Autopetard-hoistery

Glenn Greenwald explains why the law demands hanging the anti-speech champions high on their own scaffold:

In June, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its 6-3 ruling in the case of Holder v. Humanitarian Law. In that case, the Court upheld the Obama DOJ’s very broad interpretation of the statute that criminalizes the providing of “material support” to groups formally designated by the State Department as Terrorist organizations. The five-judge conservative bloc (along with Justice Stevens) held that pure political speech could be permissibly criminalized as “material support for Terrorism” consistent with the First Amendment if the “advocacy [is] performed in coordination with, or at the direction of, a foreign terrorist organization” (emphasis added). In other words, pure political advocacy in support of a designated Terrorist group could be prosecuted as a felony — punishable with 15 years in prison — if the advocacy is coordinated with that group.

This ruling was one of the most severe erosions of free speech rights in decades because, as Justice Breyer (joined by Ginsberg and Sotomayor) pointed out in dissent, “all the activities” at issue, which the DOJ’s interpretation would criminalize, “involve the communication and advocacy of political ideas and lawful means of achieving political ends.” The dissent added that the DOJ’s broad interpretation of the statute “gravely and without adequate justification injure[s] interests of the kind the First Amendment protects.” As Georgetown Law Professor David Cole, who represented the plaintiffs, explained, this was literally “the first time ever” that “the Supreme Court has ruled that the First Amendment permits the criminalization of pure speech advocating lawful, nonviolent activity.” Thus, “the court rule[d] that speech advocating only lawful, nonviolent activity can be made a crime, and that any coordination with a blacklisted group can land a citizen in prison for 15 years.”

In August of last year, The Christian Science Monitor‘s Scott Peterson published a detailed exposé about “a high-powered array of former top American officials” who have received “tens of thousands of dollars” from a designated Terrorist organization – the Iranian dissident group Mojahedin-e Khalq (MEK) — and then met with its leaders, attended its meetings, and/or publicly advocated on its behalf. That group includes Rudy Giuliani, Howard Dean, Michael Mukasey, Ed Rendell, Andy Card, Lee Hamilton, Tom Ridge, Bill Richardson, Wesley Clark, Michael Hayden, John Bolton, Louis Freeh — and Fran Townsend.

For some reason, those who favor an expanded role for government never seem to understand that a government with the power to do things you want necessarily has the power to do a lot of things you don’t want. But it’s hardly surprising that Giuliani, Bolton, and Freeh are legally considered terrorists. They have been for a long time.

It should be interesting to see how National Review reacts to this news in light of their inexplicable cheerleading for the nonexistent political career of John Bolton.

50,062

That’s how many words Word Dynamo estimates me to know. Now, I would argue that it’s an artificially low estimate, since it doesn’t include any Italian, German, French, or Japanese words. But despite its limited word list, the test is rather well-designed, as it keeps getting harder as you progress up the difficulty ramp.

Check it out and see how you do. And here is another benefit of homeschool. One of our elementary school age kids took the test and scored 20,090. Ender scored 43,814.

But speaking of homseschooled accomplishment, I would be badly remiss in failing to offer congratulations to the daughter of one of the original Ilk:

After correctly spelling “pickelhaube,” “idiopathic” and “pharmacology,” Elise Stahl of Greenfield won the seven-county metro-area regional spelling bee Saturday on the word “remand.” In the 16th round, Elise, 12, outlasted Eva Beeman Trelstad, 10, of St. Paul and Benjamin Pults, 13, of Maplewood to represent Minnesota at the Scripps National Spelling Bee in Washington, D.C., in May.

Chalk one up for the Grizzlies! League sources were heard to say that Greenfield would be wise to consider turning the team’s drafting responsibilities over to the young Miss Stahl.

WND column

Greek default and eurocollapse

Even a regular observer might have lost track of how many Greek rescue agreements were announced over the last two years. A default was impossible. It had been prevented, we were repeatedly assured. And yet, despite all of these many success stories, the Greek government nevertheless announced that it would not be repaying 100 billion of the 206 billion euros it owed to its creditors, while simultaneously signing up for 130 billion euros in new debt. Needless to say, there is almost no chance that any of that new debt will be repaid; this is nothing more than another flimsy support in the giant, extend-and-pretend structure with which the Federal Reserve, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund are attempting to shore up the global economy.

The subtle sexism of white knights

Dr. Helen has some advice for men concerning the equalitarian’s new discovery of “benevolent sexism”:

I hear women constantly complaining that men aren’t gentlemanly or don’t want much to do with them anymore. But with the stakes so high, who can blame them?

Guys, my advice? At work, avoid any woman who looks your way. If you must engage, use few words and whatever you do, don’t try to help or compliment her. Men are already wary to work with women or be around women for fear of being called a pervert, charged with sexual discrimination, or worse. Now, subtle sexism is here. Who has the time to figure it out? It’s no wonder many men prefer porn.

The solution is pretty simple. If it’s not your job, it’s not your concern. And when you’re approached by a female co-worker who flashes that sweetly helpless smile before making an appeal to your strong manly competence, don’t fall for it. Just return the smile and say “I’m sorry, I can’t help you with that.” And repeat it, with a smile, until she stops wheedling and trying to get you to do her work for her.

No one who claims he can swim has any call to complain when you fold your arms and watch him sink. The same holds true for women.

Winning hearts and minds

Surely Obama can simply apologize for this mass murder and make everything all right; that worked so well after the Korans were burned.

A US soldier in Afghanistan has killed at least 16 civilians and wounded five after entering their homes in Kandahar province, senior local officials say. He left his military base in the early hours of the morning and opened fire in at least two homes; women and children were among the dead.

If this isn’t a sign that the occupation of Afghanistan has to end, and end now, I don’t know what more is needed. It’s a little hard to pretend they hate us for our freedoms when our soldiers are invading homes and murdering children.

Green shoots redux

The IMF’s Lagarde announces “economic spring is in the air“:

A couple of weeks ago, I sat on the speakers’ podium during the opening panel of the Euromoney Bond Investors’ Congress in London. Together with leading industry experts, including senior ratings agencies’ officials, we engaged in a detailed discussion of the contentious aspects of the Greek debt debacle and the fate of the eurozone.

The audience was “top drawer; the room packed with 500 of the world’s biggest bond market participants; the combined assets under management measured in the trillions of dollars.

“Who thinks the upcoming Greek bail-out will be the last, drawing a line under the eurozone’s sovereign debt crisis?” asked the senior Euromoney staffer chairing the panel. “Put your hands up”.

Delivered with a serious demeanour, this was exactly the right question. So deadly was the inquiry, and so germane, that the mood in the room grew uneasy, barely camouflaged by an outbreak of coughing. Scanning this ultra-influential audience, I saw rows of delegates cowed, keeping their eyes locked forwards but staring down slightly, not daring to look elsewhere.

Not a single hand was raised. Not a single hand among hundreds of the world’s leading bond market practitioners was stirred to support a debt swap now presented as the key to the world economy shaking off the post sub-prime torpor and taking us into the sun-lit uplands of sustainable global growth.

On Friday, Greece pressed ahead with the largest sovereign debt restructuring in history. By “securing adequate participation” from the private sector, Athens avoided a big, disorderly default in late March. Holders of €172bn (£143bn) of the €206bn of eligible bonds agreed to take part in the write-down, or 83.5pc. Participation has since risen to 95.7pc after the Greek government triggered retrospective “collective action clauses”, forcing objecting investors to play ball.

This deal was “voluntary”, in the words of one market wag, “in the same way confessions were voluntary during the Spanish Inquisition”. In other words, unless this deal was agreed, bond-holders faced ending-up with nothing at all. Under the current terms, investors swap their bonds for new ones worth 53.5pc less and with easier repayment terms for Greece.

So, Greece has defaulted, despite all of the assurances to the contrary. So, the next question is, who is next? And, of course, how long until Germany pulls the plug on the EU project. Also, there is this to consider: “With the addition of the new IMF/EU loans of $172 billion and the revelation of the guaranteed debt at $107 billion Greece now has $279 billion of new and hidden debts.”

Libertarianism in one country

It’s too late for the USA, but from a theoretical perspective, Steve Sailer is correct about the impossibility of using liberty to lead by engaged example:

It’s time for us good guys to take a lesson in prudence from the bad guys. As you may recall, Trotsky and Stalin had a little falling out. Trotsky wanted to pursue “permanent worldwide revolution.” In contrast, Stalin thought it wiser to concentrate on “revolution in one country,” and only pick off buffer states as circumstances allowed. Stalin won the debate with Trotsky through the penetrating power of his logic (and ice pick), and went on to be the most enduringly successful of the 20th Century’s sizable cast of monsters.

This is what libertarians must realize: There is staggeringly too much inequality in the world for America’s love affair with capitalism to survive importing massive amounts of it.

As my Southern Baptist pastor used to say, it is much easier to pull someone down than it is to lift someone up. Free trade and open borders have turned out to be nearly as significant factors in the American decline as increased government spending and women’s suffrage. None of which, of course, were as important as the establishment of the third central bank, but it is worth noting these things in the process of the ongoing decline and fall in the hopes that future generations will turn out to be wiser than we were.

Just as many of the arguments that pervade our political debate today were presaged one hundred, and sometimes one thousand years ago, we can reasonably expect politicians of the far future to be arguing over whether free trade with the aliens in the Gar Zephrod sector will be of benefit to the economy or not. And we can also expect that leftist equalitarians of the far future will be shocked when the carnivorous Hleetongs of Xpicol IV, who were permitted to settle en masse among the posthuman colonists of New New York, begin devouring their neighbors.

Mailvox: Why they hate

Feminists absolutely hate this blog, although not for the reasons they claim. It’s not because I hate women, because I don’t, or because I openly display contempt for women, although I do. It’s not because I’m afraid of strong independent women, because I don’t fear unicorns either, or because I don’t believe in sexual equality, even though I don’t.

The real reason they hate this blog, and fear it, is because they understand on some level that it is convincing. A ruthless commitment to logic and truth tends to be persuasive over time because the human mind can only stand so much cognitive dissonance before it either begins to break down or accept the observable truth. And there is nothing that feminists fear so much as women being exposed to the unvarnished truth and seeing through the vast accumulation of the Sisterhood’s many lies.

SarahsDaughter comments:

The worst challenge to our marriage occurred three years ago. Looking back at it, I am so disappointed in myself that leaving him entered my mind. And again I was reminded that my replacement was out there. They (the replacements) are quite eager to proclaim their availability. In a desire to fix our problems, I went to a psychologist. He completely agreed with me, offered no valuable advice, and creeped me out. My husband suggested I start reading this crazy, misogynist (my words, at first) blog (VP). Really, I’d like to tell you that my faith, relationship with God, profound books, and wisdom made the difference in how I deal with conflict. I’d be lying. It was because of men and women on VP speaking of logic and shaming the irrational nature of women that I began a journey to root out feminism in my thoughts and truly understand and accept the vows I made before God.

While I don’t write this blog for anyone but myself, I’m always pleased to hear that others consider it to be in some way beneficial to themselves as well, particularly when it helps them break out of the intellectual chains that have been holding them mentally captive. We all have them. We are unthinking Republicans who believe God blesses the USA despite its corporate abjuration of Him, we are equalitarians who believe in many equalities that have never been observed in the wild or in captivity. We are science fetishists who have never noticed that there is no method in the peer reviewed madness. We are progressives against progress, feminists without femininity and Christians who believe Christ sins for us.

But whatever the chains are, they can be broken.

I am under no illusion that I am always correct. But the challenges that others offer, particularly the serious and intelligent challenges, help me continually refine and strengthen my positions, which is why I particularly appreciate those critics who are able to force me to rethink my assumptions as well as my conclusions. And as for the anklebiters and those who harbor vehement hate for the blog, I would only be concerned if such intellectual cripples admired it.

Team Calvin: Question Five

EE. “YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR STRENGTH, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND ; AND YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF.” (Luke 10:27)

Now large crowds were going along with Him; and He turned and said to them, “If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his own father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters, yes, and even his own life, he cannot be My disciple. (Luke 14:25, 26)

How do you reconcile the Second Great Command with Jesus’ statement about hating one’s father and mother, etc.?

A) Jesus contradicts Himself
B) Hate != hate
C) One verse is hyperbole
D) Other

There are two ways to reconcile it. My assumption is that the verses about hating everyone is hyperbole. However, it is also possible to reconcile the two verses by noting that the Second Great Command is in response to the question “what must I do to inherit eternal life?” while the statement about hate concerns what one must do to become Jesus’s disciple. Since “inheriting eternal life” is not necessarily synonymous with “becoming a disciple”, the two passages cannot be regarded as being definitively in contradiction.

But, as I said, I incline towards the hyperbole explanation. And with this answer, I conclude my part of the Team Calvin Challenge. I lead it to you, the reader, to determine if you believe that these five answers show me to be guilty of the same contortions we have previously observed in Team Calvin’s various interpretations of Scripture.

Team Calvin: Question 1
Team Calvin: Question 2
Team Calvin: Question 3
Team Calvin: Question 4