet for countless bad news stories. Together they very nearly overthrew Bush.
Read the whole thing to find out who "rescued" Bush, and dragged him over the finish line!
Was it:
(a) John Edwards
(b) Saddam Hussein
(c) Osama Bin Laden
(d) None of the Above?
The 2004 election hinged on Iraq, in three political incarnations: Iraq, the war; Iraq, the first presidential debate; Iraq, the media magnet for countless bad news stories. Together they very nearly overthrew Bush.
Read the whole thing to find out who "rescued" Bush, and dragged him over the finish line!
Was it:
(a) John Edwards
(b) Saddam Hussein
(c) Osama Bin Laden
(d) None of the Above?
Tuesday, November 09, 2004
A New Psychological Disorder?
Are Kerry supporters really suffering from a new psychological disorder, as this article indicates? I don't think so. They are just having the terminal symptoms of Bush Derangement Syndrome, described earlier by psychiatrist/columnist Charles Krauthammer.
I recommend emigration to a "better" environment for the cure. Cuba, North Korea, Iran--all these countries strongly believed that Bush should have been defeated and I'm sure they would welcome BDS sufferers. After all, Europe and Canada don't yet have the higher degree of "enlightenment" on political and economic issues that the first four countries do. But give them a few years--at the rate they are going they will be totalitarian regimes in practically no time!
Bon Voyage! Adios!
I recommend emigration to a "better" environment for the cure. Cuba, North Korea, Iran--all these countries strongly believed that Bush should have been defeated and I'm sure they would welcome BDS sufferers. After all, Europe and Canada don't yet have the higher degree of "enlightenment" on political and economic issues that the first four countries do. But give them a few years--at the rate they are going they will be totalitarian regimes in practically no time!
Bon Voyage! Adios!
Bring Out Your Dead!
Remember the scene from Monty Python and the Holy Grail?
The Dead Collector: Bring out yer dead. [a man puts a body on the cart]
Large Man with Dead Body : Here's one.
The Dead Collector : That'll be ninepence.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't : I'm not dead.
The Dead Collector : What?
Large Man with Dead Body : Nothing. There's your ninepence.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't : I'm not dead.
The Dead Collector : 'Ere, he says he's not dead.
Large Man with Dead Body : Yes he is.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't : I'm not.
The Dead Collector : He isn't.
Large Man with Dead Body : Well, he will be soon, he's very ill.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't : I'm getting better.
Large Man with Dead Body : No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment.
This is the same scene that's playing out between the Palestinian authorities and Arafat's spouse in Paris, believe it or not (Life imitates Art). As Suha says one thing, the Palestinian officials say another; and right in the middle of things are the French doctors and politicians.
Why the comedy laced with melodrama? They are fighting over his dead body for the millions of dollars Arafat has looted from the Palestinian people.
So ends Arafat--undead , undignified, and (hopefully) unmourned.
The Dead Collector: Bring out yer dead. [a man puts a body on the cart]
Large Man with Dead Body : Here's one.
The Dead Collector : That'll be ninepence.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't : I'm not dead.
The Dead Collector : What?
Large Man with Dead Body : Nothing. There's your ninepence.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't : I'm not dead.
The Dead Collector : 'Ere, he says he's not dead.
Large Man with Dead Body : Yes he is.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't : I'm not.
The Dead Collector : He isn't.
Large Man with Dead Body : Well, he will be soon, he's very ill.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't : I'm getting better.
Large Man with Dead Body : No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment.
This is the same scene that's playing out between the Palestinian authorities and Arafat's spouse in Paris, believe it or not (Life imitates Art). As Suha says one thing, the Palestinian officials say another; and right in the middle of things are the French doctors and politicians.
Why the comedy laced with melodrama? They are fighting over his dead body for the millions of dollars Arafat has looted from the Palestinian people.
So ends Arafat--undead , undignified, and (hopefully) unmourned.
Iraqis Eager for Democracy
From Powerline comes a story straight from an Iraqi newspaper, Annabaa:
For the first time in Iraq’s modern history, Iraqis are taking interest in their country's election. Iraqis have heard and read about free and fair elections in other countries and now they stand at the doors of their own election.
We visited the streets of Najaf and asked some people about the elections.
Mr. Thual ( age 18) said: "I and my whole family will participate in the elections. It is our country and it is our duty to build it and keep it. If we slack then who will build or protect Iraq? I believe the elections will be successful and turnout will be big."
Mr. Abed Azuhra said: "I will participate in the elections because they are free and fair. Then we asked, "How do you know they are fee and fair?" His answer:"I have seen the previous elections, they were mandatory, with only existing government officials on the ballot and only one president 'Saddam.' The baathists cut our rations if we did not vote. There has been a fundamental change in Iraqi government, this government is for the people. This government invites and asks us to vote they do not threaten us. I wish the security situation were better. But it will not stop me from voting."
Mr. Jaafar said: "This election will decide Iraq’s destiny. The elections are an important step toward safety, stability and Iraq’s complete sovereignty. Voting is a civic requirement, elections insure the rights of citizens, guards their unity and ends occupation (by its own or outside governments). We will all participate, women and men."
Abed Al-Sabbag said: "The most important thing now are the elections. They are the only avenue to the solution of the problems of appointees. The terrorists and naysayers, first said that the Iraqi interim government under Bremer was illegitimate because the coalition forces picked it out. Then they rejected the interim government selected by U.N. as being illegitimate, (even though the naysayers asked the U.N. to pick the government). So let us see what they will say after the elections. I am sure they will find something. The terrorists and naysayers do not want to give up power. The days of taking power by force are gone."
You won't see their comments in the mainstream news. All you will get is Kofi Annan huffing and puffing about Fallujah and postponing the election. And on NPR this morning not a single person they interviewed in Iraq was positive about the Allawi government or the attack on Fallujah; and all complained bitterly about the violence that they felt was caused by the Americans.
How does the mainstream media always manage to find people adamantly opposed to what the U.S. is doing and noone who thinks it is the right thing? At least the report above from an Iraqi newspaper shows that there ARE Iraqis who believe that democracy is worth the sacrifice. I wonder if we do?
UPDATE: Here's a rundown on media coverage on the Battle for Fallujah so far. Fair and Balanced? You decide. (via Instapundit) And while you're at it, be sure to read THIS--a marvelous question that the Left should be asking themselves (but won't, I fear).
For the first time in Iraq’s modern history, Iraqis are taking interest in their country's election. Iraqis have heard and read about free and fair elections in other countries and now they stand at the doors of their own election.
We visited the streets of Najaf and asked some people about the elections.
Mr. Thual ( age 18) said: "I and my whole family will participate in the elections. It is our country and it is our duty to build it and keep it. If we slack then who will build or protect Iraq? I believe the elections will be successful and turnout will be big."
Mr. Abed Azuhra said: "I will participate in the elections because they are free and fair. Then we asked, "How do you know they are fee and fair?" His answer:"I have seen the previous elections, they were mandatory, with only existing government officials on the ballot and only one president 'Saddam.' The baathists cut our rations if we did not vote. There has been a fundamental change in Iraqi government, this government is for the people. This government invites and asks us to vote they do not threaten us. I wish the security situation were better. But it will not stop me from voting."
Mr. Jaafar said: "This election will decide Iraq’s destiny. The elections are an important step toward safety, stability and Iraq’s complete sovereignty. Voting is a civic requirement, elections insure the rights of citizens, guards their unity and ends occupation (by its own or outside governments). We will all participate, women and men."
Abed Al-Sabbag said: "The most important thing now are the elections. They are the only avenue to the solution of the problems of appointees. The terrorists and naysayers, first said that the Iraqi interim government under Bremer was illegitimate because the coalition forces picked it out. Then they rejected the interim government selected by U.N. as being illegitimate, (even though the naysayers asked the U.N. to pick the government). So let us see what they will say after the elections. I am sure they will find something. The terrorists and naysayers do not want to give up power. The days of taking power by force are gone."
You won't see their comments in the mainstream news. All you will get is Kofi Annan huffing and puffing about Fallujah and postponing the election. And on NPR this morning not a single person they interviewed in Iraq was positive about the Allawi government or the attack on Fallujah; and all complained bitterly about the violence that they felt was caused by the Americans.
How does the mainstream media always manage to find people adamantly opposed to what the U.S. is doing and noone who thinks it is the right thing? At least the report above from an Iraqi newspaper shows that there ARE Iraqis who believe that democracy is worth the sacrifice. I wonder if we do?
UPDATE: Here's a rundown on media coverage on the Battle for Fallujah so far. Fair and Balanced? You decide. (via Instapundit) And while you're at it, be sure to read THIS--a marvelous question that the Left should be asking themselves (but won't, I fear).
Monday, November 08, 2004
Ha Ha Ha Ha !
Here's how the Left consoles itself when they LOSE BIGTIME:
- They claim that everyone who didn't vote their way is stupid.
- They claim that anyone who didn't vote for Kerry is a "redneck"
- They claim MEDIA BIAS!
- They claim that Republicans are better at "playing dirty"
- They claim that they are morally and intellectually superior.
- They claim that the U.S. is mentally handicapped and draw cute and simultaneously disgusting cartoons
- They claim that the U.S. is "Jesusland"
This list could go on and on documenting all the bizarre and psychologically naiive(at best) and pathological (at worse) responses to the fact that President Bush won reelection with a majority of the popular vote. They insult, demean, and stereotype and threaten 51% of the population of this country and expect that anyone with any brains would listen to them? Now that's intellectual arrogance.
This all brings to my mind a scene from Star Trek: Wrath of Khan. Remember when Captain Kirk surprised Khan by surviving one of his many plans to kill him? Like Kirk, I'm laughing at the superior intellect.... LOL, LMAO & LMFAO.
Arafat Burial Post Reprinted
My post "Arafat Burial Suggestion" has been reprinted in Israel Insider, a daily online newsmagazine. You can find it here. I've received lots of email from Israelis who like the suggestion. Typical is this one:
"I think your suggestion demonstrates resourcefullness, creativity and is highly appropriate.Just tell me where and when." E.A. , from Netanya, Israel
Another email asked me why I focused on that one particular death that Arafat was responsible for, and I have to admit that it was the horrible murder of Leon Klinghoffer that first made me aware of Islamic terrorism and the insanity of those who wanted to destroy Israel (and were using the Palestinian situation as their excuse). Mr. Klinghoffer was not the first to be murdered (remember the Munich Olympic games of 1972?) Like most others in the world, I assumed these events were just brief detours into abnormal, savage, subhuman behavior....I was wrong. Yasser Arafat made it his life's mission to encourage other psychopaths like himself, until their insane worldview became the official Palestinian perspective.
Anyway, if you missed the post first time around, check it out at the above links.
"I think your suggestion demonstrates resourcefullness, creativity and is highly appropriate.Just tell me where and when." E.A. , from Netanya, Israel
Another email asked me why I focused on that one particular death that Arafat was responsible for, and I have to admit that it was the horrible murder of Leon Klinghoffer that first made me aware of Islamic terrorism and the insanity of those who wanted to destroy Israel (and were using the Palestinian situation as their excuse). Mr. Klinghoffer was not the first to be murdered (remember the Munich Olympic games of 1972?) Like most others in the world, I assumed these events were just brief detours into abnormal, savage, subhuman behavior....I was wrong. Yasser Arafat made it his life's mission to encourage other psychopaths like himself, until their insane worldview became the official Palestinian perspective.
Anyway, if you missed the post first time around, check it out at the above links.
My Predictive Powers !
Was I prescient, or what?
I wish I could take credit for extrasensory powers, but these predictions were really pretty obvious! Nevertheless, here are predictions I made in the immediate aftermath of the election with links to stories showing they were generally right on:
1. This is the most dangerous time for the safety of the President. There will be a lot of rageful and vengeful leftists, who will delusionally believe that they were robbed of an election and might--with the right encouragement form many forces in American life--be tempted to harm Bush. The Secret Service should increase their vigilance at this time and for the next several weeks until emotions calm down. (LINK) UPDATE: via LGF- NY TIMES wants an "act of God" to remove Bush--unbelievable!
2. Because John Kerry did not bring them to a victory, once he concedes defeat, the mainstream media will go after him in a flash. All those stories questioning his military discharge and actions after the Vietnam war will finally be investigated and the truth will come out. (LINK, LINK,
3. Michael Moore, and various Hollywood celebrities will make a big deal about their emigration to someplace (probably France) in Europe. (this is good). They have been wanting to do it anyway, and this latest example of American perfidy will be just the excuse they need. (LINK, LINK,
4. Thoughtful Liberals (yes, there are such people) will begin to really look at their premises and begin to think about why they supported Kerry and the Democrats (as Wretchard suggests), but the majority of the Left will only dig themselves deeper into the "hatred of America "meme, convinced that they are right and the rest of the country is composed of morons and rubes; and they become even more vicious and intolerant of anyone who disagrees with them--possibly even violent. (LINK, LINK, LINK)
5. As above, there will be considerable "acting out" by the toddlers and adolescents of the Left. (LINK, LINK, LINK
6. That frisson of fear Osama bin Laden has been feeling for several years will expand into full-blown anxiety as he realizes he has badly misjudged America and Americans. (I believe this is true, but obviously no evidence yet--except his silence. I reserve the right to go back to thinking he's dead)
6. Now that the word "marriage" had been redeemed by Americans tired of language being stripped of all meaning, there will be a new tolerance and acceptance of gay "civil unions". (We'll have to wait on this one, but watch to see what the individual states decide to do over the next year. I do not believe that Gay Marriage is the "civil rights movement" of this century--that denigrates the concept of civil rights, as far as I am concerned. It would be like saying that "separate bathrooms for transsexuals" is a civil rights movement. It is my belief that both issues are issues that should be left to states and below for managing and that the federal government has better things to do.)
7. Europeans will be mystified at the reelection of George Bush and chalk it up to the fact that Americans are hopelessly uncivilized and remarkably stupid. (LINK, LINK and there are so many other links documenting the world's malaise, I'll leave you to find them!)
I wish I could take credit for extrasensory powers, but these predictions were really pretty obvious! Nevertheless, here are predictions I made in the immediate aftermath of the election with links to stories showing they were generally right on:
1. This is the most dangerous time for the safety of the President. There will be a lot of rageful and vengeful leftists, who will delusionally believe that they were robbed of an election and might--with the right encouragement form many forces in American life--be tempted to harm Bush. The Secret Service should increase their vigilance at this time and for the next several weeks until emotions calm down. (LINK) UPDATE: via LGF- NY TIMES wants an "act of God" to remove Bush--unbelievable!
2. Because John Kerry did not bring them to a victory, once he concedes defeat, the mainstream media will go after him in a flash. All those stories questioning his military discharge and actions after the Vietnam war will finally be investigated and the truth will come out. (LINK, LINK,
3. Michael Moore, and various Hollywood celebrities will make a big deal about their emigration to someplace (probably France) in Europe. (this is good). They have been wanting to do it anyway, and this latest example of American perfidy will be just the excuse they need. (LINK, LINK,
4. Thoughtful Liberals (yes, there are such people) will begin to really look at their premises and begin to think about why they supported Kerry and the Democrats (as Wretchard suggests), but the majority of the Left will only dig themselves deeper into the "hatred of America "meme, convinced that they are right and the rest of the country is composed of morons and rubes; and they become even more vicious and intolerant of anyone who disagrees with them--possibly even violent. (LINK, LINK, LINK)
5. As above, there will be considerable "acting out" by the toddlers and adolescents of the Left. (LINK, LINK, LINK
6. That frisson of fear Osama bin Laden has been feeling for several years will expand into full-blown anxiety as he realizes he has badly misjudged America and Americans. (I believe this is true, but obviously no evidence yet--except his silence. I reserve the right to go back to thinking he's dead)
6. Now that the word "marriage" had been redeemed by Americans tired of language being stripped of all meaning, there will be a new tolerance and acceptance of gay "civil unions". (We'll have to wait on this one, but watch to see what the individual states decide to do over the next year. I do not believe that Gay Marriage is the "civil rights movement" of this century--that denigrates the concept of civil rights, as far as I am concerned. It would be like saying that "separate bathrooms for transsexuals" is a civil rights movement. It is my belief that both issues are issues that should be left to states and below for managing and that the federal government has better things to do.)
7. Europeans will be mystified at the reelection of George Bush and chalk it up to the fact that Americans are hopelessly uncivilized and remarkably stupid. (LINK, LINK and there are so many other links documenting the world's malaise, I'll leave you to find them!)
Blogging Soldiers
Beautiful Atrocities has links to all the U.S. military personnel in Iraq who are blogging. I recommend you take a look at the news from their perspective sometime. (hat tip: LGF)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)