Category: Uncategorized

Germany turns to National Socialist propaganda:

A multi-million pound campaign to boost Germans’ low self-confidence has backfired after it emerged that its slogan was first coined by the Nazis.

The £20 million Du Bist Deutschland – You Are Germany – campaign was devised to inspire Germans to stop moaning and do something good for their country.

Beethoven, Einstein and the sports stars Franz Beckenbauer and Michael Schumacher have been cited in advertisements encouraging Germans to take more pride in their homeland.

But a historian from Ludwigshafen has provoked an uproar with his discovery that the same Du Bist Deutschland cry was used at Nazi rallies in the 1930s.

Actually, I’d be more nervous if they were pushing a “Du bist Europa” campaign.

From Papers Please:

Meet Deborah Davis. She’s a 50 year-old mother of four who lives and works in Denver, Colorado. Her kids are all grown-up: her middle son is a soldier fighting in Iraq. She leads an ordinary, middle class life. You probably never would have heard of Deb Davis if it weren’t for her belief in the U.S. Constitution.

One morning in late September 2005, Deb was riding the public bus to work. She was minding her own business, reading a book and planning for work, when a security guard got on this public bus and demanded that every passenger show their ID. Deb, having done nothing wrong, declined. The guard called in federal cops, and she was arrested and charged with federal criminal misdemeanors after refusing to show ID on demand.

On the 9th of December 2005, Deborah Davis will be arraigned in U.S. District Court in a case that will determine whether Deb and the rest of us live in a free society, or in a country where we must show “papers” whenever a cop demands them.

The land of the free and the home of the brave? Right. The fact that our ancestors were free and brave doesn’t mean that we are, it only means that we are fortunate enough to have been given an example and a challenge to live up to.

The government is never your friend and it is seldom your protector. Never forget that.

This is how feminist bloggers are defeating the Patriarchy:

i got me tattoo.

yuppers. it’s purty..

Rose is biting me, now.

Vox day is a fucking retard. Dumb ass evil retard.

i have a cat on my shoulder, for really literally.

I can’t help but envision a feline-filled future for this scion of the Sisterhood. And based on this writing sample, I suspect that my buttocks may in fact be more intelligent than this future cat-collector.

Amandagon is running out of patience with the antifeminist New York Times:

there’s no doubt at this point that’s what the NY Times is up to–running a non-official series that Echidne has dubbed “New York Times Lessons For Uppity Women”. The lesson by now is shaping up. Lesson #1 for young women: Make a lot of noise about how non-ambitious you are or you won’t get a husband. Lesson #2: Women who don’t quit their careers to stay home to be wives and mothers full time are bad mothers. (Unspoken assumption is they are also bad wives.) Lesson #3, provided by Maureen Dowd: Being rich and powerful and well-respected is good and all, but only if you’re a man. If not, you need such a man in your life to count at all. Lesson #4 is provided by this Daughter Track article: If you don’t hang up your ambitions young and thereby snag that man and get to breeding, you’ll get shoehorned into giving up your job to care for elderly parents anyway. So what’s it gonna be?

One thing I really think, at least hope, that blogging is doing for feminism is that it makes it harder for feminism’s opponents to keep believing so strongly in the Strawfeminist when faced with the prospect of real feminists to have to deal with. Feminist bloggers I read come from all socioeconomic backgrounds and all races. Feminist bloggers are younger and older, male and female, gay and straight and bisexual and other sundry things, married and unmarried, religious and non-religious, career-having and job-having and even staying at home, and most of us have a pretty good sense of humor, though some of us are rowdier than others. (*ahem*) The gap between the Strawfeminist that the haters like to pick at and the real feminists out gets more and more comical every day.

The notion that blogging – sharing the real hopes, dreams and fears of feminist women – is going to make it harder for feminism’s opponents is hilarious. I mean, after wading through one after another hormone-laden, emotion-drenched, femchismo-filled lament about how Mizz Strong Independent Woman is falling to pieces because Boyfriend didn’t read her mind / doesn’t exist / dumped her, I know I’m prone to taking these lunatics more seriously as my intellectual and social peers.

What makes Amanda think that Maureen Dowd isn’t a true feminist? Maureen has long been a feminist poster girl and likely thought very much like Amanda did thirty years ago. The most striking thing about feminist bloggers is how young and immature they sound, even when they aren’t still engaged in picking up a Womens Studies, Political Science or Sociology major.

I’ve noticed that feminists tend to follow a certain trajectory over time:

18-27 – arrogant and angry
27-35 – confident, but increasingly concerned
36-45 – privately resigned, but publicly chipper
46-55 – brittle and desparate
56+ – openly sad but not always wiser

It’s been particularly interesting to see how my friends who are single, non-feminist career girls are beginning to get very angry at their feminist forebears, as they begin to realize to their shock and horror that the mysogynistic neanderthals were telling them the truth all along. Men don’t give a damn about degrees, don’t care at all about a woman’s career and tend to see these things as a threat, not to themselves, but to the possibility of a romantic relationship.

The two key things that too many women fail to grasp with regards to relationships is that men simply don’t think like women, and that the sell-by date is about 32 when it comes to dating men your own age. You don’t have to like these things, but you do have to deal with their reality. As with gravity, you ignore it at your own peril.

A new nasal spray aphrodisiac for women that works in minutes may soon hit the market…. Doctors said women who used the drug PT-141 in test studies felt a tingling or throbbing followed by a strong desire to have sex immediately after spraying their noses. PT-141 is a synthetic version of a sex hormone that works on both men and women, according to a report.

“In the case of women, what we’re really doing is sensitizing the vaginal tissue so when they get touched or stimulated, they would feel it a little bit more,” Dr. Carl Spana said. The spray allows the sex drug to work faster. “It’s a very simple product to use,” Spana said. “Essentially, you take off the protective cap and place it at the base of your nostril and then they would just activate the device while breathing normally.

“We know that some women need something — a pill, a nasal spray — to get them going,” Melinda Gallagher said in the report. “We’re all for that. But one caveat that we have about that is they should probably look around themselves before they start taking a pill.”

What’s the over/under on how long it will take for the first date rape complaint to get filed after PT-141 goes on the market? A week? Ten days? Color me skeptical… I’m still not convinced that Viagra is anything but a scam.

From the Telegraph:

Twice this week the rape laws have been called into question. First, Amnesty International expressed its shock at the findings of a poll suggesting that many people believe that if a woman flirts, fails to say no clearly, wears sexy clothes or drinks too much, she is partly or totally responsible if she is raped.

I’m shocked too, mostly because it demonstrates that the duplicitous equalitarian ethic is disintegrating faster than I’d hoped. The reason many people believe a woman is at least partly responsible for her own victimization is because in many cases that is demonstrably true. In no other circumstance is it argued that a victim of a crime is must be considered wholly innocent of responsibility regardless of his actions – just ask your insurance company if you don’t believe me. As Camille Paglia pointed out, a woman who gets drunk and goes to a man’s bedroom deserves no more sympathy or understanding from society than the man who leaves his unlocked car running with the key in the ignition or the woman who leaves her purse unattended on a public park bench.

Now, this responsibility doesn’t make the thief any less a thief, or a genuine rapist any less a rapist. (I use the term “genuine rape” because most so-called “date rape” is not rape nor a crime of any kind, because he said-she said is no basis for a system of justice. If sex without written permission is a crime, then all sex is rape and all men are unrepentant criminals.) Responsibility is not a zero-sum game.

Women have demanded freedom from paternalistic protection they enjoyed/endured in the past. Now they’ve got it, and many of them are finding that they don’t like it and thus have, as usual, turned to the State in search of the security they crave so badly.

I have to confess that I don’t understand this ceaseless quest for victimhood. Being raped doesn’t confer some mystical moral superiority on a woman, it just makes her a victim. And unfortunately, in all too many cases, it just makes her a stupid one.

I’m just curious what basis the moral relativists have for condemning rape in the first place. If I deem the slaking of my desire for lust – or violence, if you prefer that theory of rape – to be an intrinsic good, who are you to condemn it? Certainly, one could argue that it is a violation of private property rights, but then, what of those moral relativists who reject the notion of private property. If all property is held in common, then how can a woman object if I decide to make use of that which belongs to me?

Can the strength of the conservative resistance of the Social Democratic workers be calculated beforehand? It cannot. In the light of the events of the past years, this strength seems to be gigantic. But the truth is that what helped most of all to weld together Social Democracy was the wrong policy of the Communist Party, which found its highest expression in the absurd theory of social fascism. To measure the real resistance of the Social Democratic ranks, a different measuring instrument is required, that is, a correct Communist tactic. Given this condition—and it is not a small condition—the degree of internal corrosion of the Social Democracy can be revealed in a comparatively brief period. – Leon Trotsky

So, Mussolini was a Marxist leader. Hitler always declared National Socialism to be the true socialism in opposition to the Marxist variant. Leon Trotsky declares “social fascism” to be a form of “Social Democracy”, an errant Communist policy.

To which the good little American Democrat says: “but, but, but my teachers said that the Nazis were RIGHT-WING!!!!”

What do you call an organization whose largest occupational group is school teachers? The NEA? The Democratic Party? Both would be accurate answers, but the one I’m looking for is that historical champion of the state-run schools, the historical German National Socialist Worker’s Party.

Courtesy of the Physics Geek:

WHEREAS, It is the duty of all nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey His will, to be grateful for His benefits, and humbly to implore His protection and favor;

WHEREAS, Both the houses of Congress have, by their joint committee, requested me “to recommend to the people of the United States a day of public thanksgiving and prayer, to be observed by acknowledging with grateful hearts the many and signal favors of Almighty God, especially by affording them an opportunity peaceably to establish a form of government for their safety and happiness:”

Now, therefore, I do recommend and assign Thursday, the 26th day of November next, to be devoted by the people of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being who is the beneficent author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be; that we may then all unite in rendering unto Him our sincere and humble thanks for His kind care and protection of the people of this country previous to their becoming a nation; for the signal and manifold mercies and the favorable interpositions of His providence in the course and conclusion of the late war; for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty which we have since enjoyed; for the peaceable and rational manner in which we have been enable to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national one now lately instituted’ for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed, and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and, in general, for all the great and various favors which He has been pleased to confer upon us.

And also that we may then unite in most humbly offering our prayers and supplications to the great Lord and Ruler of Nations and beseech Him to pardon our national and other transgressions; to enable us all, whether in public or private stations, to perform our several and relative duties properly and punctually; to render our National Government a blessing to all the people by constantly being a Government of wise, just, and constitutional laws, discreetly and faithfully executed and obeyed; to protect and guide all sovereigns and nations (especially such as have show kindness to us), and to bless them with good governments, peace, and concord; to promote the knowledge and practice of true religion and virtue, and the increase of science among them and us; and, generally to grant unto all mankind such a degree of temporal prosperity as He alone knows to be best.

–George Washington – October 3, 1789

Strangely, I find that you all, freaks, friends and frauds alike, are among the many things for which I am thankful. To God.

Now, I’m not saying you’re particularly high on the list or anything… let’s not get carried away now.

Here we go again. SingleMind brings up the usual theme after first being kind enough to throw the snarling dog a few bones.

Vox challenged Shapiro–who is a 21-year-old law school student at Harvard–to put his money where his mouth is and join the military. In the exchange that ensued, Vox attacked Shapiro with implicit gay-baiting and suggested “methinks the lady doth protest too much.”

Now, Vox is in a long-standing spat with Michelle Malkin over her book In Defense of Internment, in which Malkin makes a case for modern-day threat profilng in the global war against terrorists (GWOT) by providing a framework for understanding the internment of Japanese Americans who resided on the West Coast in World War II. The spat has descended into a slingfest, which now has Vox calling Malkin a “liar” and referring to her with such derogatory terms as “Me-So Michelle” (which is tantamount to calling her a slut) and “media whore”.

Vox is a smart man, but this level of personal attack against Malkin–a fellow Christian, by the way–reveals a lack of maturity on his part. Having read Vox’s columns for quite some time, I hate to say this, but I think he’s jealous.

Ben Shapiro, after all, is only 21, and has written two outstanding books. Malkin is also widely published and has written three fine-selling books.

On one hand, he’s a first-rate intellect. He is so smart he can run circles around 99% of the population, but this has gotten to his head. When people challenge him, he ridicules their arguments and treats them like crap. That may arouse his loyal fans, but he ends up forgetting the Christian in his Christian libertarian label.

And Vox is published by a far bigger publishing house, has written as many books as Shapiro and Malkin combined and has almost certainly sold more copies as well. So, obviously, the reason for my biting criticism of these two twits is that I’m jealous.

Okay, that’s not really fair. Shapiro is a twit, Malkin is a – oh, Sweet Cthulhu, Bane, you know it’s physically hurting me not to say it – fraud. Both are third-rate intellects; to say that Shapiro’s books are “outstanding” defies belief. As I’ve written previously, now that the Littlest Chickenhawk has introduced us to the concepts of college professors being liberal and American men liking porn, we’re eagerly awaiting his next two books, Oxygen (very important!) and Water (wet!).

The problem with Shapiro and Malkin is that they are, along with a few others, being pushed to the forefront as the next generation of conservative opinion leader. This is a death trap for conservativism, because both are big government courtesans, the sort I referred to as Scortus medius washingtonia in Media Whores, the unpublished book for which a conservative publishing house initially offered a contract and then paid me not to write.

I’m not bitter about that – the only thing better than getting paid to write is getting paid not to write – and I’d rather write fiction anyhow. But don’t believe for one second that it’s a coincidence how every mainstream media figurehead, left and right, will ultimately come down on the side of big government.

I trash Malkin and Shapiro, not because they are intellectual garbage, but because they are intellectual garbage that far too many otherwise decent individuals inexplicably scarf up as though they were a three-course meal. If you saw a little kid gobbling used diapers, coffee grinds and banana peels from a trash can on the sidewalk, wouldn’t you try to stop him? Conservatives don’t need me to warn them about Maureen Dowd, Eric Alterman and Michael Moore, they need to be warned about the nominally right-wing big government lovers who are so busy pointing “look, no clothes!” at the Left that no one notices they are themselves skyclad.

At least Malkin has an excuse for being a girl and hiding instead of publicly defending her work. Shapiro tried to offer a pre-emptive defense, got deservedly bitchslapped and wasn’t even man enough to defend himself from an actual accuser despite previously spending two straight weeks addressing imaginary ones.

Unlike those I criticize so sharply, at least I take the time to address my critics’ arguments, often in depth, before I indulge myself by treating “them like crap”. And unlike Malkin, I never offer up pop psychological explanations for my critics’ attacks in lieu of a substantive response. As for Christianity, I seem to recall Jesus Christ wasn’t exactly shy or soft-spoken when he got in the face of hypocrites who made a habit of sucking up to government authority.

Still, I understand that there are plenty of those, like Singleminded, who consider this sort of thing to be distasteful and would rather I was more moderate in my polemics. I certainly respect this perspective and I take no offense at his expressing this nor at his recommendation.

Of course, I still don’t give an airborne rodent’s posterior and I will “cool it” with regards to “right-wing” courtesans and charlatans in the Commentariat about the same time I give up my repetitive and redundant attacks on feminist equalitarians, Marxist socialists, Republican backstabbers, Manchester United and the Green Bay Packers.

Isn’t it amazing how everyone has a pet theory of why you are attacking a target that somehow avoids them having to address the points raised? At least, that’s how it appears to a bitter, jealous, self-hating, secretly-gay capitalist running dog who can’t get laid.

PN responds to my response:

You exploit Malkin’s ethnicity and the fact that men generally find her attractive in an effort to humiliate her and further mock and discredit what she says. This is neither decent nor is it the equal treatment you claim women deserve (I don’t believe that women who want to play on an equal playing field deserve special treatment or respect–in case you forgot). Would you ever take advantage of a man’s looks (whether they be good or bad) or his ethnicity to do what you’re doing to Malkin? I highly doubt it. If you did, you’d sound so utterly stupid. Imagine, people talking about how you tried to refute what Mister-Man said by calling him ugly…or claiming that people only agree with him because he’s so gosh-darned-good-lookin’…! So if you wouldn’t do this to a man, you’re guilty of giving women the special treatment (albeit subpar) you so strongly expressed they don’t deserve.

So Michelle is a media whore–call her that. Call her exactly that. Don’t call her a name that alludes to a Da Nang hooker trying to solicit business by using the phrase, “Me so horny. Me love you long time.” You and I, along with everyone else who sees you calling her “Me-So,” knows that her media whorishness is not the only thing that this name references. Like I said above, it exploits her ethnicity, the way she looks, and her gender. Would this metaphor, this nickname, still be applicable if she were, say, an ugly, media whore Dutchman? He’d still be named Michelle, of course–we most certainly would not want to deprive you of that oh-so-clever and spicy use of alliteration.

First, if Me So doesn’t want to be mocked for her ethnicity and her gender, she should have known better than to be born a Philippina. The blame lies entirely with her. No one exploits Me So’s looks more than Miz Malkin herself; if she looked like Helen Thomas there is not a chance in Hell that she’d have a syndicated column or a book deal, much less appear from time to time on Fox. Seriously, other than her internment idiocy, she’s neither written nor said virtually anything that ten other faux conservatives haven’t said before.

That’s fine, I have no problem with those whose careers are entirely based on their physical attractions; I quite like them actually. But even the dimmest model or stripper understands t
his, while Malkin and other TV wanna-bees are desparate to convince us and them that it’s actually their intellects on offer. Please. It’s called marketing, get used to it as long as we still live in a quasi-capitalist society. In a truly meritocratic media, Fred Reed would be the most widely-syndicated columnist; he’s a far better writer than Ann Coulter and far more amusing than Jonah Goldberg, who is probably the best of the new breed. And yet, he never had a shot.

Everyone has to have a gimmick now. Me So’s schtick is Ann Coulter II: half the brains and twice the whore (minority included!). Shapiro’s bit is the same as Kyle Williams, look, ma, the little kid can write in complete sentences! Kyle lost interest in the trained monkey act; it will be interesting to see if Shapiro eventually does the same or goes right into politics proper. WND and UPS could never quite figure out what my gimmick was supposed to be – WND went with the male Ann Coulter thing, while UPS was thinking WFB with attitude – but I simply stuck with the arrogant white male motif that has served me so well for lo, these many years.

There is not, it turns out, a market for that in the mainstream media or in the conservative publishing world. C’est la vie. Not only was I not surprised, but I’m still shocked that UPS managed to sell the column to the Dallas Morning News, even if it was dropped before it ever ran.

Would I ever take advantage of a man’s weaknesses? In a heartbeat. Actually, there are those who would argue that what I did to Brave Sir William and the Littlest Chickenhawk was worse; the vast bulk of my criticism of Malkin is mind-numblingly substantive.

Which leaves us with the interesting question of what I would call an ugly, male Dutch media whore. Well, that’s obvious. Amstertrannie.

MinnesotaSmith manages to keep it within three Haloscans:

BTW, Vox, when the heck are you going to get a modern discussion forum software like EZBoard for your site? It’s way overdue; you’ve certainly got the traffic/interest level to support it.

I will make the switch as soon as someone else arranges to do so. If you have an idea, talk to Digital Cowboy – his email should be at voxday.net – and talk with him about incorporating the blog with the website there.

This is my hobby, not my job, and I’m not interested in doing anything that looks remotely like work. I understand that Blogger and Haloscan are suboptimal in the eyes of many, but they work for me with a minimum of effort.

Also, the ephemeral nature of the comments tends to prevent a few from too-easily dominating them as happens in many forums. Forums implies the need for forum cops, and while I’m sure we could arrange for that, it’s just one more thing that I know I’m not going to do myself.