Category: Uncategorized

The efforts of some colleges to shut down these classic demonstrations of free speech have failed miserably. For example, at William and Mary College, administrators recently claimed that students conducting such a sale were “violating campus policy.” However, when later asked by the student protestors to cite the specific policies, the administration claimed that, “Referring to the Student Handbook at this point in time is counterproductive.”

A pilot writes: Great commentary this week. The more I listen to Wes Clark, the more I dislike him and see his lack of integrity. I am a [plane] pilot in the Air Force and I just recently flew with [an officer] who cares very little about Wes Clark. This [officer] said that Gen Clark has 3 personal traits that, when combined, make a very “dangerous” personality. They are 1) unbridled ambition, 2) extreme intellect/intelligence, and 3) incredible narcissism. It was absolutely amazing to listen to this senior [officer] talk to us about what drove then Gen Clark to make some of the decisions he made during Op. Allied Force. It gave me more insight to how Gen Clark thinks which is why I mentioned earlier about disliking him the more I listen to him. That is the main reason I enjoyed your latest commentary because it touched on the very subject I and the [officer] were talking about as we flew into Iraq and Afghanistan.

I’ve heard this from Marines, I’ve heard this from the Army, the Navy and the Air Force. Interesting, isn’t it, that those who know Wesley best are so opposed to him. But then, on the other hand, Madonna and Michael Moore think he’s spiffy. That should tell you everything you need to know about his electability.

By the way, I don’t believe the Republican rumors that Clark is any kind of stalking horse for the Clintons. Not for a second. The man is far too vain and ambitious to willingly play the patsy, and he’s intelligent enough to see through their generally rather obvious machinations. Contrary to what people believe, neither Bill nor Hillary are especially intelligent – from what I understand, Clark is at least a level up on both of them. This would not be unusual. I happen to know that at least one member of Bill Clinton’s Joint Chiefs – not Wesley Clark – had an IQ that exceeded his 137 by almost 40 points.

I’m not surprised that Dean melted down, in multiple senses, last night. This isn’t based on any sophisticated political analysis, just given that America generally prefers candidates who are taller and better-looking, with better hair, you’d expect either Wesley Clark or John Edwards to be the eventual nominee.

The fact that Kerry won means little, since Iowa is a very poor predictor of the eventual Democratic nominee. He strikes me as being far too lugubrious for one thing, and boring for another, and for a third, senators tend to make for unsuccessful candidates. Edwards is also a senator, of course, but very few people know enough about him to realize that. According to NRO’s Corner, he speaks well, which is unsurprising considering that he’s a successful trial lawyer.

Clark makes a decent candidate when seen from afar, but he’s already committed enough mistakes to sink himself twice over. His abortion comment alone would be enough to sink him, and the fact that he’s loathed by everyone in the military from generals on down means that what should be his greatest strength is actually his greatest weakness. This doesn’t matter in the Democratic primaries, where the military vote is nonexistent, but will matter greatly in the fall.

I’m not that interested in politics as horse race. But it was fun to see the media’s pet, Doc Sausage, implode like that. The only thing that would have been better is if he’d actually burst out crying. Three whole weeks of people being mean! Live by the media, die by the media. I suppose they play nicer in Vermont. What a loser.

Westcott whines: Just thought your comments about Wesley Clark were ill advised. He does not have an abstract view of the world, he has had to keep the world together in order to prevent almost a million muslims from being slaughtered by Serbia. BTW My IQ is 141 and you are an idiot. Why? because I said so.

A. Wesley Clark doesn’t keep the world together, even if he believes so.

B. Wesley Clark certainly has an abstract view of the world, which is why he is a UN-worshipper. This is true of all UN-worshippers, except those starry-eyed few who would seriously argue that the UN has significant practical relevance today as opposed to theoretical potential in a globalist vision for the future.

C. Wesley Clark and his ill-advised bombing campaign did little damage to the Serbian army and significantly worsened the ethnic cleansing that took place there.

D. You’ll have to do better than 141, wannabee.

“Stefanie Thomas, a senior women’s studies major, is performing the monologue “Reclaiming Cunt,” which depicts one woman’s passion for the word. Similar to vagina, “cunt” is not often used in daily conversation, but the women of The Vagina Monologues have embraced it. “Cunt is not a derogatory word, cunt,” Thomas said. “Cunt is a word that I have reclaimed to transform into something positive, and that is an important message. Somehow it got transformed into something negative and so this monologue is all about transforming something that could be perceived as negative and claiming it and turning it into a positive.”

Oh, dear luscious Vaginette, how I do love thee.

Though thou doth shameth my lame hand at parodee.

Try as I might, I am put to flight,

By the limitless depths of thy self-mockeree!

INTERCEPTED ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION – Excellent work, Brotherhood Idealizing Totally Curvacious Hos. For our next masterpiece, we’ll be convincing overeducated young women that having anonymous sex with strangers is a mark of self-confidence and feminist independence… oh, we already did that? Right, then that brings us to a project that is close to my heart, convincing the poor dears to swallow the notion that performing a daily blow job will prevent breast cancer. And remember, no taxation on breast augmentation!

Fred brilliantly expounds: The US government consists of five branches which are, in rough order of importance, the Supreme Court, the media, the presidency, the bureaucracy, and Congress. The function of the Supreme Court, which is both unanswerable and unaccountable, is to impose things that the congress fears to touch. That is, it establishes programs desired by the ruling political class which could not possibly be democratically enacted. While formally a judicial organ, the Court is in reality our Ministry of Culture and Morals. It determines policy regarding racial integration, abortion, pornography, immigration, the practice of religion, which groups receive special privilege, and what forms of speech shall be punished.

Interesting to see the depth of insight of a man who is, as near as I can tell, not a Christian, but nevertheless has great respect for the primary fount of Western values. Most Christians, let alone secular humanists, would vociferously argue that there’s no ongoing abolition of Christianity in America. They’d also be completely wrong.



…the two-party system prevents expression of any ideas the two parties agree to suppress. How much open discussion do you hear during presidential elections of, for example, race, immigration, abortion, gun control, and the continuing abolition of Christianity? These are the issues most important to most people, yet are quashed.

Unlike most, Fred puts his money where his mouth is. He doesn’t like the direction America is going, so he left. The truth is that America is not the most free country in the world, among other things, the Heritage Foundation puts it tenth in economic freedom. I’d put it even lower in comparison with some of the countries of New Europe who have no taste for our creeping socialism, so I imagine that our rank will be dropping in the next decade.

Susan comments (tongue-in-cheek, I do hope): To borrow a pharse- What’s frightening, to me, is the notion of intelligent people who are able to focus because they so slaver after power over others. That is why I think that anyone who is willing to put themselves in the position to alliance others by espousing their superior thoughts should be at least considered as suffering from perhaps being somewhat psychologically narcissistic.

“Pharse” may indeed describe this blog from time to time, but I do excuse typos here. I do not, however, excuse the confusion of ‘alliance” and “influence”. As for psychological narcissism, come on, Susan, it’s a blog! It’s psychologically narcissistic by definition! How on earth would you explain the popularity of the phenomenon otherwise?

As for power over others, I don’t slaver after it. Quite the opposite. I try to avoid getting saddled with it as best I can.

BP asks: First, I thank you for your Worldnetdaily commentaries. Yours is one of the few columns I always read. But I do have a question about your last column. How is it that you, a Mensa member, consistently writes a thought-provoking column, soundly grounded in reality, despite being cursed with a high intelligence? You need a column to explain the success of highly intelligent people. Interestingly enough, In my close circle of friends, personal and economic success seems to have a small negative correlation with intelligence. But at the subnormal levels life is definite difficulty among those I know.



You are, of course, quite welcome. As confusing as life can be for the super-bright, there’s no question that it’s much tougher for the stupid. They deserve our pity, our respect and our help, though never our contempt, and there is no justification to proclaim ourselves a self-selected elite worthy to rule over them, however distasteful their aesthetics and appalling leisures may be to we happy arrogant few. However, I suggest that you could argue my column is anything but successful. There are plenty of columns written by the less-than-brilliant that appear in hundreds of papers around the country, while mine is dismissed by editors – even those open to my political ideology – as being over the heads of their readers, which may be why it only appears in precisely two places. I’ve been told by numerous parties to dumb it down, (excuse me, make it more accessible), if I wish to increase the odds of my success. A columnist more focused on the financial success and fame of his column would certainly do so. I considered it for about a week.

And, I won’t. Why not? Not out of some prideful quasi-artistic pique, but because as a conventionally unfocused megabrain, I have other interests that claim my attention, some of which are significantly more lucrative than mediahood, some of which are orders of magnitude less so. I’ve concluded that my media career, such as it is, is nothing more than a hobby so I’m free to write as I please. For example, these last two columns are about as close as I’ll get to the political horse race that will dominate 80 percent of everyone else’s columns for the rest of the year; how many variations on “why Bush is bad” and “why Clark is stupid” do we really need to read? A lot more than I want to write, I’m sure.

So, you see, I can be just as functionally-stupid in my own way. But at least I know it. General Clark doesn’t.

I’ve added an RSS feed, though I’m not sure what the best way to let people know about it is, and I’m also curious to see if it will increase or cut down on blog traffic, but I thought I’d give it a whirl anyhow. The feed is http://feeds.blogstreet.com/39490.rss.

One of the reasons I felt pretty comfortable making the assertions I did in today’s column is that I am not only in the high-powered intellectual range myself, but I have three close acquaintances and two extended-family members who also are. The brightest of the bunch, interestingly enough, is the one who would almost certainly be accounted the biggest failure in social, career and societal contribution terms. Horn lived in the basement of the Digital Ghetto for about two years, taking a low-level tech job only when he ran out of money – usually being promoted twice within the first three months. He would also almost always make some simple, but astoundingly brilliant suggestion to modify the company’s procedures that would be immediately enacted by a surprised and happy management.

Then, as soon as he’d stashed a bit of money in the bank, he’d lose interest and stop showing up for work. Most people who knew him blamed his behavior on the copious amount of chemicals he added to his bloodstream, but that wasn’t it at all. He always knew what he was doing – indeed, he had a far better idea than most people I know – he simply didn’t have much interest in the trappings of a normal life. I also saw, first-hand, how his irrepressible curiosity prevented him from accomplishing much, as he’d spend an evening writing a lovely, melodic song on the synthesizers, then not bother to save the MIDI file because he’d thought up an interesting new synthetic chemical formula or conceived a design for a monstrous superbong that required two men to move. That one, he actually built. “The filtration is excellent!” Yeah, and if the police come, we can just push it over and drown them.

It was always interesting to live with him, though. And it certainly does sharpen the intellect to have someone walk into your room at three in the morning and lead off with “So what do you think Kant meant when….” Please, please, tell me this is a nightmare….

I’m not in Horn’s league where raw upstairs firepower is concerned, but Space Bunny would probably tell you that I have the same distaste for focus, even though chemicals don’t figure into my interests. My next company could quite reasonably justify a ten-digit market cap in five years, assuming that I don’t get too distracted with writing my next fantasy novel or designing the multi-level stratego-tactical historical wargame I’ve been pondering since 1992. That will sound ridiculous to most people, of course, and yet I’m truly as interested in the third concept as the first. I’ve certainly put more time into it.

What’s frightening, to me, is the notion of intelligent people who are able to focus because they so slaver after power over others. That is why I think that anyone who is willing to put themselves through the grueling rigor of the campaign process should be barred as being psychologically unfit for office.