SHAME, HONOR, AND THE CONSEQUENCES OF THE BAKER-HAMILTON REPORT

It doesn't take a psychiatrist to figure out why Iran is ecstatic about the ISG Report recommendation that they be included in discussions about Iraq.

The Captain wonders how many more victories we want to hand the mullahs; and it is essential that we understand the fundamental psychology at play, otherwise we will continue to do exactly that. We are talking about a shame culture here, and Baker-Hamilton have just elevated the international status of the barbaric, totalitarian thugs who run Iran and their psychotic president by acknowledging that they are our "equal"--even suggesting that they are superior in that they can assist us out of a difficult situation.

And, of course, the Democrats, the left, and media all joyfully rush in to reinforce that perception. These segments of American society operate in the manner of a shame culture themselves--whatever humilitates and shames America brings their ideology and its adherents great honor and even joy.

So, is it surprising that in the mullahs eyes, America's tacit surrender in Iraq is a source of honor and status? And with more honor in that culture, comes more arrogance, more swaggering rhetoric and veiled threats; more taunting of the Jews, Israel, and the West; more oppression of its own people, and more flaunting of its nuclear ambitions.

This is exactly the same dynamic going on with North Korea, by the way. And, even there, there are forces of appeasement, surrender, and complete moral idiocy working hard to bring honor to Kim Jung Il and shame to America.

What motivates regimes like Iran and North Korea is the avoidance of shame, and maximization of honor. For them it is is simple elementary psychological math. In such cultures maximizing their honor involves shaming you--or, in the case of the ISG, allowing you to shame yourself publicly and thoroughly. A public display of gratuitous self-flagellation and mea culpas by the U.S. is music to their thuggish soul. They can now offically consider you as weak and inferior. It is only a matter of time until they then proceed toward your complete subjugation. Only by your total humiliation and defeat can their own honor continue to be maximized. Just ask the women in their culture (the ones that are not brainwashed by this cultural dynamic anyway).

By allowing these sick regimes to preen and flout their sense of superiority at the expense of the U.S., the Baker-Hamilton Report has quite possibly proved to the mullahs that there is no one strong enough to stop them now from obtaining (or using) nuclear weapons. It has also further enabled and encouraged them to believe that they can easily wipe us off the map (just as Kruschev wanted to "bury" us) or force us to submit to their religion.

You may be asking yourself, what in God's name (or Allah's perhaps) were Baker- Hamilton and that useless committee thinking?

That is easy to answer also. Like many people in this country at the present time, they were not, in fact, thinking at all. In point of fact, their conscious cognitive processes were outsourced to their unconscious feelings and fears, as they closed their eyes to an unpleasant reality (and I am not talking about Iraq, as unpleasant as the facts on the ground are right now) and retreated mentally from dealing with a post 9/11 world.

In such a state, while in the grip of this profound and near-suicidal psychological denial and projection, they can even pronounce their actions "realism".

LOL.

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. And you might read this before submitting an entry.

Thanks for all the submissions. I try to use as many as possible! SO MANY INSANITIES! SO LITTLE TIME!!!

1. Silly String saves soldiers! American ingenuity at its best! But now, new atrocities uncovered in Iraq--warning:very graphic (hat tip: Larwyn) I'm surprised the MSM hasn't picked this up....

2. The AQISG. Makes about as much sense as the original half-Bakered idea. Here's to bipartisan consensus! Surrender monkeys or the boogie woogie laughing stock of Company B? Just what we need: iterative -izations! Who died and made him king anyway?

3. What sort of mentally challenged persons would begin negotiations with known liars and plunderers?... Oh wait !

4, No Imams were involved. Only farts. Soon we will have Allah's Airport and Allah's Gym.

5. Equal opportunity idiocy in the Islamic world. Never forget that women, too, can be a force for evil.

6. Thank goodness it is only child pornography and not those odious Mohammed cartoons!

7. A launch site for idiots?

8. Sometimes stupid ideas are just....stupid. As is stupid behavior. Is this the most pretentious in all of history?? Wow, impressive.

9. Orc, Oreck, or Orca? What does it matter--It's oppressed!

10. Is anyone actually surprised at this? Don't you know that higher taxes are good for you??

11. THE END has finally arrived. But some never can say goodbye!

12. What the %$#@? With leadership like this, Israel is surely doomed.

13. Uncovered mystery meat crackdown in NYC and uncovered meat crackdown in Gaza.

14. Tired of Tex-Mex? Need more bacon?

15. Is anybody --anybody!--still listening to this loser ? Heh. Even if he has more credibility than the AP ? And speaking of narcissists, here's the ultimate in self-absorbtion...

16. Where's Algore when the solar system really needs him??

17. If Supreme Court justices were rock stars....what a concept!

18. A reason to almost want to visit Cleveland? Absolutely no reason to visit Baltimore--particularly not because of their baseball team....

19. This can't possibly be politically correct, so don't tell any feminists! So, what did Neanderthal women really do all day?

20. A solution to the potential aggravation of gift giving.

21. Uh-oh. The political kiss of death. This guy to always backs losers..(his record is near-perfect)--even if it is the once and future king...

22. Are you being screwed, or is he just a tad disingenuous...you decide.

23. Naked ambition exposes moral dilemma. Warm beer leads to murder.

24. Hugo Chavez crotch shots---eeewwwww! No wonder she started an advice column for the lovelorn!

25. The Village People and the YMCA are alive and well in...France!

26. If a blogger blogs in a forest....


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?

JABBERWONKY

A jabberwonk at the London School of Economics is loose, and Jules Crittendon has located the beast's steaming pile and is on the hunt:

Which brings us to Iraq. Jacques correctly notes that in the wake of U.S. failure there, Iran will emerge as a power. He fails to notice any problem with that, only equating Iran's rise with a hypothetical but laughable notion of a rise in European Union power.

What is interesting here is the Euroview Jacques is treating us to: A U.S. failure in Iraq does not have dire consequences, but in fact is desireable in how it will give the neo-cons their comeuppance and force the United States into what Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer once accurately disparaged as "multilaterism of the lowest common denominator."

But jabberwonks where ever they are found, are all about revisionist history and distortion of truth. They gyre and gimbal in the wabe, happily rewriting the historical record in order to justify their current policies of appeasement and surrender; protecting and enabling evil.

It is all mere mimsy on the part of the European (and American) political left. As they furiously outgrabe in an effort to implement their political agenda; and bask in their brillig self-righteousness, the manxome foes that threaten all of civilization keep whiffling and burbling onward.

The jabberwonky political left, with eyes of flame and postmodern claws that catch, is so intent on undermining those awful, unilateralist neocons (the greatest threat to civilization as they know it) and biting at the heart of the American neocon President; that they are happy to ally themselves with the the Ahmadinejubjubbird and the and the frumious Islamosnatch.

As I suggested in the previous post, it is long past time that those of us committed to reality, reason and truth took our vorpal sword in hand and kill this rhetorical beast dead, once and for all.

It will take leadership--something the crop of mome raths and borogoves in the ranks of both Republicans and Democrats are incapable of providing.

This country used to have no shortage of heroes or heroines. But would we even recognize a true hero now--someone who will say what needs to be said and will stand up unflinchingly for this country and its values--or would such a person be vilified and castigated unceasingly and unmercifully by the jabberwonks? I think you already know the answer to that.

That's why we must pause for a moment in uffish thought and consider that the first step in dealing with the enemies at the gate is to deal with the rhetoric of the enemies within. Our only hope lies in exposing their totalitarian agenda over and over again; as many times as necessary, to as many people as we can reach-- as we wait for someone of the caliber of a Reagan or Kirkpatrick to enter the fray.

Now that would be a frabjous day.

THE LEFT'S EMPTY DOGMA

A simply superb piece in The American Thinker by James Dunn (hat tip: White Ringer) that discusses the return of the leftist dogma that has saturated this country for more than 60 years. In his piece, Seeds of Intellectual Destruction, Dunn pulls no punches as he discusses the revival and new life of the leftist/socialist ideology that threatens to destroy our country from within, even as the Islamofascists attack it from without:

But no ideological construct dies before its time. Hegemonism was kept alive by people like Noam Chomsky in his endless series of books and pamphlets, Howard Zinn, whose "People's History of the United States" is the standard classroom history, and Oliver Stone's paranoid cinematic fantasies. It remained a central concept of the entertainment world and the media, was encysted within the Democratic Party, and acted as the motivating force of the anarcho-syndicalist anti-globalism movement.

When the towers came down and the U.S. went on war footing, it emerged intact and complete in every detail, as if it had never lain dormant. It has set the terms of the argument since late 2001 - unspoken, unacknowledged, and undebated. The conspiracy theories surrounding 9/11, with their faceless mass murderers manipulating a cooperative military and intelligence sector, are purely hegemonist. So is the entire effort to undermine the Iraq War, with the endless echoes of Blood for Oil, accusations against Halliburton, and attacks on "neocons" by people who have no idea what neoconservatism is or could name a single one of its tenets.

The Iraq War was a godsend for the American left, something they'd have had to invent if it hadn't happened on its own. It allowed the entire War on Terror to be chopped and fit into the already existing intellectual template, enabled all the old slogans to be revived, all the dusty concepts to be trotted out anew. It has turned the overall war, one of the most justified conflicts in this country's history, a belated defensive response against an ugly and murderous enemy, into the traditional shadow play of murderous military officers, bloody-handed CIA operatives, and cackling businessmen, all overseen by a bulging-browed Karl Rove, operating from some Goldfingeresque headquarters buried far beneath the Crawford ranch. The result is a nation slowly edging toward the same paralysis that afflicted it during the 1970s.

Our fatal flaw involves our national will, our apparent inability to take on any necessary task, however lengthy, dirty or unpromising, and finish it satisfactorily. Our enemies have noted this and target it as a matter of course. Our friends - to perhaps stretch a term - have learned to manipulate it to their advantage.

As we have seen, this is no natural turn of events. There is nothing inevitable or unavoidable about it. It is entirely synthetic, the byproduct of an effort by our intellectual elite to serve an ideology now long dead. Our belief in ourselves as a nation, in our role and mission on the international stage, has been undermined for fifty years and more. There is not a level of society, from day laborer to corporate CEO, who has not been touched by this dogma. Not a single institution (with the professional military perhaps excepted) has been unaffected.

There are politicians now serving in Congress, intelligence agents investigating overseas threats, diplomats working in embassies, bureaucrats handling the day-to-day business of the government, who fully believe that the country they serve is a criminal enterprise. And this is not even to mention the millions of students, professionals, housewives, officials, clergymen, and citizens of all types who labor under the idea that their country is an international tumor worthy only of defeat and punishment, because they have never heard it argued otherwise. The United States, the most powerful nation in the memory of man, is proving unable to correct a situation that led to the greatest crime ever committed against its citizens because of the doubts and anxieties engendered by this empty dogma.

You should read every word of this excellent piece. I have only one addition to his remarks: the revival of this leftist/socialist crap has been facilitated since the end of the Cold War by Postmodernism, a philosophical movement that made it possible for the left to be able to ignore the millions of people killed during the 20th century as a direct result of their ideological illness; and to be able to foist on the American public the concepts of political correctness and multiculturalism. The cultural and moral relativism advocated by these philosophical approaches effectively disarmed intellectual debate in this country, and the forces of reality, reason, and truth have yet to recover from the onslaught--let alone counterattack.

As Dunn notes, if the Iraq war did not exist, the left would have to invent it because it is a perfect vehicle for them to promulgate their irrational postmodern nonsense and achieve their political agenda.

Until and unless those of us still committed to objective reality, reason, and truth stand up to the empty dogma of the left and expose it for the destructive malignancy it is; it will continue to eat away at our national soul, and place all our precious liberties at risk. We must stop being on the defensive and cease catering to the dark, empty vision to which the left's dogma is utterly committed.

Clarity of thought, strength of moral purpose and unyielding adherence to the principles upon which this country was founded is all that is necessary to cure the spreading cancer of leftist ideology that threatens the very life of American values and ideals.

I can't say it any better than Siggy:

To add insult to injury, even as we fight our ‘war on terror,‘ choreographed so as to be as PC as possible, we seem to need to apologize in advance, in case our motives (the preservation of democracy) are ‘misunderstood.’ We seem to have the need to explain that freedom trumps totalitarianism, bigotry and racism- as if that were really necessary. On the other hand, we prop up and support corrupt regimes, out of necessity- and we pretend that those regimes are morally equivalent to our own.

We are put in a defensive position, having to explain to much of the Arab world that we are not responsible for their degradations and that we are not responsible for the hundreds of billions squandered and stolen by their leaders. We have to explain that neither we, nor Israel, are responsible for their abject poverty, failed economies and medieval educational systems. We have been put in this untenable position because we are seen as ambiguous when it comes to evil. It is because of that silence that we are asked to sit down with leaders of some of the most dysfunctional and corrupt nations in the history of mankind. We are expected to pretend that their blatant racism, bigotry and hatred are acceptable. We are asked to sit down with leaders of regimes that are comfortable with media, education and religious outlets that demand their citizens ‘finish the job Hitler started.’
[...]
We have no need to apologize for who we are and the freedoms we represent....

Let us stop apologizing for being the greatest, most noble country in the history of the world. Let us stop apologizing for being the most productive and free people in historical memory; a people who willingly, generously and honorably shoulder the burdens and problems of the world-- and get little or no thanks for doing so; on the contrary, they are heaped with scorn and are the objects of unceasing malevolence.

It is time to go on the rhetorical and political offensive against the political left, before their strategies succeed in destroying the soul and will of our country, leaving us even more vulnerable to the Islamofascist enemy who--if they cannot possess or enslave our soul--intend to wipe us off the map.

THE STORY ONLY GETS WEIRDER AND WEIRDER...

But the disturbing part is in the last few paragraphs....

And, as more and more people test positive for polonium 210 contamination, an age-old mystery is finally explained!

A WORD ABOUT MY 'HATEMONGERING'

I stand accused by some angry commenters on my own blog (who are not content with simply disagreeing with me and departing for greener blogpastures...I wonder if they are neurotic enough to also keep tuning into TV shows that they claim to hate? Or, maybe they just have one of those repetition compulsions Freud talks about?);and by commenters at PJ media who prefer to attack my physical appearance; and even by people who seem to think that I should not be allowed to be a finalist in the Weblog awards --all because they consider me a vile "hatemongerer".

They all voice objection to my insinuations that Democrats and the political left in this country--either consciously or unconsciously-- enable, encourage and support terrorism and terrorists.

Oh, I'm so sorry. Was I not clear? I didn't mean to insinuate or suggest such a thing. I believe I have stated it quite unambiguously and directly multiple times on this blog, but obviously I have not been clear enough for some. Let me clarify my position with no ambiguity whatsoever:

- The left and the Democrats (and anyone else) are delusional if they think that Iran and Syria would be helpful in calming things down in Iraq (unless they are using some definition of "helpful" that I am not familiar with--one which suggest that pouring oil on a fire is helpful, for example);

- The Democrats' spurning of John Bolton's nomination is a triumph of appeasement and denial;

- The political left repeatedly demonstrates contempt for the concept of free speech and most of the values of this country, including political and economic freedom;

- The left and the Democrats systematically subvert the truth and exhibit a peculiar rhetorical solidarity with terrorist regimes and terrorist fanatics--just ask the President of Iran, who regularly uses their talking points;

- The left long ago abandoned the liberal philosophy and have happily sunk into moral and intelluctal bankruptcy.

Just read about anything in my sidebar or archives to see that I never refrain from saying what I really think as directly as possible. My overarching emotion toward today's left and their wholly owned subsidiary, the Democratic party, is not hate, but pure, unadulterated contempt (consult a dictionary if you don't know the difference).

I reserve the emotion of hate for the Islamofascist terrorist thugs, and I am very proud to monger that hate for the kind of bestiality and barbarism they routinely exhibit. That the left is unable to realize or accept that it is their own ideology that sanctions the bestiality and barbarism is their problem, not mine.

If you are a Democrat or an adherent of leftist/socialist/communist ideology and you are offended by my analyses--tough shit.

I suggest that if you are unable or unwilling to take a hard look in the mirror and contemplate what your ideology has wrought; then you should get yourself a nice therapist and/or take your anti-anxiety medication more regularly. If you can be in complete and utter psychological denial about what's happening in the world and oblivious to the threat western civilization faces, reading this blog will not enlighten you one bit. Retreat into your bubble of delusion and denial, so that you might maintain your pathetic and overweening self-esteem.

It is very hard these days to call a spade a spade, what with the oppressive regime just waiting in the wings, drooling all over themselves anticipating a return to the White House. The ruling intellectual elites of this country simply are incapable of thinking or listening outside their ideological box. They refuse to look and see the objective results of their rhetoric and treasonous (yes, I said it--do I need to make that more clear?) behavior.

They are intensely, profoundly...desperately eager for this country to fail--for George W. Bush to fail--and to declare defeat; abjectly surrender; betray our friends; humiliate our military; and prop-up every two-bit terrorist from San Francisco to Kabul.

The latest incarnation of the Neville Chamberlain/Lindhberg/Kennedy Brigade of the left want to pretend to everyone that they are "patriots"; that they "care about the troops"; that they are the true warriors, rather than those "losers" we sent over to fight in Afghanistan and Iraq; and that they are a voice for "peace in our time".

Yeah, right.

They are not a voice for peace. They have never been a voice for peace; and they will never be a voice for peace. They are merely a voice that, always and everywhere, calls for the appeasement of evil.

There. Is that clear now?

MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD WEEK

(apologies to Tom Lehrer)

Oh, the Shia hate the Sunni,
And the Sunni hate the Shia.
But to blow up you and me-a
Is an old Quranic rule.

During Musim Brotherhood Week, Muslim Brotherhood Week,
Lebanon and Syria are dancing cheek to cheek.
Musims love to fatwa-tize
Those other sects that they despise,
And take turns burning down each other's mosques.

Oh, Muqtada hates the Baathists;
Muslim socialists hate Muslim fascists,
But during this week they're all pacifists
It's as Islamic as a suicide bomb!

During Muslim Brotherhood Week, Musim Brotherhood Week,
Tehran makes nice with Riyadh cause it's oh so very chic.
Kneel down and start to pray
With someone you'd prefer to flay;
You can be peaceful if you try.

Oh, Hamas will sleep with Fatah,
Persian or Arab will no longer matteh
They all have women they can batteh
And everyone can hate the Jews!

And during Muslim Brotherhood Week, Muslim Brotherhood Week,
It's Muslim Everyone-smile-at-one-another-hood Week.
Be nice to any Muslim who
Allah's decreed inferior to you.
It's only for a week, so have no fear.
Be grateful that it doesn't last all year!

A MOST DISINGENUOUS PARADOX

Today, on the anniversary of Japan's attack on Pearl Harbor that killed 2,403 Americans, Victor Davis Hanson compares the timeline of WWII with today's war on terror and identifies a number of paradoxes:

The limitations on our war-making are just as often self-imposed. Yes, we defeated the Axis powers in less than four years, but it was at a ghastly cost. To defeat both Japan and Germany, we averaged over 8,000 Americans lost every month of the war - compared to around 50 per month since Sept. 11.
[...]
A stronger, far more affluent United States believes it can use less of its power against the terrorists than a much poorer America did against the formidable Japanese and Germans.

World War II, which saw more than 400,000 Americans killed, was not nearly as controversial or frustrating as one that has so far taken less than one-hundredth of that terrible toll.

And after Pearl Harbor, Americans believed they had no margin of error in an elemental war for survival. Today, we are apparently convinced that we can lose ground, whether in Afghanistan or Iraq, and still not lose either the war or our civilization.

It is hard to imagine that during the middle of WWII, when things were going rather badly for the US and its allies, that a "Pacific Study Group" or a "European Study Group" issuing public recommendations for the war in the Pacific or the European front would have been wildly applauded the way the ISG was yesterday by all sorts of folks.

T.F. Boggs, returning from his second tour of duty in Iraq had this to say (hat tip: Power Line) :

The Iraq Survey Group’s findings or rather, recommendations are a joke and could have only come from a group of old people who have been stuck in Washington for too long. The brainpower of the ISG has come up with a new direction for our country and that includes negotiating with countries whose people chant “Death to America” and whose leaders deny the Holocaust and call for Israel to be wiped from the face of the earth. Baker and Hamilton want us to get terrorists supporting countries involved in fighting terrorism!
[...]
Talking doesn’t solve anything with a crazed people, bullets do and we need to be given a chance to work our military magic. Like I told a reporter buddy of mine: War sucks but a world run by Islamofacists sucks more.

Meanwhile, those dear, misunderstood Islamofascists must be rolling on the floor of their local mosques howling with laughter (assuming such behavior is permitted), even as they soberly agree that they can be oh so helpful to the poor, bumbling and needy United States.

So, now we come to the betrayal part. The abandonment of Iraq, and the reported secret negotiations with terror groups.

Can complete capitulation in the global war on terror be far behind? About half the population of this country has already pretty much given up--and many of those were outraged at the idea that a war needed to be fought in the first place.

In the distorted reality inhabited by those whose voices unceasingly call for retreat from and surrender to enemies who want to destroy our civilization, all that matters is to make sure the rhetoric is liberally sprinkled with lovely words like "peace", "social justice". In their self-induced psychosis they really believe that all they have to do is "give peace a chance" and regimes like Iran; terrorist groups like Hamas and Al Qaeda; beacons of civilized behavior like Nasrallah and the mullahs will all bow and genuflect before the left's utopian vision.

Ah, but you see, our enemies have a competing and equally compelling (to them) utopian vision that they intend to impose on the world. In their parallel rhetoric, they speak of "Allah's will" and "bringing the peace of Islam" to the world--or else.

Actualy, the two delusions (one from the left and one from the religious right) are very similar and have many shared aspects, almost like a folie a deux. Both extremes know they are "god" because when they pray to that which they worship, they are actually talking to themselves.

ShrinkWrapped notes:

As Richard Fernandez points out, the West is losing the information war because the "means of production" of "news" is overwhelmingly in the hands of people who do not see themselves as members of Western Civilization; instead the leftists and quasi-leftists populating the news media see themselves as on a mission to make this world a better place for the poor and down trodden. Unfortunately, they have shown themselves to be spectacularly incapable of separating the lofty rhetoric of their "higher truth" from actual behavior and we are all left at risk because of their "good intentions"

Yes, they mean well. I see plenty of paranoid and delusional patients who "mean well" and who believe their insane behavior will "save the world"; or, at the very least, protect them from the threat their disordered senses perceive.

The problem is that while the political left is fighting windmills and dreaming the impossible dream; and while the Islamofanatic right are tackling the alien Jews who have implanted electrodes in their brains and eat their children; the reality both aare desperately trying to avoid manifests itself nonetheless.

Like the two delusional patients in the movie The Ruling Class who each believe they are the one, true god; at some point they will duke it out to the end.

But in the meantime, the competing utopian visions are content to focus their equally malignant versions of "peace" upon those of us who live in the real world.

As Hanson suggests, it leads to all sorts of disingenuous paradoxes.

UPDATE: From Cox and Forkum:

DR. SANITY A FINALIST IN THE 2006 WEBLOG AWARDS

I am amazed to discover that I am a finalist in the 2006 Weblog Awards in the category of "Best Individual Blog" ! I had no idea I had even been nominated, and I'm honored and humbled beyond comprehension. Just to be nominated with blogs of the caliber of The Anchoress, Lileks, and Riehl World View , as well as all the others is unbelievable.

To see the finalists in all categories, go here.

Voting begins on Thursday. Make sure you take your medication that day and go vote for me!

OH YES! LET'S ENGAGE IRAN & SYRIA !***Updated***

It has been so productive in the past:

...it's past time to knock down a myth that appears to be driving the panel's deliberations: the notion that the Bush administration's refusal to talk with Iran and Syria is the reason for our inability to stabilize Iraq.

The premise--pushed by Democratic politicians and others--is absolutely false. The people pushing this, among them Jimmy Carter and Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Sen. Chuck Hagel, seem intent on sandbagging President Bush into negotiating from a position of weakness over some form of "grand bargain" with some of our most deadly enemies. But the fact is that plenty of engagement has already been taking place. For one thing, Syria retains an embassy in Washington; and the United States has one in Damascus. As for Iran, there are plenty of opportunities for the United States to talk with it in forums such as the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency, where both states are represented. And America has been trying for decades to resolve differences diplomatically with both regimes.
[...]
Based on the historical record, the advocates of U.S. engagement with these regimes are delusional. The record, from Carter to Bush II, strongly suggests that neither regime has any interest in cooperating with us in Iraq, and are more likely than not to view the Carter-Brzezinski-Hagel approach as a demonstration of American weakness.

Delusional is precisely the word for it. Some, apparently prefer to refer to it as "realism".

I see this sort of cognitive process all the time with patients who simply can't figure out why responding in the same dysfunctional manner to events in their life doesn't seem to work any better on the third, fourth, or fifth try. God forbid they examine those thought processes and adjust their behavior to the reality of the situation.

By way of contrast, let's look at a group of individuals who are willing to squarely look at reality, acknowledge the problems they face, and identify the source of the dysfunction that impedes their moving forward. From Bill Roggio (hat tip: Instapundit)

While waiting to manifest on the flight to Fallujah, CNN played a news segment of President Bush announcing there would be no “graceful exit” from Iraq, and that we'd stay until the mission was complete. Two sergeants in the room cheered. Loudly. They then scoffed at the reports from Baghdad, and jeered the balcony reporting.

In nearly every conversation, the soldiers, Marines and contractors expressed they were upset with the coverage of the war in Iraq in general, and the public perception of the daily situation on the ground. The felt the media was there to sensationalize the news, and several stated some reporters were only interested in “blood and guts.” They freely admitted the obstacles in front of them in Iraq. Most recognized that while we are winning the war on the battlefield, albeit with difficulties in some areas, we are losing the information war. They felt the media had abandoned them. (Emphasis mine)

I bet the Baker Report won't address that issue in their assessment. Nor is it likely that it address this one. Read the entire article, and consider the psychology of fear that has been instilled in our fighting forces--not by the enemy, but by the rampant cluelessnes and hatred for all things military that emanates from both the Democrats and their lunatic leftist base.

To anyone who exists in the real world, both of theabove issues -- the unbelievable bias of the MSM in their Iraq reporting and their willingness to be the propaganda arm of the enemy; and the insane politically correct behavior demanded of our soldiers and marines in this war--are THE major impediments to arriving at a winning strategy in Iraq.

Any report that does not address these two issues is almost certainly completely delusional. All the BS about "speaking truth to power" is mere rhetorical posturing and narcissistic mental masturbation when the real truth can never be mentioned and dealt with.

Oh yes, let's do engage Syria and Iran! We can see how wonderfully helpful Syria has been to Lebanon's dreams of democracy and I'm sure they will be equally helpful to Iraq's. And all of us, I'm sure, deeply appreciate that Little Mahmoud is just looking for a brotherly pen pal in the U.S.to whom he can confide and share his hopes and prayers for the world.




UPDATE: I should add that the whole idea of "engaging" with Iran and Syria that is being promulgated by many in the West now, is actually a form of psychological projection. Mostly, I talk about projection as being a psychological defense in which one's own negative emotions are attributed or projected onto someone else. In other words, it is attempt to shirk the responsibility for one's own feelings, thoughts, and actions and ignore reality.

In this particular case, the West (and Baker/Hamilton et al) are actually projecting their own positive emotional traits. It is the same psychological situation you regularly observe in hostages toward their kidnappers. One has to believe that the kidnapper or potential executioner is a caring,concerned individual with emotions such as you yourself possess in order to survive the overwhelming anxiety of being in their complete power. But, whether you project negative or postive emotions onto someone else, it is still a refusal to face reality, and behave in an adult and mature manner by acting in accordance with that reality. Grown-ups face reality and take the necessary steps to deal with it (see the Roggio excerpt above). Only children and adults who are emotionally overwhelmed and paralyzed resort to the primitive defense of projection.

In the long run, the use of this defense can only result in negative or devastating consequences.

UPDATE: Jay at Stop the ACLU has the text of the worse-than useless Baker Report, and a round-up of blog reaction to it.

THE SANITY SQUAD MINCES NO WORDS AND DOESNT GIVE A FIG ABOUT BEING DIPLOMATIC

This week The Sanity Squad minces no words in discussing the recent resignation of John Bolton; the über-dysfunctional UN; and the agenda-driven MSM--which is either incompetent or deliberately malignant (take your pick). As Siggy always says, "To hell with diplomatic protocols and niceties"- the fact is, that John Bolton was among the best UN Ambassadors ever; the UN sucks big-time; and the MSM has abandoned all pretense of journalistic integrity in their reporting of Iraq.

Join Siggy , Neo-neocon , Shrinkwrapped and myself as we bemoan the decline of western civilization and the insanity of postmodern world.

Go on and take a listen to the four politically incorrect mavens of mental health. You'll either love us or hate us (most likely the latter), but you won't remain neutral! We're better than a week's supply of Zyprexa (that's an antipsychotic drug, if you're interested).

Previous podcasts of The Sanity Squad can be found here; and you can also download them from iTunes.


(The Sanity Squad cartoon drawn by Eric Allie, whose political cartoons can be found here and here)

Narcissitic Underground

The Narcissistic Underground

Let me paraphrase a short story that a patient with a borderline/narcissistic personality disorder once told me, when I asked her how things were going:

"Just wait until you hear how I stood up and took responsibility for myself, doctor! Last night at about 2am, my daughter knocked on my door and told me that she had been raped and beaten up by her boyfriend. There she was standing at my door and demanding that I help her out. But I said to her, 'I have to take responsibilty for myself alone so I can't help you. You'll have to deal with it yourself.' And I slammed the door in her face. Maybe I could have helped her, but I don't see why when I'm having so many problem of my own."

The context for this is that in her group therapy, they had been discussing interpersonal effectiveness and how to stand up for one's self when dealing with other people who are trying to take advantage of you. As is somewhat typical for persons with her personality, she had managed to interpret this to mean that she now had official permission to tell everyone to 'drop dead' because her needs came first. This is, of course, not even remotely what "interpersonal effectiveness" is all about. In fact, it is about learning how to relate to others as real people. All too often, narcissistic or borderline people have no room in their psyche for other people. They tend to see others as mere extensions of their own feelings and needs; or as threats to those feelings and needs. Other people don't really exist in their own right.

This is characteristic of the peculiar derangement of the borderline/narcissistic person. It is all about them, you see. The world is not big enough for their needs and anyone else's at the same time. All situations must be filtered through the feeling prism of "what's most important for me?" or "how can I most benefit from this?". Compassion can be faked if necessary to achieve one's ends, but expressing the rage and hatred inside is even more important.

With that story in mind, consider this example of Bush Derangement Syndrome that K-Lo mentions at The Corner - it is, of course from the site that regularly makes persons with serious mental illness seem completely sane by comparison--the Democratic Underground. Let's listen a minute to her piteous plight:

I did not stop to help a [Bush] supporter today.

I had no idea how deeply my hate for that man ran. My lack of an interaction, with a * supporter is still haunting me a couple of hours later.

I was on my home and was on the ramp getting off the highway. I saw a mini-van on the side of the road. There was a lady standing next to the van and in her arms she held her child. I can only assume her mini-van had broken down. I don't know, perhaps with so many gad stations being out of gas, she had also run out. I slowed down and started to pull over to offer her a ride. At the very last second I noticed a "W" sticker on the back of her vehicle and I sped up and drove off.

I feel really bad as a human being. That child is not responsible for their parent's belief system. They are innocent and do not deserve to be out in the heat. (It is warm but not so bad that they would even break a sweat) I try not to punish people for what they believe.

On the other hand, so many hateful thoughts went through my head. I wondered how a person could see what was going on in NO and still have one of those awful stickers on their car. How could they support an awful excuse for a human being that has let our country down and is letting Americans die after they have made it through the storm? How can someone be so blind and so stupid?

I thought that if she loves * so much, maybe he would come along and help her the same way he is rescuing all of those poor people in the weather stricken part of our country. Let's see what her hero can do for her.

I never did go back. I was so upset with that sticker and with the fact that someone would support an idiot who is so clearly running our country into the ground.

So why am I writing this? It is not to boast, I really feel bad about passing this child and not picking up their mother. Perhaps it is for a catharsis of sorts? That would be an educated guess. I suppose it is because I feel conflicted and I am writing this to try and sort through what I am feeling. There are two emotional sides, for me, on this incident and neither seems completely right or wrong to me. Even writing this, I am still not able to work through what happened. I feel like I am floating between right and wrong and am unable to grab either side.

Thanks for listening.

Note that there is considerable suffering in the world right now, but it is all about their feelings. Their beliefs. Their suffering and conflict. She is surprised at how much hate she feels. Why is that, do you suppose? Is it because she spends a considerable amount of psychic energy projecting her hate onto others (e.g., Bush etc.)? Is it because she cleverly psychologically disguises her intense hatred and anger under a flowing veil of love and compassion and peace?

To justify the intensity of her rage, she must make its object equally "bad". In her deluded mind, Republicans are responsible for the devastation in New Orleans. In fact, Republicans (and Bush of course) are responsible for ALL THE EVIL IN THE WORLD! By making them the ultimate evil, she can bask in her virtuousness and goodness. Why, look at how she simply is so anguished about not stopping to help someone in need. But she never did go back, did she?

This is the worse kind of narcissism--the kind we refer to as "malignant". People who are so obsessed with their own needs and feelings, that they can't really be bothered to care about anyone else.

It's not about the people suffering from Katrina. It's all about their intense feelings regarding Bush and the people who voted for him. It's all about feeling "conflicted" about their own rage and anger. Me. Me. Me. Me. My feelings. My conflicts. I feel, therefore I am. I feel strongly, therefore I am better than you.

All without noticing --or taking responsibility for the consequences of-- their anger and rage. Or, if they happen to notice them--like our DU friend above, it simply becomes more grist for their emotional mill (imagine the "woe is me", hand to the forehead, as they contemplate how the evil Republicans have made them feel and behave in this horrible way).

Under normal circumstances, I might feel somewhat sorry for people who think like this, particularly since they are on the path to self-destruction. If they had one iota of self-reflection or insight about their malignancy and the damage they carelessly inflict on all those around them, then maybe I might spare a little sympathy.

The problem is that they want to destroy my country and all that it stands for. They could care less about New Orleans and the terrible situation there. They could care less about any of the destruction they are leaving in their hysterical wake.

We will eventually manage the destruction wrought by Katrina; the people whose lives have been so disruped and broken will slowly get their lives back and things will return to some semblance of normality. But how can we deal with a hatred that seems to know no bounds and threatens to destroy the very fabic of our nation?

At least I can expose the malignant narcissism that permeates their "compassionate" and "loving" behavior.

UPDATE: Isn't this nice? The BBC and the DU in a folie a deux:

Set yer VCRs - I'm going to be on the BBC world news tonight I got an email earlier from the planning producer at the BBC world news asking if someone from DU could take part in a 2-3 minute interview on tonight's broadcast. Since Skinner's not here, I'm it. I'll be heading over to the studio in DC just before 8pm eastern tonight. They seem to want to talk about the suggestion that Bush's appearance in New Orleans was timed to coincide with aid reaching the Superdome.

I wonder where that "suggestion" came from?

UPDATE II: It seems there is hope for insight and self-awareness after all. JLawson from the comment section writes:

Doc -
I waded through the DU post in question - and further down she posted the following:
-------------
"In fact after actually being able to write it out and think it over, I was 100% wrong and would take it all back if I could. In fact my response, to the first person who answered my post, was that I did wrong and that I will be picking up a person no matter who it is next time. That does fall within reason - I may offer to call the police for a male who is stranded.

I am not someone who usually stops to think about something before helping someone. I just talked to my husband about taking in people from NO who needed help. There were no strings attached as to how people voted, etc.... He did feel uncomfortable since we have two small children so we have donated money and I have contacted someone I know, from NO, to offer any assistance we can give to them or their family."

demgurl
------------------
To my thinking, that redeems her. Sadly, others in that thread thought what she did wasn't extreme enough. But to give her credit, she realized she went too far and she was very ashamed of it.

Shame is a good start in this case.

"COME FOR THE EGALITARIANISM, STAY FOR THE BESTIALITY AND TYRANNY"

Gagdad Bob at One Cosmos analyzes why progressives tend toward primitivism, particularly in their appreciation of economic theory. He begins:

“For millennia -- until quite recently -- human beings struggled to rise above subsistence because of a stubborn inability to recognize how wealth is created. Certainly into the late 18th century, people mistakenly believed that there was simply a fixed amount of wealth in the world, and that it was left to individuals and governments to fight over their share. Not until Adam Smith was it recognized that wealth can grow without limits, but obviously even now people have a hard time wrapping their minds around this idea.”

Then segues to a discussion of envy and its role in human evolution and group behavior, commenting:

The further back in history you travel, the less individual neurosis you see. Instead, the whole group is nuts. But from the standpoint of the group, the “nut” is the one who will not or cannot conform to the crazy group -- like that decent Muslim who was kicked out of his mosque in Tulsa last week for writing an editorial that was critical of Islam. To us, he is “sane,” but to his primitive co-religionists he is “crazy” or “evil.” You see similar phenomena in other primitive groups such as the progressive nutroots vis-à-vis their treatment of Joe Lieberman. Here was a fellow who had a near perfect liberal voting record, but he took one step outside the closed circle of the group mind, so he was banished.

Progressives, he argues, operate under an economic model that is more genetic as opposed to cognitive. They are still functioning with the herd mentality and have yet to embrace modern civilizization or individualism, preferring instead to function on an instictual, rather than a rational level. This is why they find capitalism and market economics so repugnant.

He then quotes from a recent article by Andrew Cassel: "In other words, to have an intuitive grasp of economics, you might just need to take a step or two up the evolutionary ladder."

Finally, it all makes sense!

The economic primitivism that is unceasingly promoted by the political left is a remnant of the cave-dwelling days of mankind; an idyllic era of history to which the left desperately yearns to return. The word "Progressive" is thus a simple rhetorical manipulation to diguise the essential backwardness of the left's economc thinking.

It also might explain the sense of solidarity that many leftists feel with the various primitive cultures still existing in the 21st century. Try as they might, they just can't hide their admiration for cave-dwellers like Osama; or the egalitarianism of the most backward societies on the planet.

Thomas Sowell can't help but notice that one of the ways this primitivism is conveyed culturally is in the relentlessly anti-business movies churned out by Hollywood:

Although these movies tap a certain envy and resentment of corporate wealth, that large corporate wealth comes from far more modest individual amounts of money from about half the population of the United States, which owns stocks and bonds — either directly or because money paid into pension funds or other financial intermediaries are used to buy stocks and bonds.

The irony is that the average Hollywood star who is making anti-business movies is far wealthier than the average owners of those businesses, who are half the population of the country.

The Los Angeles Times refers to documentary “films” that are “critical of corporate power.” But just what does this vague word “power” mean when it comes to businesses?

Wal-Mart is the big bugaboo these days but what “power” does Wal-Mart have? I lived three quarters of a century without ever setting foot in a Wal-Mart store and there is not a thing they can do about it...

One of the morally indignant “films” (more high-toned than “movies”) coming out of Hollywood makes the same complaint against Starbucks, depicting poverty-stricken Ethiopian coffee growers providing beans for the big-bucks coffee-store chain.

Are the Ethiopian coffee growers worse off now that Starbucks is buying their beans? Supply and demand would suggest otherwise. But moral crusaders seldom have time for economics.

He concludes by saying that what the world needs is more multinational corporations, not less; and I would go further and specify that what the world needs is more capitalism and business, and less progressive nonsense. As I have noted multiple times, poverty has a cure. There is an undeniable link between economic freedom and the elimination of human poverty and misery.

Such a link, however, is studiously ignored by the leftist elites, who prefer to idealize the primitivism and egalatarianism they observe in backwards societies. They have in fact elevated that primitivism and pronounced it superior to the materialism of the West.

The truth is that for all the lip service the Left pays to "fighting poverty" and "achieving social justice"--which makes them feel just oh so good about themselves--that not one single government program they have supported in the endless bureaucratic quagmire they refer to as the "war on poverty" has done more than those evil corporate bastards at WalMart to actually help the poor.

Instead, the programs they support nationally and internationally inevitably reinforce their own latent envy, racism, and sociopathic selflessness.

So, many times in politics, programs that originate with the "best of intentions" end up doing exactly the opposite of what was intended. Yet, the political left is so ideologically committed to the utopian ideal of egalitarianism which, in the real world simply makes everyone equally poor and miserable (except for the lucky elites who control the social system) that they reflexly keep pouring money into programs that can be shown to actively harm the people they are meant to help; and reinforce the stereotypes they are meant to end.

The politically correct left heaps scorn on business, capitalism, free trade, and globalization; and instead glorify and praise the most primitive and barbaric of cultures and cultural practices. As Bob suggests, they come for the egalitarianism, but stay for the bestiality and tyranny they unleash with their "progressive" ways.

If they really cared about helping the poor; if they really cared about social "justice"--then they would shut the hell up and get out of the way of those evil, greedy capitalistic bastards, who, while pursuing their own selfish, profit-making agendas, in the long run effortlessly manage to increase the standard of living and improve the lives of everyone around them.

A TRIUMPH FOR FORCES OF APPEASEMENT AND DENIAL

John Bolton's resignation as UN ambassador has been accepted by President Bush.

Yet another triumph for the forces of appeasement and denial.

Bolton's critics called him "too combative for international diplomacy", but the reality is that international diplomacy has been catastrophically compromised by the endless platitudes and toadying of the international left. The Democratic Party wing of the left could not possibly let a man like Bolton be UN ambassador--he exists in the real world; a place they haven't visited in quite a while.

COMMENT PROBLEM

There seems to be a problem with comments posting in Haloscan. I am trying to figure out how to fix it, so be patient!

UPDATE: FIXED!! Feel free to move about the comment sections...

DENIAL TO THE Nth POWER

While the Hitleresque President of Iran continues to go around making veiled threats about Israel "disappearing" or being "wiped off the map", it is interesting to note this article, that:

Iran's parliament wants the next presidential elections to be held more than one year early, the Fars news agency reported Sunday.

Parliament approved a draft bill upon which the parliamentary and presidential elections would be held simultaneously in the first quarter of 2008.

As the next parliamentary elections are scheduled for February 2008, but the next presidential elections for June 2009, the new bill would reduce the four-year presidential term of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by almost one and a half years.

Too bad they didn't propose this a few years ago. In fact, going even farther back in time, it is really too bad that during the 1979 Iran Hostage crisis we didn't deal with Ahmadinejad and his band of thugs more assertively. He might not have been in a position to run for President of Iran several decades later.

While it is tempting to think that Ahmadinejad might eventually disappear into the dustbin of history, the proposed date is, alas, too far off in the future to matter much today. Indeed, if the Carter Administration had not been in such hopeless denial and so terrified of its own shadow, history might have taken a different turn at that particular fork.

It was psychological denial then, and it is psychological denial now.

From the Dry Bones Blog, we have this astute observation:



Did you know that Quranic "scholars" have determined that it is OK to kill 4 million women, children and men (specifying that up to 2 million can be children)? That is is OK to leave up to 8 million homeless? And a few hundred thousand maimed and crippled?

Can you imagine normal human beings spending their time calculating things like this (let alone those who insist that Islam is a "religion of peace") ?

It is almost banal to talk about evil these days when there are countless vile incidents and innumerable insane psychopathic people who perpetrate them on a daily basis. We are used to speaking that way about lone serial killers, who up until recently were monstrous enough for our sensibilities.

But the religion of Islam in both its Sunni and Shia variants has spawned a meta-Evil -- an "uber" malignancy that has no corollary in history.

Certainly there have been historical events that intimated the depths of evil to which men may sink. The Holocaust in WWII instantly comes to mind. And until the early 21st Century, Hitler was the epitome of the worse evil that could have been imagined by humanity. Even today, more than five six decades afterwards, the worse insult you can foist on a world leader is to compare him or her to Herr Hitler.

Of course, it is important to remember that Hiter did not have today's sophisticated weapons of mass destruction. If he had, then the unbelievable amout of death coldly and calculatedly meted out by the Nazi's in their short existence would simply boggle the mind.

As if jealous of the infamously elevated status Hiter has obtained in world history, Ahmadinejad seems obsessed with minimizing Hiter's murderous accomplishments. One can only conclude that he intends to put even Hitler and the Nazi's to shame.

We are talking about a person whose daily paranoid rhetoric deals with the desired extermination of millions of people because they are Jews. This rhetoric is born out of a psychological envy of Israeli success and hatred of the values that made that success possible. It differs little from the envy and hatred directed toward America. Ahmadinejad and Bin Laden both justify their homicidal impulses with decorous, formal religious language and repeated invocations stating how great their bloodthirsty god is.

Compared to these religious fanatics, Hitler was a mere piker.

What is most frightening is that both maniacs combine a religious primitivism with a paradoxical technological sophistication. As they search for the perfect weapons to carry out their holy duty, will the civilized world continue to deny the threat?

Diplomacy and negotiation are meaningless in dealing with regimes like Iran and fanatics like Ahmadinejad and his puppet-masters, the mullahs. Seeking their "assistance" in stabilizing Iraq is worse than foolish; it is psychological denial taken to the n^th power. The "realists" who propose such a scenario might as well suggest that America discuss with Osama and Al Qaeda the possibility of his helping to "stabilize" the fledgling democracy in Afghanistan.

If we had faced the reality of the threat of Islamic fundamentalism twenty years ago, then perhaps today we might have more than one or two military options open to us to get serious with Iran and make Ahmadinejad, the mullahs (and perhaps even Osama) finally disappear.

As bad as any military option might be, remaining in denial to the n^th degree will assuredly have even more catastrophic consequences.

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. And you might read this before submitting an entry.

Thanks for all the submissions. I try to use as many as possible! SO MANY INSANITIES! SO LITTLE TIME!!!

1. New photos prove AP story was true ! There's rumors, and then there's reporting. The enemy as a trusted news source....They don't need no stinkin' proof-- everybody knows they're the MSM! Speaking truth to bullshit. Why am I not surprised at this revelation?

2. These guys are no flying nuns. More like thugs on an airplane. Now for thugs in a tent.

3. Sort of like Jack the Ripper hosting a conference on serial murders. And they think GWB is a satanist!

4. What's in a name? Barack Hussein Obama is "likable"; while John Forbes Kerry is not likable ??? But at least his middle name is not an impediment to his ambitions (only his personality it).

5. Consistently anti-military; consistently anti-Defense and faith-based to boot!

6. Giddyup! Horses are certainly wonderful critters, but this goes a bit too far.

7. Testes to make your heart tinkle (I'm not making this up); and then there's orange goat genitals.

8. Michael Moore is upset that Americans are dying in Iraq and identifies more suspects in their deaths. (besides the usual ones)- Hint: They are not jihadis. A "dumbed-down Michael Moore" is even less sexy than the original.

9. Recommendations so brilliant, why stop at Iraq? They must be under the mistaken assumption that we care about them.

10. Friday night pig races...how can that possibly be offensive, you ask? Anti-Islamic behavior versus Islamic behavior?

11. Yes, clearly the Jews have been violently angry and threatening war about this for some time. Oh, btw, what is Olmert smoking?

12. Where's the beef avocado? Holy guacamole! It really is hard to make this stuff up. Really!

13. A rather unique method of protesting potholes. See for yourself! (hat tip: SC&A)

14. The only Christmas Gift Guide you'll never need! Remember, it's the thought that counts.

15. Actually, they think we're stupid, AND crazy --and it's research coming from critical thinkers like this guy.

16. And, speaking of research, is there anyone who didn't already know this? Bet you didn't know this, though.

17. Seems like there could be a lot of potential flaws in this new birth control product....and it might not be exactly what Britain needs....

18, Oh no! A scary scary boogey-woman has come to destroy all that hard feminist work.

19. You decide which is more disgusting: Britanny's firecrotch derby....or beheading as a lifestyle choice? (OK, they're both pretty disgusting). In the latter case, remember that on-the-job training is important in many professions.

20. Then there are the Mecca Stars of Marie Claire and the not-so-hidden threat of vaginofascism

21. Do you want to date a gay millionaire?

22. An exceedingly honest real estate agent.

23. You just can't be too careful these days ...so make sure you work on building up your resistance to polonium...

24. Why bloggers hate holidays.


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?

THE POLITICAL LEFT'S DEDICATION TO THE CONCEPT OF FREE SPEECH

Here are two examples of the political left's dedication to free speech--for themselves but most certainly not for anyone else:

1. TANCREDO PROTESTERS TURN VIOLENT
Violence erupted at a Michigan law school Thursday when protestors tried to block a speech by Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo.

Police were called after protestors pulled a fire alarm prior to the speech on immigration policies. There were at least three violent incidents with protestors targeting student backers of the event, Tancredo, R-Littleton, said today.

"One was spit on, one was kicked, and one was punched," Tancredo said in an e-mail. "Tires were also slashed."

Michigan State University College Republicans and Young Americans for Freedom sponsored the event.

2. Here's how a president gets inaugurated in Mexico from The Belmont Club

Mexican Congress comes to blows over stolen election


Anyone think they are a little unclear on the concept?

BEHOLD THE LORD HIGH EXECUTIONER !

This guy is the real thing, brought into the honored profession by a set of curious chances:

"I was at school, and an execution was set for my father in Mecca. It was to take place in front of the King Abd Al-'Aziz Gate. Before all that happened at the Al-Haram Mosque, the executions were held there. We showed up. I was a little boy. The first thing that came to my mind when people talked about executions was the digestive system. I wanted to see it. At that time, we had an exam at school on the digestive system, and we had to explain about the digestive system and whatever... So I came along, and the moment my father executed the man, I ran to see the digestive system, but all I could see was the man's head flying, and where the neck used to be, there was a kind of well. It went down. That's it. I couldn't take it anymore. I woke up in the car on the way home. At night, I tried to go to sleep, but couldn't. I had nightmares, but only once. Then I got used to it, Allah be praised. "

Turns out the lord high executioner was a little late to the interview because he was so busy getting ahead in his job...so they had to get someone else--a psychologist!--to fill in transiently:

Dr. Turki Al-Atyan, Saudi Interior Ministry psychologist: "The rulings of the shari'a - executions or other punishments decreed by Allah - are carried out by the sword, not by hanging or by gunfire. In the past, gunfire was used, and the victim's guardian was allowed to do the shooting, but out of the fear that possible injustice, Saudi Arabia decided that executions would be carried out by the sword."

The entire passage from MEMRI sort of reminds me of the kind of story you might chance upon in the Lifestyle section of the NY Times Medieval Islamic Times... It's always amusing when life imitates art, especially when there is no sense of humor or even a whiff of irony.


Behold the Lord High Executioner
A personage of noble rank and title —
A dignified and potent officer,
Whose functions are particularly vital!
Defer, defer,
To the Lord High Executioner!
Defer, defer,
To the noble Lord, to the noble Lord,
To the Lord High Executioner!
-The Mikado (Gilbert and Sullivan)

MEET SYLVESTER AND SYLVESTER, JR

...the newest stars in the wacky "realpolitik" looney tunes cartoon universe!



The neocon in me says that this plan makes much more sense! But maybe they just need a good, stern talking to?

SANITY SQUAD ON MUSLIMS IN EUROPE AND SURRENDER IN IRAQ

Over at Pajamas Media Politics Central the latest Sanity Squad Podcast is now posted, and no one will be surprised that we have concluded that there is little sanity to be found in the situation in Europe with regard to its Islamic population; nor in the Democrats seemingly desperate desire to surrender in Iraq.

Join Neo-neocon , Shrinkwrapped , Siggy and I as we opine on Eurabia and Iraq. You'll either love us or hate us, but you won't remain indifferent!

Previous podcasts of The Sanity Squad can be found here; and you can also download them from iTunes.

(The Sanity Squad cartoon drawn by Eric Allie, whose political cartoons can be found here and here)

SYSTEMATIC SUBVERSION AND THE ULTIMATE TRIUMPH OF FREEDOM

Vasko Kohlmayer, writing in the World Defense Review makes this startling observation:

In one of the most startling incidents in our history, America's sworn enemy used the term 'brotherly' when referring to one of our major political parties. The remarkable pronouncement came amidst the celebrations that erupted in the terrorist ranks after the democratic victory in the latest elections.

Given all that the democrats have done, the affection in which they are held by our foes is neither unjustified nor surprising. They have more than earned it by systematically subverting this country's war effort while simultaneously proffering assistance to those who have pledged to destroy us.

Democrats' devious deeds are too numerous to be fully recounted, but here at least are some of the highlights:

-They have tried to prevent us from listening on terrorists' phone calls
-They have sought to stop us from properly interrogating captured terrorists
-They have tried to stop us from monitoring terrorists' financial transactions
-They have revealed the existence of secret national security programs
-They have opposed vital components of the Patriot Act
-They have sought to confer unmerited legal rights on terrorists
-They have opposed profiling to identify the terrorists in our midst
-They have impugned and demeaned our military
-They have insinuated that the president is a war criminal
-They have forced the resignation of a committed defense secretary
-They have repeatedly tried to de-legitimize our war effort
-They want to quit the battlefield in the midst of war.

To see just how bad things really are, ponder this question: If the terrorists were represented by a party in our political system, how would their foreign policy program substantially differ from that of the present-day democrats?By effectively becoming a political arm of our sworn enemy, the Democratic Party has staked out a position that is unparalleled in our country's history

Kohlmayer suggests that the inability to grasp the motives of the Democrats, sprurred on by their leftist base, has made Americans reluctant to believe in their essential treachery.

That's all very well and good; and I applaud Americans who are so fair-minded, but from a psychological perspective, their motives are not at all hard to understand. Just hard to believe.

The Democratic Party leadership is in thrall to the lunatic left, and like the terrorists they support, the political left these days makes no bones about their agenda. They are completely upfront about it, in fact.

If you have doubts about this, take James Taranto's quiz. It's a tough one.

The Democratic Party is no longer on the side of America. They are no longer on the side of freedom. It is time that the American public begin to appreciate what is so very obvious to the enemies we are fighting.

And before the trolls deride these remarks and cry foul, they should first take a long hard look at the list Kohlmayer has above. Is it just a coincidence that the left's rhetoric sounds remarkably like Ahmadinejad? Some cosmic joke, perhaps? Or (now this is the tough question) is it that the beliefs and agenda that you so mindlessly support has merged with those whose only goal is the destruction of America and its values?

Charles Krauthammer this morning has an excellent post that should be read by all you "reality-based" realists:

Now that the "realists'' have ridden into town gleefully consigning the Bush doctrine to the ash heap of history, everyone has discovered the notion of interests, as if it were some new idea thought up by James Baker and the Iraq Study Group.

What do people think we've been doing for the last five years? True, the president's rhetoric has a tendency to go soaringly Wilsonian, e.g. the banishing tyranny stuff in his second inaugural address. But our policies of democratization in Iraq and Afghanistan and Lebanon have been deeply rooted in the most concrete of American interests.

If we really had been in the grip of "idealism,'' we'd be deep in Chad and Burma and Darfur. We are not. We are instead trying to sustain fragile democracies in three strategically important countries -- Afghanistan, Iraq and Lebanon -- that form the geographic parentheses around the principal threat to Western interests in the region, the Syria-Iran axis.

We are trying to bring democracy to Iraq in particular because a pro-Western government enjoying legitimacy and popular support would have been the most enduring means of securing our interests there. Deposing Saddam & Sons was essential because they posed a permanent strategic threat to the region and to U.S. interests....

Very hardheaded realist terms: interest, stability, regional powers. But stringing them together to suggest that Iran and Syria share our interests in stability is the height of fantasy. In fact, Iran and Syria have an overriding interest in chaos in Iraq -- which is precisely why they each have been abetting the insurgency and fanning civil war.

Supporting liberty and the development of free societies in the middle east is not a utopian fantasy or even a Wilsonian dream--but a reasonable policy and expression of our national values AND national interests. September 11th taught us that we can no longer ignore the tyranny and fanaticism that deliberately brought death and destruction to our shores and declared war on everything our country stands for.

Consider this: we could have (and still can) completely obliterate the entire problem with the use of overwhelming force that is at our disposal. There are some who argue that is precisely what we should do; and that our primary target should be the source of Islamic totalitarianism since 1979. I don't even necessarily disagree with this approach. (hat tip: ARationalHuman).

But, as I discussed in this post the strategic question of our time is whether or not Islam itself--not just the Islamic totalitarians who have taken over that religion--is compatible with freedom and free societies. President Bush has bet everything on the idea that it is, and that democratic reform can salvage that beleaguered religion and prevent the incredible loss of life that answering "No" to the question will entail.

In contemplating these pieces of a larger puzzle, it strikes me that more and more people (from the conservatives who now question the value of the Iraq war; to the ordinary citizens who are fed up with the antics of flying imams and the islmaophobic accusations of CAIR; to independents like myself who have resolutely supported President Bush) are beginning to inch slowly toward a negative answer to the strategic question. While many muslims are decent, tolerant and yearn to be free; Islam itself does not appear to be compatible with a free society. This ultimate conclusion is breathtaking--and heartbreaking-- in its implications. And if you doubt the seriousness in which I say this, revisit this post. And, if you have not read this post from September, 2003 from The Belmont Club, then you should do so.

I wrote:

It may eventually be the case that the West becomes convinced that Islam is unable to change and is completely incompatible with freedom. We are well on our way to that eventuality, sadly. Time and again there have been opportunities for the moderates in the religion to pull it back from its suicidal historical course.

Personally, I am not convinced that Islam can change, but I hope it can, given time.

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 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.

It is surely possible that I place too great a hope in the idea of freedom; or that I have unrealistic expectations of how much time is needed for its moderating effects to be realized. My primary concern has always been to minimize the loss of life--our own and those who yearn for freedom but who are in the grip of Islamic totalitarianism; and the only option that seemed to me to do that was the Bush Doctrine. But there has always been the possibility that it would not work in time, implemented some 30 years too late.

SC&A have this to say:

Freedom supports righteousness and make the world a more civilized and moral place. Notwithstanding the reality that much of the world doesn’t care about those ideals, that truth about freedom is unassailable. Those that resist and resent our involvement in helping to secure freedom for others, may at times, seem to prevail, but in the end, even that is illusory. Evolution, political and otherwise, has always meant that man was empowered and free to reach greater heights, unencumbered by the tyranny of other men asserting their dominion over his freedom, property, ideas or beliefs.

There are those that will go to great lengths to keep us from bringing freedom to others. They excoriate us, berate us, laugh at us and even support violence against us. They take great pleasure in our trials and tribulations. There are those who align themselves with evil so as to hurt us- and then rejoice in our pain. There are those that would support the propaganda and ideologies that would demoralize and weaken us. With all their might, deceit and hatred, they would relentlessly attack us- but in the end, it will all be for naught. Americans will defend freedom, from all enemies, foreign and domestic.

They may at times kill or harm the messenger, but they cannot kill the message. Freedom, in the end, will prevail.

Despite the ongoing and systematic subversion of freedom's message from within by those whose rhetoric mindlessly supports freedom, but whose actions have exactly the opposite effect, the courageous Democrats and ever-so-brave lunatics of the left have managed to foolishly convince themselves that the "real" enemy of freedom is Bush. They strut around convinced by their own smug, self-righteous slogans that they are defending freedom, even as they kiss up to any two-bit despot or tyrant in the world; even as U.S. military personnel confront the true enemies of freedom and civilization in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And, despite their strident wails and transparent attempts to consolidate their own power and influence no matter what the cost, they are only becoming increasingly irrelevant.

Because, in the end--one way or the other--I have no doubt that freedom will indeed prevail.