NOT ANCHORED TO REALITY

In his article today, "The Left Promotes Assertions That Turn Out To Be False" , John Leo discovers a fundamental fact about the left's postmodern rhetoric: it is aggressive rehtoric in the absence of cognition.

But bitter surmise isn't proof. And according to a long and detailed analysis on Salon.com -- no hotbed of Republican thought -- the evidence Kennedy cites isn't new, and his argument is filled with distortions and the deliberate omission of key data.

Why would Kennedy damage his credibility this way? This may not be breaking news, but if an assertion reflects a widely shared emotion, it can make great headway in this culture without any need to prove its truth. We have been through this many times. The 2000 election was allegedly stolen, though no credible investigation backed up the claim, not even the one by the Civil Rights Commission, which was then firmly in Democratic hands.

The Katrina theory that blacks died because of racism wasn't true, but it fit both the emotions and the beliefs of the political and media establishments. The Duke rape case also unfolded along the lines of conventional liberal beliefs about privileged whites and allegedly dumb jocks. The leadership at Duke should be ashamed. As the facts emerge, ever so slowly, it is becoming apparent that the prosecutor should be disciplined for his shocking behavior.

Assertion doesn't always beat facts, but it happens a lot.

Indeed it happens far too much. Let us take such an assertion promoted by the left that is currently making the rounds, and observe how it is quickly becoming an undisputed fact --without the necessity of demonstrating any evidence, rational argument, or even the slightest suspension of judgement until those facts are in.

The allegations of a massacre of innocents by Marines in Haditha are now being discussed on the left as if no reasonable person could believe the accusations false.

Juan Cole, for example, in parading some newly surfaced accusations against the US-- specifically that Zarqawi was beaten by Americans before his ignomonious death-- makes this statement:

This story is implausible, but may gain purchase in the Arab world after the Haditha massacre and the news that Guantanamo prisoners were found hanged. (emphasis mine)

There you have it. Just automatically inserted into a sentence as a matter of "fact". And even worse, the "massacre" (not even alleged) is cited to explain why people might naturally think of Zarqawi as just another "victim" of the US; and because of Haditha, all and any outrageous accusations made against Americans would be automatically believed.

Well, he should know.

Do you begin to understand why we keep hearing the same assertions over and over again by the left--long after they have been conclusively disproved or the distortions and errors "regretted"? They have fully and completely swallowed and metabolized the lies they have propagated, and no amount of evidence--even their own contrary assertions, previous statements, and counter-rhetorical ploys--is capable of making them see what is true anymore.

Truth is only a matter of what is felt; language does not connect to reality; and cognition is irrelevant. In the artificial world the left is busy creating, only their feelings are real.

It is important to realize that this rhetorical strategy that Leo excellently exposes in his editorial is being used to drive the left's politics, which are characterized by an incredible disregard for truth or even consistency in argument.

For example, it has in abeen repeatedly asserted in the most sneering and sarcastic manner, that since the US has been unable to capture or kill either OBL or Zarqawi, it somehow "proves" that Iraq is a quagmire and the US cannot possibly win. Now, listen to left. With one voice practically, they now claim that killing Zarqawi means nothing; that his role was overinflated by the US to begin with etc. etc.

Like the frankly paranoid individual, the death of Zarqawi is interpreted only in a manner that can best foward and give them reason to continue to believe their own delusions. Here are a few of the most common ones:
-Zarqawi never really existed to begin with, the US just made him up as a foil to delude Americans
-the timing of the death is obviously intended to redirect attention away from the Haditha "massacre"
-Killing Zarqawi will only make things worse in Iraq
-America is evil for killing Zarqawi in the manner they did (either it was "illegal", proof of American terrorism, or further evidence of how sick our society is

I could go on, but I find these attitudes disturbingly perverted. And I deal every day with people who are fast and loose with the truth and have little association with the real world.

Most reasonable people can appreciate the fact that the war on terror is not over because one important terrorist is dead; and yet still be able to see the killing of that particular thug as a major victory in that war.

What we see in the current Haditha meme that they have taken in as absollute truth is yet another of their delusions being carefully nurtured. Haditha merely confirms their belief that anyone in the US military is a savage oppressor.

If the Marines are cleared of wrongdoing in Haditha, it will not matter to them. They can feed their delusions a thousand different ways (e.g., "cover-up", "the military is lying" etc. etc.). Truth is irrelevant. The rhetoric will stay the same since it is not anchored to reality to begin with.

And, assertions that turn out to be false can merely be recycled later on when things die down to obtain additional political mileage from them.

CARNIVAL OF THE INSANITIES ***Zarqawi Death Extravaganza***

Time for the weekly insanity update, where the insane, the bizarre, the ridiculous, and the completely absurd are highlighted for all to see!

***This week the Carnival's focus is on the innumerable insanities that sprouted up all over the blogsphere in response to the well-earned, richly deserved death of Al Qaeda's own Prince of Operations -- Musab al-Zarqawi.

It was actually this obnoxious op-ed piece that inspired me to dedicate this week's Carnival to exhibiting some some completely unrestrained JOY and intolerant mocking to celebrate the occasion. While it is certainly an example of "gung-ho" coverage, with an excess of "marked enthusiasm, verging on inappropriate glee"; what the hey! It's passionate, and the left certainly should be able to appreciate that!

If you sent in a link on a different subject, I will try to use them in the next Carnival.

Send all entries for next week's carnival to Dr. Sanity by 8 pm ET on Saturday for Sunday's Carnival. Only one post entry weekly per blogger, please. Thanks for all the submissions. I try to use as many as possible! SO MANY INSANITIES! SO LITTLE TIME!!!

1. A dramatic comedown. I'd say so.

2. The press suspect "foul" play . I think it was clearly a "strike". He's out anyway.

3. Wow, it really is all about the oil !!

4. Iraqi "minutemen" have lost a dear leader.

5. Reaction of the confused and always compassionate: ""I woke up this morning and learned my country had dropped a bomb on someone's head...."

6. Reaction of fellow thugs and psychopaths.

7. Sports announcers give a play by play !

8. A victim of Bush tax cuts?

9. "You think I didn't see this martyrdom goatshit coming?" Guest blogger commentary.

10. The exclusive interview!

11. Rumors of his death were pretty accurate as it turns out!

12. Rest in Pig. Rot in Hell. Whichever.

13. His death is sorta good, but, but, but, but, but, but....

14. It's a win win win win situation !

15. Some question the timing. I think it was perfect.

16. Satan and Zarqawi sittin' in a tree....

17. Forget Zarqawi, here's the really BIG news.

18. Personally, I think it would be unethical not to celebrate.

19. If there is a terrorist heaven....

20. Trouble in Paradise ! Virgins? What virgins?

21. Praise the Lord, pass the ammunition, and lob over the porn …

22. Zarqawi - dumber than dirt dust?

23. Smoked and Eliminated.

24. This is THE END (a remix)

Carnival of the Insanities can also be found at The Truth Laid Bear's ÜberCarnival and at the BlogCarnival.

***************************************

If you would like to Join the insanity, and add the Carnival of the Insanities button to your sidebar (clicking on it will always take you to the latest update of the Carnival), click on "Word of Blog" below the button to obtain the html code:

Heard the Word of Blog?

SOCCER CAN BE HEAVEN OR HELL, ACTUALLY

Well, this clinches it. If it's up to an Islamic cleric, I'm going to hell.

But, if they don't play soccer (or baseball, for that matter) in heaven, why would anyone want to take up residence there?

If you aren't watching the FIFA World Cup games (the first US game is on Monday) you are really missing something great. Trinidad-Tobago in its first ever World Cup game were heavily favored to lose bigtime to Sweden. But they didn't, they tied 0-0; and the goalkeeper was the star of the game.

Did I mention that the Boo is an outstanding goalkeeper? It's the same position I played when I was in college and semi-pro during med school.

AGENDA-DRIVEN NEWS "REGRETS" ERRORS IN REPORTING ABOUT HADITHA

This is extremely disturbing: even worse than the Rathergate debacle or the other trumped-up charges by leftist liars in the service of their anti-Bush, anti-American, anti-military; anti-capitalistic agenda. Here is the link to Sweetness and Light, who is looking into this, and who posts a series of corrections now being run by Time Magazine about the original story.

It seems they got a few of their facts wrong, and "regret the error(s)". I'll bet they do. It makes any reasonable person wonder about the veracity of the original story's claims.

In other words, is this just another "fake, but accurate" media event, designed to manipulate people into the "correct" mindset about the U.S. military? We all know that the left wants us to believe that our military are no better--and even much worse-- than the terrorists we fight.

I have witheld judgement about Haditha while all the facts were investigated, because in this country we hold people innocent until proven guilty; and NOT innocent until accused. I will withold final judgement about this; but my psychiatric instincts are tingling--primarily because the same kind of projection and paranoia that motivated the principals in the TANG memo case; in the Plame case; and in the dozens of other hyperbolic and histrionic news articles since; could very well be behind this one.

They all have the same underlying goal: to undermine America.

There is no question that the more despicable members of the left would willingly lie, distort, and manipulate to further their totalitarian agenda. We have seen this kind of manipulation by the press in their coverage of the Palestinians, who are regularly given a pass by the gullible leftist newsmedia when they stage the news; and whose suicide bombings that deliberately murder innocents are given moral equivalence to Israel's targeting of specific terrorists.

Let's face the truth. By and large, the News media desperately want Bush to fail; they want the military to fail-- in Iraq and everywhere; and they desperately want America to be brought to its knees.

And, when I talk about projection and paranoia--here is perfect example of how the left dismisses anything (even the implications of the "regrettable" Time errors) in their rush to assuming the worse.

The kerning of Haditha

Wow. These people are desperate.
The sum and substance of this thumbnail sketch on the Haditha claims is that it follows so closely the template for the TANG and Plame stories. Take a reporter with an anti-Administration agenda, an interested group (think of the Mashhadanis as the VIPS in the Plame case or Burkett and Lucy Ramirez in the TANG case) and a story too good to be checked and circumstances where the people attacked are limited in what they can quickly respond to and you get a story which smells to me like it will soon be unraveled.

Of course, they fail to mention that Bush did skip out on his TANG obligation regardless of the memo, an indictment was handed down against Scooter Libby and soon to be others, and the Pentagon does seem to believe Marines went wild at Haditha.

For the Right Wing, every scandal has a grassy knoll conspiracy theory.

Two points: first, this is the usual leftist BS regarding the TANG issue; still claiming the "fake, but accurate" meme and insisting that Bush skipped out on his ANG service, despite the fact that this has been disproved repeatedly. The author also conveniently "forgets" that the Libby indictment is NOT for outing madame Plame; and he seems to mysteriously "know" that indictments will soon be coming down against others. Apparently, not only does this blogger have inside information about Fitzgerald's case; he has inside information about what the Pentagon happens to believe--even as they are carefully investigating the Haditha allegations.! Truly amazing!

Second, this blogger is aware of all the same information that I am about Haditha, yet he is willing to not only assume the worse about the US and its military forces; he actually glories in the possibility. How else could one interpret his automatic assumption of guilt on the part of the Marines in Haditha; and his flippant remarks about their alleged behavior?

I suppose I can be accused of being willing to wait until all the facts are in (again, this is called "presuming innocence until proven guilty" in our society). I am hardly "desperate" to see the Marines exonerated; but a great case can be made that Tbogg--and others like him--are desperate to see the Marines convicted (even before the facts are out) because it will "prove" to them that their beliefs --about Bush, the military, and America--are justified.

The only thing I am "desperate" for in Haditha is justice. Justice for the victims who were killed, and justice for the Marines who are accused. If any Marines are found guilty of committing atrocities, then I will be among the loudest demanding their punishment.

Because, you see, I believe in the American values of truth and justice; and in the fundamental morality of our military personnel and their mission; and I will always stand against those who willfully debase those values--whether they are individuals within the military who behave unconscionably; or whether they are "somewhat popular" bloggers who allow their BDS overcome any good sense they might possess.

UPDATE: AJ Strata uncovers more details as the Time Haditha story unravels;

THE COUNCIL HAS SPOKEN !

This week's winners in the Watcher's Council are now posted at the Watcher of Weasels . Every week the Council nominates posts from the blogs of the Council members, and posts from around the blogsphere. The Council then votes to select the "Best" of all these posts.

BEST COUNCIL POSTS:

First Place

Abolish the "N" Word ShrinkWrapped

Second Place (a three-way tie!)

A Word About Courage Right Wing Nut House

The Influence of Immigrants on American Political Thought The Glittering Eye

There Is Something About the Danes Gates of Vienna

BEST NON-COUNCIL POSTS:

First Place

Why Does the Unhinged Left So Hate Jeff Goldstein? Ace of Spades HQ

Second Place

Selected Quotes Do Not a Reasoned Argument Make Villainous Company

Be sure to check out all the winners at the Watcher's Site! Great weekend reading.

BREAKING NEWS !

Well, sort of.... The inimitible Scott Ott is on the story:

DEMOCRATS VOW TO FIGHT ON AFTER ZARQAWI LOSS

(2006-06-09) — As Blackberry devices and cell phones on Capitol Hill hummed with news of the death of terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi yesterday, Congressional Democrats vowed that despite the loss they would fight on in “the war on the war on terror.”

"The war on the war on terror." That is so perfect.

Read it all because it is extremely funny; and sadly for this country, it is also a direct hit on the "patriotic" Democrats--whose definition of patriotism is reflexly opportunistic and mostly dedicated to tearing down this country for personal advantage.

I have to admit that Democrats are not the only party that is guilty of this behavior; but they have the distinction of being the only party that is determined to lose any war the U.S. is involved in, particularly if they are not the majority party.

Many seem completely incapable of appreciating this simple fact:

What matters at least as much as the killing of al-Qaeda top terrorist Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Iraq is that we, in America, appreciate it for the important battlefield victory it truly is.

Dubbed "the prince of al-Qaeda" by Osama bin Laden, Zarqawi was the apparently invincible face of a campaign of hideous carnage in Iraq - a barrage of kidnappings, shootings, bombings, assassinations and beheadings. He had carried this bloodshed over into his native Jordan and threatened to expand well beyond.

Part of the battle against such enemies is simply to reduce them in the public imagination to mortal scale. It was a smart move when the U.S. military a few weeks ago released video footage ridiculing Zarqawi as a pudgy thug who did not know how to handle a gun. It is a much greater leap that, thanks to a combination of Iraqi intelligence and U.S. military forces, he has now been killed, along with seven of his aides, in an air strike Wednesday on a house where they were hiding north of Baghdad.

But that's the modern Democrat for you--always willing to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory ("the Murtha Option").

UPDATE: More truth satire over at Instapunk (hat tip: Ray)

GETTING MILEAGE FROM DOOM & GLOOM

I was thinking the other day about the fact that Americans seem to assume that their energy should always be cheap--that they are, in fact, entitled to cheap energy. The precipitating factor that started this line of thinking--an article on AOL, that asks, "Who Do You Blame?" for the high oil prices; and also that suggests that gasoline prices are going to jump this summer (what else is new?).

The choices on who to blame are listed in the following order:
-The Bush administration
-Gas stations
-Congress
-Oil companies
-No one
-Other

I notice that "Yourself" isn't one of the choices. Nor, for that matter is "The Iraq War", "The Oil Cartels", "The Lack of Oil Refining Capability in the US" etc. etc.

Somehow, the outrage about oil prices just seems to me to be completely overblown.

Why do I say that? Because, if gas is so dang important to a person--such that their entire lifestyle depends on it--then shouldn't they be willing to pay whatever is necessary to be able to get it? I mean, if you can't cut back and decrease your driving and gasoline is ABSOLUTELY ESSENTIAL for your work or whatever, then it should take a priority position in your budget, don't you think? Over, say cigarettes? Or, those fashion jeans you just bought for $185? Or the tennis club membership?

Of course, you don't have to like paying high prices, and it would be nice if the prices were lower--but, nevertheless, each person must gauge how important the issue is for them and their particular lifestyle. And if they aren't willing to cut back when the price is high, then they don't have much to complain about (hah!).

In the course of a day, I happen to see numerous houses where I live--all of which are completely out of my price range. My husband and I bought a modest house (which I like very much) that fits in with our budget. If we hadn't moved to Ann Arbor, we would still be in Texas where housing prices are about one third the price here; but my husband wanted the job he was offered here, so we bit the bullet; adjusted our budget; and every month now, a higher percentage of our income goes to pay the mortgage on the house. The driving distance to work was a big factor in our decision, I must say.

That was our choice.

The cars we drive are also our choice. The distance we drive to work each day is another.

Interestingly, life is filled with choices like this. If we had a variable rate mortgage and the interest rate suddenly went up, we'd have to find a way to pay it--or we'd change our lifestyle and move to a cheaper house. Or, if we couldn't afford the gas or air conditioning bill on the house.

You generally don't find daily news articles whipping up hysteria about the prices of housing (occasionally, but not daily). Most people seem to understand that there are certain financial consequences that are attendant on owning a house.

But somehow when it comes to owning a car, people expect that the energy to drive that car should be inexpensive and always affordable so that they don't have to adapt or change any aspect of their lifestyle. The market, it seems, should adapt to solely to their personal desires and wishes.

They are often aided and abetted in this sense of entitlement by the MSM; as well as pandering politicians at all levels and on both sides of the political spectrum, who hope to get extra political milage from fueling the sense of entitlement. Big Oil is always to blame; or the greedy gas station owners; or the failure of government to regulate these things. And don't forget the evil US auto manufacturers who keep making big cars with low gas milage (because those are what people like to buy perhaps?).

All in all, there is a lot more mileage derived from doom and gloom and the histrionic blame game (if only we could harness that energy!) than from confronting the inconvenient truth that there are always going to be consequences from the choices we make in life.

As adults, we tend to buffer the bad choices that little children often make; hoping that as they grow and mature, they will have started making good choices and have the character to take responsibility for the bad ones.

Unfortunately, many adults seem to think that their own bad choices should be buffered, and that this is the proper role of government. One of the ways the government does this is to regulate prices and other aspects of the free market, and thus, artificially separate the consumer from the consequences of his or her behavior. Like a bad parent, the government is always there to bail you out, no matter what kind of trouble you get yourself into. To them you will always be the five-year-old child who makes bad decisions and needs their help.

Some people seem to feel this is a good thing.

The free market provides people with what they want -- and are willing to spend money on. It is each individual's responsibility to decide what they need--and can afford--and act accordingly.

For some strange reason, the free market doesn't automatically adapt to everyone's wishful thinking, childish fantasies, or grandiose sense of entitlement; it tends to responds to actual human behavior in the real world.

WHERE HAVE ALL THE INVESTIGATIVE REPORTERS GONE ?

Captain Ed posted an important piece the other day that may have got lost in the news about Zarqawi's death (hat tip: The Anchoress). This news complements that about Zarqawi, and should be plastered all over the MSM (but is not).

Joseph Shahda has translated another key text from the archives of captured documents left untranslated by the Pentagon. In this case, Shahda appears to have struck gold: the memo describes not only the disposal of chemical-weapon materials but also where Iraq buried them. The memo dated September 15, 2002, comes from the General Relations group from one of Saddam's military/intelligence organizations, and describes in detail where the chemicals were hidden from UN inspectors (via Power Line)

These documents have generated little or no interest in the MSM. Investigative journalists have no enthusiasm for stories that don't fit their template of Iraq; and have the potential of putting their real enemy (i.e., Bush) in any sort of positive light.

Where have all the investigative reporters gone? {Long time passing?) Except for Claudia Rossett who stayed (and continues to stay) on the UN Oil-for-Food Scandal like white on rice; most of them are curiously uninterested in the kinds of issues that would seem to be very important to a large section of the country.

I'm still waiting for the intrepid reporter who will investigate the entire issue of John Kerry's discharge from the military (you probably don't realize that he never publicly released all his records--particularly those that might explain some curious discrepancies in the timeline of his discharge). Meanwhile, however, there is no shortage of MSM reporter coverage for the likes of Mary Mapes delusional claims about the TANG Memo.

Certain stories never seem to die; while others never see the light of day. Go figure.

F.U. VERY MUCH

Wretchard at The Belmont Club helpfully interprets Malloch Brown's remarks the other day at at a conference sponsored by the Security and Peace Initiative, a joint initiative of the Center for American Progress and The Century Foundation.

Just keep scrolling down. I think the list of speakers at this conference is extremely interesting, particularly the last one (#7). I'm looking forward to the PDF file of his remarks.

Meanwhile, the NY Sun wonders if Brown's comments represent an historical turning point for the U.N. I most certainly hope so.

REACTION ON ZARQAWI'S DEMISE FROM THE REALITY-BASED COMMUNITY

Daily Kos-Who cares?(*Note - this is not a direct quote, so I have added the following, which is, as an update) : "Where is Osama? Where are the batillions of trained Ira)qis? Doesn't matter, we got this guy, right? We wrote a 25 million check as a reward, and get a new headline to bump off Haditha."

Democrats.com - Bring the troops home.

AMERICAblog: "He's been demonized (clearly he was a bad guy) as the central figure in the problems over there so it will be interesting to see the actual impact of his death."

the talking dog - "What a week this has been for the GOP AMERICA! Today's spectacular news is that terrorist leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has been killed in an airstrike north of Baghdad. This was "confirmed" by the Iraqi government, but actual confirmation appears on the Islamist web-site of his "organization", "Al-Qaeda in Iraq". In short, it might actually be true. There is no doubt that this will be the greatest day in the long march toward winning the key battle in Iraq in the global war against swarthy-people's extremism since the fall of Saddam, or the toppling of his statue, or the deaths of Qusay and Uday, or the capture of Saddam, or the battle of Fallujah, or the first election, or the second election, or the naming of al-Maliki.
This comes on top of the defeat of insurgent California school board member Francine Busby in the global struggle taking place in California's 50th Congressional district.
Take that, you dirty jihadists! You've been SERVED! "

The Carpetbagger Report - "One relevant angle to this story, however, that has not been emphasized (or even mentioned) by most news outlets today is that Zarqawi could have been taken out years ago, but Bush decided not to strike."

Democrat Taylor Marsh - "This is a psychological lift, but reality remains terribly grim in Iraq. Al-Zarqawi's killing doesn't dent the insurgency reality."

From an open thread at Eschaton this morning- Al Zarqawi just got blown up. Well I hope they were able to save his pistol. Bush will want that.
That way he can play with it and the Saddam pistol and pretend he's 'Yosemite Sam'!

From a comment thread at Think Progress: "Later today the Bush trolls will flood onto the TP threads calling us all traitors, while they praise Dubya Dunce Decider as a decisive hero in winning the war in Iraq > yep bullcrap!

Democratic Underground - "Don't worry, he's not dead. In a few months, Shrub will wake up in his bed, go into his bathroom, open the shower door and there al-Zarqawi will be. It will all have been a dream."

UPDATE: Here's more:

TAPPED - "TURNING POINT! TURNING POINT! Look, it's great that Zarqawi's dead, and it's certainly too bad the Bush administration chose not to kill him when they had the chance years ago, preferring to keep him alive since it was useful to bolstering the set of deceptions they used to launch a war in which tens of thousands of innocent people have been killed, but let's not kid ourselves here. Zarqawi's importance to the tactical situation in Iraq has always been overstated, and I doubt he has any significance at all to the strategic situation."

Juan Cole - "There is no evidence of operational links between his Salafi Jihadis in Iraq and the real al-Qaeda; it was just a sort of branding that suited everyone, including the US. Official US spokesmen have all along over-estimated his importance. Leaders are significant and not always easily replaced. But Zarqawi has in my view has been less important than local Iraqi leaders and groups. I don't expect the guerrilla war to subside any time soon."

Shakespeare's Sister - "So, while it's no doubt good news that Zarqawi is no more, it's worth remembering that Bush wasn't willing to hit this known al-Qaeda terrorist in a known location based on air-tight intelligence before the war even began.” Indeed.

That’s the way it is with the Bush administration. Every good deed has a shit-streaked lining."

left i on the news - "Zarqawi is dead...in an airstrike on a "terrorist safe house." And the obvious question (obvious to me, but your chances of hearing it in the corporate media are nil) is, "Even if this is true (and I assume it is), how many innocent Iraqis died in the many airstrikes on other alleged "safe houses" in previous attempts to kill Zarqawi (or his associates)?" Attempts like this one (20 dead). Or this one (40 dead). Or this one (11 dead). Or this one (40 dead). And those are just four that happened to be reported and that I wrote about."

Booman Tribute - "Zarqawi's death will have more value for President Bush and his supporters, than it will for anyone else. That's my view of this "event" as of this morning anyway. A major propaganda victory on the home front, but, as with Saddam's capture, not much else. But who knows, this time I might be proven wrong. I'd certainly like to be."

Firedoglake (Taylor Marsh, again) - "During the news conference, General George Casey said al-Zarqawi’s death would not end the insurgency. That’s for sure. It’s pathetic that Casey has to remind everyone that this doesn’t solve our challenges in Iraq, considering how far gone the country is at this point. But with Bush and the administration feeding progress propaganda to us at every turn it’s a point that must be made.

Now we’ll get to see the truth about Murtha’s case regarding insurgents vs al Qaeda types in Iraq. The reality is that it’s going to take a lot more than killing al-Zarqawi to change reality on the ground in Iraq.

Good riddance to al-Zarqawi, especially what he did to Nick Berg. But his death comes so late in Bush’s preemptive war games it’s hard to appreciate it at all."

UPDATE II: Yet more:

From Michael Berg, father of Nick Berg (via STOPtheACLU)- "I have no sense of relief, just sadness that another human being had to die...As the poet John Donne said, any man’s death diminishes me. It doesn’t bring my son back, and this will just bring a new cycle of revenge killings”

John Kerry - Some Democrats renewed pressure on Bush to bring U.S. troops home by the end of the year. "Our troops have done their job in Iraq," said Massachusetts Democratic Sen. John Kerry.

UPDATE III: From another prominent Democrat:

Pete Stark, D (CA) - "This is just to cover Bush's [rear] so he doesn't have to answer for Iraqi civilians being killed by the U.S. military and his own sagging poll numbers. Iraq is still a mess -- get out."

ZARQAWI DEAD ! ***Updated****

Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi has been killed.

This is a good day for the forces of peace and freedom.

Michelle has the updates.



UPDATE: Kos: Who cares?

UPDATE II: (7:35 am EST) President Bush this morning- "Zarqawi has met his end and this violent man will never murder again...America can be enormously proud of its military forces...The difficult and neceassay mission in Iraq continues...Zarqawi's death is a major victory in the GWOT."

UPDATE III: CentCom press release:

“Ladies and Gentlemen, Coalition Forces killed al-Qaida terrorist leader Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi and one of his key lieutenants, spiritual advisor Sheik Abd-Al-Rahman, yesterday, June 7, at 6:15 p.m. in an air strike against an identified, isolated safe house.
“Tips and intelligence from Iraqi senior leaders from his network led forces to al-Zarqawi and some of his associates who were conducting a meeting approximately eight kilometers north of Baqubah when the air strike was launched.
“Iraqi police were first on the scene after the air strike, and elements of Multi-National Division North, arrived shortly thereafter. Coalition Forces were able to identify al-Zarqawi by fingerprint verification, facial recognition and known scars.
Al-Zarqawi and al-Qaida in Iraq have conducted terrorist activities against the Iraqi people for years in attempts to undermine the Iraqi national government and Coalition efforts to rebuild and stabilize Iraq. He is known to be responsible for the deaths of thousands of Iraqis. Al-Zarqawi’s death is a significant blow to al-Qaida and another step toward defeating terrorism in Iraq.
“Although the designated leader of al-Qaida in Iraq is now dead, the terrorist organization still poses a threat as its members will continue to try to terrorize the Iraqi people and destabilize their government as it moves toward stability and prosperity. Iraqi forces, supported by the Coalition, will continue to hunt terrorists that threaten the Iraqi people until terrorism is eradicated in Iraq.”

UPDATE IV: More good news from Iraq.

UPDATE V: One wonders if a certain President of Iran is considering his own mortality??

UPDATE VI: Al Qaeda spin (per Fox News): Zarqawi's death is "joyous news" because he is now in paradise. (I'll post a link when available). My spin: I'll bet he didn't expect "paradise" to be so hot.

FINALLY, RACISM !

James Lileks roots around inside the inchoate and confused thoughts of enlightened world citizens trying to process the Canadian terror arrests--so that an overworked psychiatrist like myself doesn't have to:

Wait a minute: The "terrorists" were Canadian? You can understand someone blowing up trains in Spain and London. They sent troops to an illegal war cooked up by neocons who want to kill brown people for Exxon and Jesus, or something. You can understand, reluctantly, blowing up teens in an Israeli pizza parlor, because the Jews took the West Bank from the sovereign, ancient nation of Palestine. (How can a liberal socialist country behave so poorly? The world is full of mysteries.) But Canada? Isn't Michael Moore from Canada? You can get medical marijuana from married gay doctors in Canada, and no one has guns. You console yourself: Maybe they were really planning to attack the U.S.

You realize the suspects were all Muslim, and you dread the inevitable pogroms. Haven't been any yet, but any day now. You read that a mosque was vandalized in Toronto after the arrest, and you feel a certain grim relief. Finally, racism! Banners. If you're going to have a march, you'll need banners.

Read it all! I'm just humbly grateful that someone else took on the dirty job this time!

PSYCHOLOGICAL ADAPTATION

Throughout my psychiatric career, the primary focus of my research has been on psychological adaptation to extreme environments.

That is why this article intrigued me. In it, Iain Murray considers the question, can we live with global warming?

Yet there are policies that can be adopted by national and regional governments that will have beneficial effects. The precursor to adaptation is resiliency, which gives a society the capacity to adapt. Characteristics of a resilient society include a strong economy, the rule of law, high trust (lack of corruption, confidence in institutions etc) and a lack of regulatory barriers to innovation. A resilient society recognizes that the ingenuity of its citizens is, in Julian Simon's words, its "ultimate resource," not the presence of abundant natural resources, the leadership of a certain class or the teachings of a dead philosopher. The guarantees the citizenry needs to exercise its brilliance constitute the institutions of liberty.

Thus, in the US, where the other institutions are already strong, we can strengthen our adaptive capacity by increasing our freedom to innovate in response to threats such as climate change, whatever its cause. There are many regulatory barriers to innovation in general, and in sectors like energy and transportation in particular.

This may be the first time I have seen a reasonable assessment of how to deal with global warming--if we are truly entering a time of significant climate change--that does not approach the subject with a Gore-like hysteria that wishes to use the issue to forward a draconian ideological agenda. The doom and gloom alarmists on this issue are quick to assign blame and to predict the worst possible outcomes--particularly, it is important to note--if their agenda is not immediately adopted.

The anti-capitalistic, anti-American, anti-human preoccupation is clear; and, as I noted in this post, the entire issue of protecting and defending the earth's environment has been stolen by the political left and is one of the four pillars of modern socialism's strategy to regain their prominence in intellectual and political circles ( following, it is interesting to note, the utterly abysmal record of transgression against the earth, prominent in every socialist and communist dictatorship).

These 20th century socialist failures and the remnants of them that persist into the 21st century (as well as several brand-spanking new variations of the theme currently in South America) have never been able to create wealth for their own people with their flawed ideology. Hence, they claim the "morally superior" highground by stating that all wealth is bad. They therefore appropriate it (since they cannot create it), as well as the techonology that drives it and proceed to drive their economies into the toilet.

Things like economies and environments must be left in the hands of the elite to manage for the good of the people and the planet. For, without this type of management by superior people like Al Gore say; who knows what evils will befall the earth?. In fact, from the leftist environmentalist's perspective, it is all that bad technology and all that wealth--as well as the humans who benefit from it--who are the ones destroying the earth and who must be controlled..

But Al and friends can fix that if they are in power. At least, so they claim.

What Murray suggests in contrast to this recurring leftist vision of a totally controlled economy (for the good of the planet) is to let loose the entrepreneurial spirt--and create more wealth, not less:

...a richer-but-warmer world provided greater benefits than a poorer-but-colder world. The benefits of wealth more than offset the costs or warming, while the climatic benefits of a colder world were more than offset by the costs of starving the world of energy to keep it cold. For example, if nothing is done to reduce temperatures, increasing wealth will drive down the population at risk from water shortage by up to 57 percent. The adaptive approach banks these benefits.

This is of course exactly the opposite of what the ideologues and environmental purists want to do. They see the solution to the problem as CONTROL and MORE CONTROL. That is because their ideology has constricted their vision and limited the capacity of their minds to adapt and consider alternative strategies to deal with the problem. Even if the most draconian of the solutions proposed by the left were to be implemented immediately, there is little or no evidence that they would have any impact at all on climate change. But such measures would undoubtedly negatively impact all of humanity--particularly the poorest and most miserable of this earth.

Those same people, in fact, who the left claims to champion so regularly.

Whatever is causing global warming--and I am not at all convinced that human agency has much of a role--the solution lies in the human ability to psychologically and physically adapt to whatever nature throws at us; and to continue to create wealth and develop technologies that move all of humanity forward.

The anti-human environmentalism of the left, if implemented, will only succeed in leading humans back to the cave.

THIS IS ONE OF THOSE MORNINGS...

Some mornings it doesn't seem like there is anything positive on the horizon. This is one of those mornings. I have wall-to-wall doctor appointments all morning; several major work projects to complete by Friday that I've been putting off; and little or no interest in most of the day's political hysteria and machinations.

So, I am taking most of the day off from blogging today. This evening, I anticipate some quiet time where I will be able to peruse the blogsphere and think about some things; and likely put up a post or two.

Until then...

BATMAN, EAT YOUR HEART OUT !

I really really want one of these things.

GET RID OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION

With regard to this news , ShrinkWrapped has a particularly excellent (all his posts are) piece up today called "Abolish the "N" Word" , in which he clearly delineates the psychodynamics of Black rappers devaluing themselves and all aspects of Black culture; and the parallel unconscious racism of the left which persistently promotes the ongoing victimhood status of Blacks. Nowhere is this more evident, it seems to me, than in the Affirmative Action programs that emphasize victimhood and inferiority. Read it all.

ShrinkWrapped asks,

What happened to the Black community between the Harlem Renaissance and the advent of N.W.A?[note: the hip hop group "Niggaz With Attitude"] Part of what happened was the growth and development of an entire bureaucracy devoted to the ongoing victim status of the American Black. There is no question that on an individual basis many poor Black Americans became materially better off with the Great Society programs, but what they lost was so much more significant. Victims have no dignity and no agency; they are helpless and weak, like children. Worse, the toxic combination of anti-male radical feminism that began to seep into the culture and the growth of the nanny state, had horrendous consequences for the poor Black community; their men were devalued (after all, they were seen as incapable of supporting a family without assistance) and unnecessary. Since a young woman could raise a child (financially) without any input from "her baby's father" (in a locution that has become all too popular), the father's importance in the life of the child was diminished. Boys growing up without fathers have no fully human, three dimensional, role models for becoming men; as a result they have adopted a caricature of manhood which depends on demanding and coercing "respect". The results, stuck at the level of a Shame Culture, have been all too apparent in the destruction of the poor Black family.

People like Bill Cosby, Thomas Sowell and other prominent Blacks within the larger Black community have been trying to get the message out that the time has come for the Black community to stop playing into these victimhood schemes promulgated by the political left--who have a need to feel "virtuous" by championing the "poor, helpless, oppressed" Blacks--and to take back both their culture and responsibility for their own success.

While once the rationale for programs like Affirmative Action seemed reasonable to most people; by now it should be evident that whatever it hoped to accomplish in the beginning, it has since evolved into an ever-growing bureaucracy whose main purpose is to maintain the moral authority of the political left.

Blacks have been stripped of all individuality and reduced to mere members of an oppressed race. And they are also stripped of any individual accountability for either success or failure in life. If they are failures-- it is ascribed to the societal racism and justification that more Affirmative Action is needed; if they are successful-- it is ascribed to the effects of Affirmative Action.

Either result ends up being profoundly destructive to the individual Black person.

Of course, God help them if they succeed without the programs of the left; or if they denouce the programs of the left; or if they join the right. Blacks are not permitted to have individual identity under the strict guidelines of the political left. If they deviate from their script, they are immediately denounced as traitors to their race.

I agree with ShrinkWrapped. Let's get rid of Affirmative Action.

Into The Void

I've been having troubles with Blogger all day and several posts have gone into the void. It seems to be up now, but you never can tell.

CONNECTING THE DOTS VS PARANOIA

Connecting the dots

Paranoia

If you want to understand the nature of today's news media, you should know that the NY Times afforded the latter group a "respectful hearing" and referred to them as "skeptics and scientists."

And this discusses how the media consciously witholds or downplays pertinent information that might help the public connect the dots.

In other words, the MSM would seem to be eagerly-- and almost affectionately-- promoting paranoid conspiracy theories about the Bush Administration and 9/11 (page 1 of the Times Metro section); while simultaneously downplaying and distorting ("a broad strata of society") the Islamist connection.

ALL OR NOTHING; YES OR NO

Theordore Dalrymple discusses whether the quest for a moderate Islam may be futile. Here is an excerpt:

In his new book, Islamic Imperialism: A History, Professor Efraim Karsh does not mince words about Mohammed’s early and (to all those who do not accept the divinity of his inspiration) unscrupulous resort to robbery and violence, or about Islam’s militaristic aspects, or about the link between Islamic tradition and the current wave of fundamentalist violence in the world. The originality of Karsh’s interpretation is its underlying assumption that Islam was, from the very beginning, a pretext for personal and dynastic political ambition, from the razzias against the Meccan caravans and the expulsion of Jewish tribes from Medina, to the siege of Vienna a millennium later in 1529, and Hamas today.
[...]
The urge to domination is nearly a constant of human history. The specific (and baleful) contribution of Islam is that, by attributing sovereignty solely to God, and by pretending in a philosophically primitive way that God’s will is knowable independently of human interpretation, and therefore of human interest and desire—in short by allowing nothing to human as against divine nature—it tries to abolish politics. All compromises become mere truces; there is no virtue in compromise in itself. Thus Islam is inherently an unsettling and dangerous factor in world politics, independently of the actual conduct of many Muslims.

I put the question a little differently in this post: Is Islam compatible with a free society? Yes or No?

Time is not on Islam's side, however. Leaders like the Mullahs and Ahmadinejad in Iran and Hamas in Gaza are acting in ways that will facilitate a confrontation. They foolishly believe that the West will back down--if not because of a belief in the superiority of Islam; then from doubts about the superiority of Western values and from a reluctance to act decisively and ruthlessly.

The psychopathic elements in Islam believe this is our fundamental weakness; but they are wrong. This is actually our fundamental strength. President Bush has bet that Islam can be changed if it is infused with some democratic opportunities and freed from some of the political and religious tyranny that has dominated the Middle East. If such a democratizing process had been started--and carried through-- a decade or two earlier, well who knows how much the situation might have changed by now?

And, contrary to the infantile imaginings of the antiwar and so-called "peace" movements, Bush's strategy--as flawed as it might be-- actually represents the Best Possible Hope For Peace.

It is a strategy that faces the grim reality of Islamic contradictions and historical brutality; yet has enough optimism and goodwill in it to be genuinely worth the price we are paying. If it works, millions of deaths might be prevented. And if the peace crowd really cares about peace, then they would do well to reconsider their own antics.

Because, if the left succeeds in its determination to undermine American policy as it is now formulated; or if the extremists succeed in eliminating any voices for moderation and tolerance; then there will be only one strategic option open.

We have been inching toward "NO" as the answer to the question for quite a while now.

Whether it is appreciated or not, these last few years in Afghanistan and Iraq have indeed been our "Golden Hour" --the short time we have to deal with and defuse the threat that is represented by the radical elements of Islam.

So much of the last three years has been wasted and frittered away by the left with their constant carping about and undermining of Bush's strategic ploy. The continual appeasement, encouragement and cover given to those who would destroy us without mercy, has markedly diluted what we might have accomplished up to now with our aggressive pursuit of the YES Strategy.

As Dalrymple suggests, it may come down to all or nothing for Islam.

The "Golden Hour" has but a few minutes of history left. As the clock ticks down to answering NO to that fundamental strategic question posed by the west; as muslims grapple with modernization--and therefore abandonment of fanatical, utopian, imperialistic dreams of a caliphate; and as the two creep closer and closer to the ultimate confrontation; there will be no deus ex machina --and no pointless protest march with clever placards--that will be able to save the millions of lives lost in the ensuing conflagration.

All the usual leftist nutjobs are already preparing to blame Bush/America if the worse happens. But the saner elements of society will recognize the truth-- that Bush has chosen a strategy and done everything possible to change the course of history.

That the strategy was implemented too far along in the process to be able to wholly succeed; or that the enemy is even more "all or nothing" in its desire to embrace death and destruction than western sensibilities could have possibly predicted-- are two "inconvenient truths" that must be faced.

MENTAL CONSTIPATION

Mental constipation can be defined as a blockage of solid ideological conviction through which reality is completely unable to pass.

We are seeing evidence of this affliction everywhere.

A case in point is the way the MSM is carefully tiptoeing around the fact that all those arrested in the Canada terror plots are...you know...muslims? As Andy McCarthy notes,

Muslims? Plotting Terrorism? You Don't Say ...

Well, no, you most certainly don't say. Not if you're the New York Times and not if your one of its serial imitators in the MSM.

Why don't they say? Because they are victims of mental constipation that has plugged the rational thought processes lest something "insensitive" come out.

Or, how about this nice little piece of impacted crap from Oliver Willis ("like kryptonite to rationality"):

Glenn Reynolds, furthering the agenda of the hard-right yet again, takes pleasure in linking to this bit of “detective work” by Dan Riehl. According to Reynolds and Riehl, media coverage of possible bad acts by the American military is not receiving the same amount of coverage as a terrorist bust in Canada. Proving… well, what exactly? Here’s a guess - the New York Giants get a lot more coverage in America than the Toronto Maple Leafs. The right would like to tactily approve what apparently went down in Haditha by bullying the press into to not covering it - but the fact of the matter is - we don’t make any headway by pulling the same tired “not as bad as Saddam/Al Qaeda/Pol Pot” sliding scale of justice. That’s really not how America works nor is it in the spirit with which our nation was founded. “Be better” is the creed America should continue to stand by… even when the President is a Republican.(emphasis mine)

Now, where do you suppose he got the silly idea that human beings who happen to be American aren't just as capable of committing atrocities as human beings who happen to be any other nationality, race, religion etc? Where did he get the idea that somehow "justice" has been obstructed by America, when the entire affair is under investigation?

What separates America from the barbarians we are fighting is precisely that we believe in the rule of law and that such behavior when it occurs is vile--whether done by a few soldiers wearing American uniforms; or religious fanatics carrying a Koran. The Haditha issue is simply one more example of human depravity in the world. But clearly, it is not depravity sanctioned or encouraged by the American military; the American President; or the American public (either right or left) contrary to the imaginings of the constipated Willis.

Yet there is a depravity that is sanctioned and encouraged by many middle eastern governments and groups--belonging to one religion in particular; but the reality of this simple fact is not able to get through the mass of sensitive, compassionate, anti-American socialist crap that is solidly impacted within the caverns of a mind like Willis'. It is automatically all America's fault to the mentally constipated.

Not only is American justice better than Saddam/Al Qaeda/Pol Pot etc. etc. --it is light years superior to those regimes. Why? Because American values at every level clearly do not support what might have gone down in Haditha. Justice will be done--for both the victims and the accused. And we as Americans [should] consider them innocent until proven guilty.

That, my dear Willis, is how America works and is the spirit with which our nation was founded.

The assumption of "innocent until accused"; or "automatically guilty if American" is a standard by-product of mental constipation--the rather pungent gas, if you will, that is involuntarily and continually emitted by individuals suffering from the disorder.

The slaughter of innocents is NOT --and never has been--sanctioned as a matter of US policy , no matter how hard the mentally blocked left tries to convice themselves it is. It is that mental constipation again. The blockage keeps the hard left from being able to have a normal bowel movement rational thought about America (yet they always give the enemy the benefit of the doubt) because it might interfere with their anit-American; anti-Bush; anti-military anal retentive ideology.

Now, one of my jobs as a psychiatrist is to dig out and bore into the site of the impaction in order to try to clear up the mental plumbing. Only by doing this dirty, and often thankless job, can the rush of reality and truth through the system be restored. But this sort of ideological blockage frequently causes the ego of the sufferer to bloat with self-righteous virtue; while creating the stink of paranoia to issue forth from the mouth; and the massive obstruction frequently re-forms quickly in a sort of self-perpetuating chronic affliction.

It is the old GIGO phenomenon. The left needs to work on changing its unhealthy diet of old, smelly garbage ideas; and begin to metabolize the high fiber of reality if they want to prevent recurrence.

IN DENIAL, Part XXIV

Ace has the roundup of lefty reaction to the massive terror roundup in Canada.

Why is anyone surprised that they have nothing to say?

Just the other day, I dissected out the incredible denial of one of those moonbat hangouts when they flatly stated that the whole point of the war on terror was to "sieze power and steal money"; and that the Bushies were "whipping up national fear and paranoia to a constant boil."

Further, this ass went on boldly to exclaim, "Take your terror and shove it!"

Now, wouldn't you like to have someone like that--a card-carrying member of the "reality-based" community--in charge of your homeland security?

When the people of the reality-biased community get back in control of things,we can all rest assured that Al Qaeda will finally be able to sleep peacefully in their caves at night.

UPDATE: Here's a fundamental difference between the left and the right position on the war on terror:
The left thinks it is unseemly that the right is "whooping it up" because a group of terrorists is caught in Canada before they could act on their terror plans. Meanwhile, the right kind of thinks it is unseemly that the left is overjoyed because Marines might have killed innocent civilians in Iraq.

I'll leave it for you to decide which of these positions is morally repulsive.

CARNIVAL OF THE INSANITIES

Time for the weekly insanity update, where the insane, the bizarre, the ridiculous, and the completely absurd are highlighted for all to see! This has been a week of rare idiocy (as always!). So, if you want to remain sane, the best thing is to poke some fun at the more egregious absurdities.

Send all entries for next week's carnival to Dr. Sanity by 8 pm ET on Saturday for Sunday's Carnival. Only one post entry weekly per blogger, please. Thanks for all the submissions. I try to use as many as possible! SO MANY INSANITIES! SO LITTLE TIME!!!

1. Talk about a WMD! Some will blame Bush, of course.

2. A carbon-intensive lifestyle

3. Why she doesn't put flowers on soldiers' graves.

4. A rescue operation for the birds.

5. Whatever is against our national interests = good policy (per the left, of course)

6. Thinking outside the box in Homeland Security?

7. This is the result when muslims are called on to be "reasonable"?

8. Great moments in Islamic marital bliss. The family that bombed together gets entombed together? This practice gives new depth to the idea of "enabling" terror.

9. The "seven-year itch jihad"? and the "naked city"

10. Married to the..errr...mob? Marriage on the rocks ; and moderate hypocrisy in marriage said to be the best policy.

11. The wonderful world of party drugs; and the wonderful world of antiwar protests !

12. You can be Christian for many years and not know this!

13. How to convert to Judaism contrasted with conversion to Islam.

14. Based on real Hobbit killings?

15. The once and future mush-brain. King Arthur he ain't.

16. Oh joy. Politically correct comic books. And, is Superman a gay icon or a just a clueless father?

17. This is good news for kids...even if some don't like it. Ah well, God gameth and God taketh away.

18. Perhaps there should be a political party for poor, victimized rapists and murderers too? Society doesn't understand them either. Using the "right to privacy" to justify criminal behavior?

19. Alien (really alien) news analysis.

20. When it comes right down to it, whose space is it really?

21. Isn't this sweet?

22. So, these six librarians go into a restaurant....

23. She has a genius for making the trite even more banal.

24. "Oh, meltdown. It's one of those annoying buzzwords. We prefer to call it an unrequested fission surplus."

25. The peppers of insanity! Wouldn't you like to be a pepper, too?

Carnival of the Insanities can also be found at The Truth Laid Bear's ÜberCarnival and at the BlogCarnival.

***************************************
If you would like to Join the insanity, and add the Carnival of the Insanities button to your sidebar (clicking on it will always take you to the latest update of the Carnival), click on "Word of Blog" below the button to obtain the html code:

Heard the Word of Blog?

OH FRABJOUS DAY FOR THE LEFT

`Twas leftoid, and the slimey toves
Did whine and wongle 'bout the war:
Out scrooching were the antiroves,
And the noam chomskies outroar.

"Beware the moonbat left, my son!
They hate the free and strong U.S.
Beware pelosi birds, and shun
The frumious BDS!"

Still, he took his freedom sword in hand:
Long time the brutish foe he fought--
Not all are pure despite demand,
Yet justice will be always sought.

For justice seeks both truth and good,
While moonbat left likes to inflame,
They shiffled through the kerried wood,
And murthad as they played their game.

One, two! One, two! And through and through
The MSM goes snicker-snack!
They want him dead, and with his head
Get their agenda back on track.

"Now this could be the next Mai Lai!
For we don't care who we destroy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!"
They chortled in their joy.

`Twas leftoid, and the slimey toves
Did whine and wongle 'bout the war:
Out scrooching were the antiroves,
And the noam chomskies outroar.


(apologies to Lewis Carroll)
*****************************************




UPDATE: (also updated here) Here's a fundamental difference between the left and the right position on the war on terror:
The left thinks it is unseemly that the right is "whooping it up" because a group of terrorists is caught in Canada before they could act on their terror plans.

Meanwhile, the right kind of thinks it is unseemly that the left is overjoyed because Marines might have killed innocent civilians in Iraq. (Don Surber takes down the NY Times here)

I'll leave it for you to decide which of these positions is morally repulsive.

METAMEDIA

It occurs to me after reading this analysis, that what is needed is a completely separate media whose major task is to cover the MSM in the same manner in which the MSM covers events.

This "metamedia" would thus be tasked with exposing the [linguistic, factual, etc. ]atrocities continually committed by the members of the MSM in their recklessly biased and prejudicial pursuit of news. Reporters of the metamedia would hound the major outlets wherever they deploy; film them obtaining and/or setting up the news; mingling with and dealing with the enemy in Iraq and elsewhere.

Not only that, but the MSM would be analyzed on a daily basis in the op-ed pieces of the metamedia--their real motivations uncovered; their conflicts of interest; their ties to...well, whatever makes a good story.

I am not talking about an "alternative" media (e.g., Pajamas or Hot Air); in the metamedia, the MSM and their activities in the pursuit of news would be the only news 24/7.

Of course, we already have some of the infrastructure and talented personnel for this metamedia within the blogsphere (e.g., Cori Dauber, who performs an invaluable service already). But it needs to be organized into newspapers and 24 hour TV and radio programs. Think of the possibilities....

Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? The metamedia!

UPDATE: Unbelievable.

UPDATE II: Guess which leaders are described today by the Washington Post as "energetic, "caring", and "prominent"?

THE COUNCIL HAS SPOKEN !

This week's winners in the Watcher's Council are now posted at the Watcher of Weasels . Every week the Council nominates posts from the blogs of the Council members, and posts from around the blogsphere. The Council then votes to select the "Best" of all these posts.

BEST COUNCIL POSTS:

First Place

Who Do You Trust With Your Constitution? New World Man

Second Place

The Pope at Auschwitz Joshuapundit

BEST NON-COUNCIL POSTS:

First Place

"Guest Workers" Are Destroying the US MaxedOutMama

Second Place

The "L" Word American Future

Be sure to check out all the winners at the Watcher's Site! Great weekend reading.

DOOM, GLOOM, BLAH BLAH BLAH

The unbelievably negative hype of the amazing US economy continues. Stephen Spruiell calls it "madness":

So just to recap: Unemployment falls. GDP races ahead by 5.3 percent ("some measures") — the fastest growth in 2 1/2 years. Yet the New York Times surveys this landscape and declares, "The sky is falling! Look out!"
[...]
It is likely that the economy will not repeat last quarter's astonishing growth — how long can 5.3 percent expansion be sustained? But looking at the press coverage of today's jobs report, one would be forgiven for thinking that by August, the most difficult decision facing average Americans will be whether to eat Whiskas and Friskies. We're at near-full employment. Is this a problem of unrealistic expectations, or is there some other agenda driving this relentlessly downbeat coverage?

As I noted some months ago, the American public is being subjected to command hallucinations, and these MSM voices keep repeating doom, gloom, blah, blah, blah.

Yes, it is definitely insane AND there definitely is an agenda that is behind those relentlessly negative voices...

Can you figure out what the agenda is?

A CULTURE OF NARCISSISM ?

Jennifer Biddison asks, does Congress itself breed a "culture of corruption"? (hat tip: Betsy)

No one is 100% blameless in Washington, D.C, no matter how much integrity or faith they start out with. Even our congressional heroes have regrets about how they’ve handled situations in the past. So let’s cut out the silly self-righteousness and self-centeredness, prosecute members of both parties who break the law, and get back to debating the issues that the American people really care about.

There is a disorder referred to as "Acquired Situational Narcissism" induced in adulthood by celebrity, wealth, and fame. This disorder seems to "victimize" many of our elected officials; as well as the wealthy, Hollywood or other "super" stars, renowned authors,and other authority figures. The symptoms are the development of grandiose fantasies, inability to empathize with "ordinary" people; and the inevitable narcissistic rage in reaction to a slight--either real or imagined-- of any kind.

...the celebrity's life is abnormal. The adulation is often justified and plentiful, the feedback biased and filtered, the criticism muted and belated, social control either lacking or excessive and vitriolic. Such vicissitudinal existence is not conducive to mental health even in the most balanced person.

If you take someone with a few narcissistic traits to begin with (and what politician doesn't have them?), and put them in a situation where they are adored, worshipped, and make to think (by the adoring and worshipping staff) that they are the center of the universe; and that words from their mouth are the font of all wisdom and knowledge--you would get something similar to the grandstanding meatheads we see every day on our TV screens; who are convinced that the rules that apply to others don't apply to them. That they are "special" and therefore protected from the consequences of their behavior.

If they had any humility or integrity when first elected, it soon evaporates under the conditions of neverending privilege and adoring media exposure. The "dedicated public servant" persona subtly begins to shift from concern about their constituents and their country; to concern about enriching themselves and doing whatever is necessary to get re-elected. This psychological shift in perspective-- more than any other rationale that can be made--convinces me that congressional term limits are an absolute necessity.

It also convinces me that the only people generally worthy of being elected officials are those who would never under any conditions seek, or aspire to public office. Such individuals would be relatively immune from the almost inevitable descent into narcissistic indulgence.

Corruption is defined as an "impairment of integrity, virtue, or moral principle". I'd say that defines the narcissistic culture of congress pretty well.

MORE HYSTERIA

As I was saying in the previous post, the "adults" who make up most of the Democratic Party leadership and their lunatic leftist base, are completely unfit to manage reality because they are too busy having hissy fits that everything isn't perfect.




Meanwhile, Ace absolutely nails the psychology of the left as he discusses why they revile Jeff Goldstein so much (and BTW, you should definitely read the entire post):

Leftism, and liberalism, and progressivism, and etc-ism. are not merely simple politics for most of these people. Their politics to them are a core part of their identity, and, more importantly, a central support propping up their egos. They are enlightened because they believe these things; someone who does not believe these things, and yet who, superficially at least, appears to be about as smart as they might be, represents a threat to their egos. The foundation upon which a crucial structure of their sense of self-worth is undermined if they discover that there may be people who can pass as normal and intelligent and yet do not believe as they do.

If one is smart, then one believes in progressivism.

If one believes in progressivism, then one is smart.

Those are the two assumptions that prop up their sense of self worth, and they are refuted by examples of smart people who don't believe in progressivism.

And because there is a great deal of personal psychological investment in progressivism, they react intemperately to rejections of it. It's not merely a tax cut that's being debated; it's they're very sense of importance that's being attacked. It's not merely gay marriage which is being argued against; it's their value as human beings that is being uncouthly denigrated.

[...]Because there is so much ego involved in the self-definition as progressive, the need for intellectual conformity becomes stultifying.

The truth is that reality itself -- when it is imperfect and/or doesn't conform to their preconceived ideas -- is a slap in the face to this crowd. How dare Jeff Goldstein, a university professor who should know better, think differently from us? How dare bad things happen in a war? How dare the military, including every single individual within it, not be perfect like us?

In fact, (if I may digress from their hatred of Jeff, who doesn't conform to their positive stereotype of the intellectual; to the US servicemen and women who do conform to their negative stereotype of the "warmonger") they long ago dismissed the military and anyone in it as semi-literate, oafish, tools of oppression; whose only purpose is to kill innocents and advance the evil objectives of America (particularly when a Republican is President). Military action is never good enough, fast enough, tidy enough, perfect enough for them.

They are so threatened on such a fundamental level at the idea that the US military could still be a force for good--despite incidents like Abu Ghraib or even Haditha (and we still do not know all the facts about the latter, but justice will be done)--that their reactions to any problem are overblown, histrionic, and completely irrational.

Let me quote from a recent commenter on this post at my blog:

As usual, you are full of shit. Our troops are murderers and our nation is the source of most of the problems of the world. We steal from the poor and give to the rich. I hate America and everything she stands for. If it were up to me, I'd see all its citizens living under sharia. It's what they deserve.

That's all they know, and all they need to know. Aren't they clever?

UPDATE: Scott Ott has some breaking news: Congressman Murtha is going to be offering "core values training" to the insurgents.

THE PSYCHOLOGICALLY DISABLED DEMOCRATS

Here is an interesting psychological analysis of the Democratic Party from an insider who asks what do you do when the entire party needs therapy?

But at least the GOP is engaged in a war over real policy choices. It is an emotional debate, often a hysterical and ill-informed one, but it is a fight among adults who know what they believe in and who have the guts to battle for it. By contrast the Democrats, ostensibly the party poised to exploit this GOP civil war, don't seem to remember what it is like to behave as adults. They resemble nothing so much as ill-adjusted adolescents, afraid of their own shadows, much less the presidency. What are they afraid of? Themselves, essentially: their past, their own left, the populist rhetoric of their leaders (Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Howard Dean, Al Gore), the left-wing loony stigma represented by “Fahrenheit 9/11” filmmaker Michael Moore (every Dem’s favorite bugaboo). Above all they fear seeming and looking soft. They are all afflicted with varying degrees of megalophobia, a fear of assuming power. Even Dr. Melfi of “The Sopranos” wouldn’t take this case.

This psychological disability has been long in the making, of course. When it comes to national security, it has been eating at the heart of the Democratic Party since its biggest debacle, Vietnam, which destroyed the Dems' prideful self-image formed during World War II and the cold-war containment consensus. But never has this Democratic dysfunction been so apparent as now, the moment when the Dems should be striding confidently into the limelight to seize control of the national agenda. And none are more pathetically afflicted than those who purport to be the “new” Democrats, the “strong” ones, the ones who want to “resurrect” the gloried intestinal fortitude and moral fiber of FDR, Harry Truman and JFK. (emphasis mine)

Well, I'm sorry, but I don't concur with the diagnosis; nor the descriptions of the symptoms.

The Democrats are not "adolescents afraid of their own shadow"--they are adolescents who whine and sulk when they don't get their own way. They are not afraid of "seeming and looking soft"--they actually are soft when it comes to defending this country--and they are deathly afraid of taking a stand on any principle because it might cost them votes from their lunatic extremist base. They aren'e megalophobic--they are megalomanic, outraged just like any other megalomaniac at the idea that their precious power has been usurped by the evil interloping Republicans; and determined at all costs to regain it-- no matter how much they hurt this country in the process.

They seem incapable of generating any ideas or alternative strategies on their own; so the best they can do is to tear down those who do. Anyone who becomes suspect of behaving in a mature fashion by dealing with the real world, is automatically purged from their ranks and vilified.

I have said it before, and it bears repeating: the Democratic party and its leftist base have devolved into the party that represents nothing and stands for nothing.

It is no wonder that they have been unable to gain any traction in public support despite seemingly widespread unhappiness and discontent (mostly promulgated, highlighted and incessantly emphasized by their Party) about the present state of affairs in theis country.

Anything good that happens or that is achieved is automatically downplayed, distorted and undermined for fear that the evil Republicans might get credit. Many of the most desperate whose all-consuming goal is to climb the ladder of political power, flirt with-- at best the most outrageous, and at worse the frankly treasonous accusations and deliberate distortions --simply to gain attention and pander to the worse elements in society. This party has willingly incorporated the most extreme and lunatic paranoid fantasies and made them mainstream; and those who voice them are given heroic status.

While exposing an unbelievable psychological naivete, combined with the appropriately politically correct philosophy that encourages "self esteeem" even when the individual has done notheing to earn it; the author of this article suggests that the only thing wrong with the Democrats is that their self-esteem is low; and all they have to do is to "believe" in themselves and they can regain power.

This may work for todlers in kindergarden (actually, it doesn't work long for them either), but it leaves a lot to be desired when applied to supposedly mature adults who are expected to make decisions and lead this country in perilous times.

No, the symptoms of the psychologically disabled Democrats derive from a serious disorder of narcissism. They are focused only on reacquistion of their power; on self-aggrandizement, with concomitant denigration of their enemies--the Republicans. God knows that the Republicans are no saints, but they at least are trying to deal with reality, and the enemies that want to destroy this Republic; they at least are willing to argue ideas and stand up for principles.

The hysterically blind Democrats see no enemy beyond their political opponents. They see no country or Republic worth fighting for if they are not in charge. They abandon principle and what is right in pursuit of ultimate power--and then like delusional individuals everywhere, they project their own inadequacies on the object of their hatred.

Let us not be wishy-washy about the diagnosis: the Democratic Party is rampant with malignant narcissism; burdened with individuals of overweening arrogance and consumed with hatred and rage. This animosity toward their political rivals has colored almost all their activities in the last 6 years and blinded them to anything important. They are suffering from severe paranoia; delusions, and depressive symptoms brought on by believeing the bellicosity of their own rehtoric.

The author concludes with this tidbit:

Democrats must first have the courage to strip bare the GOP’s failures. They must believe they're every bit as good on national security as their rivals. This courage is frankly not in evidence.

While it is true that their courage is not in evidence; even more importantly, the assertion that they are "every bit as good on national security as their rivals" is, without making too much fuss about it, unbelievable and completely ludicrous. It is precisely because of this fantastical ability to delude themselves that their real problem is that they are "too virtuous", "too nice, "reality-based" and "not as mean as those horrible Republicans"-- that they have failed to convince the (laughing) American public that they could do any better than the Republicans; and have gone a long way to convincing them of exactly the opposite.

The Democrats need to do more than "believe" in themselves and wish very very hard with their fingers crossed that they could be as good as Republians on this issue. They actually have to do something to demonstrate it in the real world.

That requires that they cease their delusional thinking and psychotic hatred of the opposition. It requires maturity, rational behavior, and actual ideas that address the realities of the post-9/11 world in a constructive manner (instead of believing the kind of pervasive silliness fisked in this post). It requires putting the country ahead of the Party; and most importantly, it requires dumping the lunatic fringe that has infiltrated and whose ideas pervert everything they once stood for.

Until that time they will remain emotionally immature, psycholgoically disabled, and politically paranoid. And for very good reasons.

ALL IN THE MIND - The First Psychbloggers' Carnival

ALL IN THE MIND -The very first psychbloggers' Carnival, is now posted at OK, So I'm Not Really A Cowboy ! Indianblogger, who manages the site, hopes to make this a regular feature for the psychosphere and is even organizing a TTLB community. Go and check it out. He's a medical student with time on his hands!

My regular feature "Touch and Go" will go on hiatus, because I am hoping that the psychosphere will jump at the chance to have its own carnival, highlighting all the mental health experts now blogging; as well as psychological and psychiatric issues in general.

If you'd like to submit to the next All in the Mind Carnival, go here for instructions.

IMAGINE -- IT ISN'T HARD TO DO...

I've got a busy day today and will be out of the loop until late this afternoon, but be sure to check out Gagdad Bob's collection of The Greatest Liberal Rock Songs over at One Cosmos.

On a more serious (but related note) ShrinkWrapped has started a series on "How To Lose World War IV". Imagine it. It isn't hard to do unfortunately.

TEXAS TWO STEP

Good Great move.

The Iranians could never possibly agree to the pre-condition without believing that they would be losing face--and hence experience shame.

This will infuriate Ahmadinejad. Particularly since a woman has shamed them.

Michael Ledeen wrote about the Ahmadinejad Der Spiegel interview yesterday, and noted this:

The use of “humiliation” tells us a lot about the way the mullahs think about the world; they look at international events as a matter of domination or humiliation, and he hammers away at this theme: “Saying that we should accept the world as it is would mean that...the German people would be humiliated for another 1.000 years. Do you think that is the correct logic?”

Ledeen is right on target. The "logic" of shame cultures is far from rational, but it has its own set of internal rules. As I commented in an earlier piece about Shame and the Arab Psyche:

...one of the ways that those who fear shame protect their fragile self is to subjugate those who he perceives as weaker. By doing so, he can rationalize that he is superior to the subjugated individual. In fact, this is the only way he can maximize his honor.

Ahmadinejad's next step in this dance will be to do something that will bring him back his honor and eliminate the shame. It will not be something nice, like contributing to the Indonesian relief effort, either. He will have to do something to counter the humiliation of being outmaneuvered by Condi Rice.

Anyone in the world who is not yet convinced of the sick irrationality and mental instability of the leaders of this regime, will likely be witness to a demonstration on the part of Ahamdinejad that will remove all doubt.

But that has been part of the Bush Administration's strategy in dealing with Iran--give them enough rope and Ahmadinejad will surely hang himself; and the international community will eventually realize exactly what kind of insanity they are dealing with.