Tag: trainwreck

PZ Myers attempts economics

Bemusement ensues. I haven’t thought much of PZ Myers ever since I was under the mistaken impression that he was a strange woman producing nonsensical criticisms of my WND columns. What I have come to find uniquely amusing about him is the way he applies his intellectually inexcusable Courtier’s Reply as a general intellectual principle; the man never allows complete ignorance to prevent him from spouting a ludicrous and uninformed opinion:

It reminds me why I detest Libertarians, and Ron Paul in particular. The man would be a total disaster for the economy, in addition to being a poisonous social regressive.

Just to be clear, PZ Myer’s believes Ron Paul would be a total disaster for the economy. What is so insane about this is that even neocons and moderate Republicans who absolutely loathe Ron Paul and are pulling out all the stops to prevent his nomination will readily admit that Ron Paul is the only national American politician who knows the first thing about economics, being the only one who repeatedly, for literal decades, warned about the evils of an economy built on credit.

Statements like this offer conclusive proof that self-styled champions of science often don’t give a damn about science or empirical evidence, they are merely using the patina of science to further their philosophical and political ideologies.

The Harassinator strikes again!

Herman Cain says he was just helping a woman financially… in much the same way that Eddie Murphy was just giving that tranny prostitute a ride and Hugh Grant was just helping Destiny Brown floss her teeth. Such good samaritans, the three of them:

An Atlanta businesswoman is breaking her silence, claiming she has been involved in a 13-year-long affair with Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain…. She says the physical relationship ended about eight months ago, right before Cain announced he was running for president. But the communication did not. When we asked for any corroborating evidence, she pointed us to her cell phone contacts. One name: Herman Cain.

She showed us some of her cell phone bills that included 61 phone calls or text messages to or from a number starting with 678. She says it is Herman Cain’s private cell phone. The calls were made during four different months– calls or texts made as early as 4:26 in the early morning, and as late as 7:52 at night. The latest were in September of this year.

“We’ve never worked together,” said White. “And I can’t imagine someone phoning or texting me for the last two and a half years, just because.”

We texted the number and Herman Cain called us back. He told us he “knew Ginger White” but said these are “more false allegations.” He said she had his number because he was “trying to help her financially.”

I’m sure he is telling the truth, if by “help her financially” he meant “provide her with a taste of that sweet, sweet, forbidden fruit that is known by the name of Herman Cain”. The best part is the way she describes him: “Herman Cain loves Herman Cain.” That sums it all up right there. You may recall that I told you, right from the start, that the man’s candidacy was a joke.

I shall now commence to bathe in the invigorating saline waters of Fred Backer’s tears.

UPDATE: In a conference call this morning, Herman Cain told his senior staff that he is “reassessing” whether to remain in the race. He will make his final decision “over the next several days.”

Exit Perry

Somehow, I don’t think Ron Paul would have had any problem naming the agencies he would eliminate. Of course, this shouldn’t disqualify Perry as a potential president, considering that our current one believes there are 57 states.

Joe Paterno is no hero

On the other hand, he’s not a criminal either. It’s a sad ending to an epic career, but in the end, Joe Paterno definitely had to go. Now. The truly problematic thing isn’t that he only fulfilled his legal obligations in 2002 when a homosexual pedophile was raping boys in the Penn State football facilities, but that he didn’t demand an investigation of Sandusky back in 1998 when the police, the local media, and the Penn State administration all knew about his criminal proclivities. If you read between the lines of the former defensive coordinator’s retirement after the 1999 Alamo Bowl, it is clear that the Penn State hierarchy, including Paterno, knew there was something seriously wrong with Sandusky’s behavior. Regardless of who should have done what after the man was seen raping the boy in 2002, Sandusky should never have been in a position to do anything of the sort in the first place, given what was clearly already known about him.

However, I think it is incorrect to seriously condemn either Paterno or McQueary for failing to run to the police. They both did exactly what they were supposed to do, exactly what the law required them to do. Saying that they should have run to the police doesn’t even make any sense; the police are not some sort of magic panacea in this situation for the obvious reason that Penn State has its own police force. In a university town like Penn State, going to the university administration is going to the police. It’s rather like complaining someone reported a crime to the DA rather than the receptionist at the police station.

Now, should Paterno and McQueary have spoken out afterwards given the failure of the administration to do anything? Yes, I believe so. But a failure to do the optimal thing is not synonymous with doing the wrong thing. To compare them, as some have, to Sandusky himself, or even to the administrators responsible for taking action, is both unfair and incorrect. It would have been heroic for either man to speak out and confront both Sandusky and the Penn State administration, but the reality is that most men are not cut out for such heroism. However, Paterno’s fame, combined with his willingness to take on the university administration in his own interest – they wanted him to retire years ago – versus his unwillingness to do so on behalf of the boys being raped by his former assistant, is an indelible stain on both his reputation and his moral character.

I think it is totally irrelevant that Paterno didn’t go to the campus police because I see no reason to believe they would have investigated the manner any more seriously, or been less inclined to cover up the matter, than the Penn State administration. They report to the administration after all, and more importantly, they already knew about Sandusky. From CFT: “An extensive police report exists from as far back as 1998, documenting Sandusky inappropriately touching a young boy.” Moreover, consider the way police forces around the country cover up most of the crime, including rape, that occurs on college campuses. Still, if Paterno shouldn’t have gone to the Penn State police, he absolutely should have gone public and spoken to the media after it became clear that the university administration intended to sweep Sandusky under the carpet as they and the police had done previously. Paterno should have threatened to resign then, but failing that, he should have resigned immediately once the media storm began. In fact, I have some serious questions about this story erupting so soon after Paterno broke the all-time coaching wins record, as it appears someone with links to Penn State was waiting until that happened before going public about Sandusky. There will be more nasty revelations coming, that is almost guaranteed.

However, don’t kid yourself into thinking that the gay rape scandal at Penn State is the least bit unusual. Most, not many, but most, such offenses are swept under the table by organizations from the Roman Catholic Church to your local high school. The sub-optimal, self-interested behavior of men like McQueary and Paterno is the norm. And the police forces of the USA have swept far more wrongdoing under the carpet than most people would like to believe. There are very, very few individuals who are willing to risk their jobs and reputations when the organization decides to handle a crime of this sort “internally”.

I’m not saying this to defend Paterno or McQueary. If it is still deemed appropriate to fire men and women from their jobs for moral failings, then they should certainly be fired. However, I am not sure that this is presently the case in the modern USA, given that one cannot deny employment to a homosexual, an adulterer, or a murderer of unborn children for their proven moral failings. Regardless, it is wildly naive to pretend that most people would have behaved much differently when faced with that situation. Some would, but most demonstrably would not. If heroism and strong moral character are necessary aspects of retaining one’s job, the unemployment rate will soon be well north of 75 percent.

UPDATE – My suspicions were correct. “The VP who heard the grad assistant’s claim was in charge of the campus police. He did nothing. Paterno got the witness to the head of the campus law enforcement agency who was supposed to know that a crime was being reported to him.” In other words, Paterno did tell the police, who then did nothing.

UPDATE II – And the next phase of the scandal looks as if it will go well beyond the university’s football program:
“Madden stated that two “prominent columnists” are currently investigating a rumor that Jerry Sandusky’s Second Mile Foundation, a non-profit organization aimed to serve underprivileged youths, was “pimping out young boys to rich (Penn State) donors.” Madden went on to say that Jerry Sandusky was told by those running the show at Penn State football that Sandusky had to retire after allegations made in 1998 that the defensive coordinator was guilty of “improper conduct with an underage male.” Sandusky, thought by some to be Joe Paterno’s successor at the time, abruptly and somewhat shockingly retired from coaching in 1999. It actually gets worse. Madden went on to say “When Sandusky quit, everybody knew; not just at Penn State. It was a very poorly kept secret around college football, in general. That is why he never coached in college football again and retired at the relatively young age of 55, young for a coach.””

This scandal is going to end up being about a lot more than one record-setting football coach. And don’t imagine that Penn State is the only place where the gay mafia is doing this sort of thing; homosexual pedophiles are more than 14 times more likely to be caught abusing boys than heterosexual pedophiles are caught abusing girls. Watch for the predictable and nonsensical attempts to claim that men who like to rape boys are not homosexual.

The fearful foundations of the Fourth Reich

I wrote that a few years ago in a column about TARP. But things are arguably even worse in Europe, where the bankers have forced two non-democratic changes in government in Greece and Italy. But don’t think things can’t go from bad to worse; the normally sane Ambrose Evans-Pritchard is freaked out to the point that he is calling for diplomatic and economic war rather than simply allowing the whole debacle to collapse under its own weight.

In Italy they have already made matters worse. I doubt that much will change with “technocratic governments” in either Greece and Italy, yet immense damage has been done to democratic accountability. The EU Project has become both dangerous and insane….

You cannot allow the biggest bankruptcy in history to run its course – with calamitous domino implications – before all options have been exhausted.

One can only guess what is happening in the great global centres of power, but it would not surprise me if US President Barack Obama and China’s Hu Jintao start to intervene very soon, in unison and with massive diplomatic force. One can imagine joint telephone calls to Chancellor Angela Merkel more or less ordering her country to face up to the implications of the monetary union that Germany itself created and ran (badly).

Yes, this means mobilizing the full-firepower of the ECB – with a pledge to change EU Treaty law and the bank’s mandate – and perhaps some form of quantum leap towards a fiscal and debt union.

In other words, because the EU is an evil financial empire on the verge of collapse, the US and China should intervene, prop it up, and help it transform itself into the literal Fourth Reich. Since Evans-Pritchard has generally been an intelligent and reasonable observer of past EU antics, the hysterical nature of this column should suffice to demonstrate the extraordinarily dangerous nature of the situation.

And he’s wrong. The bankruptcy is going to happen no matter what measures are taken. The financial media has learned nothing from 2008. Desperately delaying the necessary surgery is not going to improve the chances that the patient will survive.

Fruits of the Arab Spring

Remember this martyr for his faith when the neocons are celebrating the accomplishments of their World Democratic Revolution. And remember it when Republicans are explaining why it is necessary to export democracy to the savages of the third world while simultaneously importing them throughout the West:

Arab Spring, Egyptian edition: a 17 year old Christian in a high school in Mallawi was ordered by his teacher to cover up a tattoo of a cross on his wrist. True to his faith, he refused to do so and instead exposed a crucifix that he wore around his neck. He was then beaten to death by his teacher and two Muslim students:

And lest they mistakenly conclude that the enemy of their enemy is their friend, I note that neither Jews nor atheists have proven to be any better off under Sharia.

Mailvox: Exit the Harassinator

NB isn’t buying Herman Cain’s astoundingly inept attempt to deal with multiple historical accusations of sexual harassment:

I saw Herman Cain on Fox News this weekend, discussing the sexual harassment issue. He blew it.

He said he’d never sexually harassed anybody and that if the Restaurant Association settled a claim, he didn’t know about it and he hoped they didn’t pay anybody because he never did anything wrong. Now it appears there’s an out-of-court settlement involving two women who got a year’s pay each. It’s never the offense that sinks you, it’s always the cover-up.

He should have said: “I was accused of sexual harassment when I worked for the restaurant association 20 years ago. I denied I did anything wrong at that time, and I deny it today. We ended up settling out of court because it was cheaper to settle than continue paying the lawyers. Both sides agreed never to discuss the details of the settlement and I’m sticking to our agreement. That’s all I’m going to say about it.”

That would have been honest and believable. Most people would said “huh” and moved on. Now, it’s not the accusation that troubles people – hell, lots of people get falsely accused of stuff and have to settle or take a plea to avoid losing everything in litigation – it’s the lying about it that troubles us. Next, he’ll play the race card and compare himself to Clarence Thomas. When that doesn’t work, he’ll probably enter sexual harassment training for a weekend and have Billy Graham pray for him. When his wife stands beside him on stage saying she’s always believed in him, that’s the death knell.

I have to admit, I simply do not understand these morons who appear to believe that the skeletons in their closet are not going to eventually come out… unless one resorts to conspiracy theory. My explanation for this seemingly stupid behavior is that most, if not all, politicians have some sort of past history that will render them political toast if outed; Cain was probably told by the Republican establishment to settle down and not get too carried away with his success in the polls, but he went cowboy and decided to buck the system in the hopes that they wouldn’t air his dirty laundry.

On the one hand, the fact that the someone in the establishment wants to finish off his campaign tends to speak well for him. On the other hand, he is an incoherent bankster. America is probably better off with him out of the race, assuming this serves to finish him.

The incompetence of the elite

Lest you think the people of the West are being governed by their betters. It’s gotten to the point that we need a new word to collectively describe the increasingly inept oligocracy. I suggest “an incompetence of politicians”:

Her rapid rise to become the youngest minister in government has taken some colleagues by surprise. Now extraordinary claims are circulating at Westminster that Chloe Smith was appointed because David Cameron was confused about her credentials. Miss Smith, who became the youngest MP in Parliament when she won the Norwich North by-election in 2009, was promoted last weekend to become Economic Secretary to the Treasury in the mini reshuffle that followed Liam Fox’s resignation….

After Mr Cameron told Miss Smith he would like to offer her the post, she is said to have replied: ‘Well, thank you Prime Minister. . .It would be an honour, but the Treasury…it’s a little daunting…’

The Prime Minister allegedly responded: ‘Not daunting surely for someone who was a chartered accountant?’

The confusion may have arisen because the MP, an English literature graduate, worked for accountancy firm Deloitte before entering politics, but as a consultant not an accountant. The confusion may have arisen because the MP, an English literature graduate, worked for accountancy firm Deloitte before entering politics, but as a consultant not an accountant The Norwich North MP is then said to have admitted: ‘Er, well, actually Prime Minister, I wasn’t an accountant. I was a management consultant in an accountancy firm.’

Mr Cameron apparently then said ‘never mind’ and welcomed Miss Smith aboard.

So chartered accountants are supermen? What? Anyhow, it can be little surprise that the economies of the West are sinking into a slough of debt and contraction when they are overseen by such a group of astonishingly corrupt and incompetent individuals. Now, I’m not a credentialist by any means, but even I would say it is going a just a bit too far in the other direction when, in a time of very dangerous economic and financial crisis, the Economic Secretary to the Treasury is a young woman with a degree in English Literature.

That being said, she’d be hard pressed to do worse than Gordon Brown did as Chancellor of the Exchequer. Or, for that matter, as Paul Krugman would if given half the chance.

So the Pope really is the Antichrist?

I’m not what you’d call a Left Behinder, but I am eschatonically aware and I have to admit, it would certainly be a little ironic if the more extreme Protestants actually turned out to be correct after all:

The Vatican called on Monday for the establishment of a “global public authority” and a “central world bank” to rule over financial institutions that have become outdated and often ineffective in dealing fairly with crises. The document from the Vatican’s Justice and Peace department should please the “Occupy Wall Street” demonstrators and similar movements around the world who have protested against the economic downturn.

“Towards Reforming the International Financial and Monetary Systems in the Context of a Global Public Authority,” was at times very specific, calling, for example, for taxation measures on financial transactions. “The economic and financial crisis which the world is going through calls everyone, individuals and peoples, to examine in depth the principles and the cultural and moral values at the basis of social coexistence,” it said…. It called for the establishment of “a supranational authority” with worldwide scope and “universal jurisdiction” to guide economic policies and decisions.

No offense, Catholics, but it does tend to look pretty, well, evil, for the Pope to be calling for world government and a one world bank. I’m not saying the case is settled yet, but if the Vatican next announces implanted debit cards with Benedict’s smiling face on them along with the excommunication of anyone who uses cash, well, that will pretty much tend to serve as all the confirmation needed. Especially if it throws in a big, splashy peace agreement with Israel.

He bravely ran away, away

Richard Dawkins is still running as fast as he can away from William Lane Craig:

Don’t feel embarrassed if you’ve never heard of William Lane Craig. He parades himself as a philosopher, but none of the professors of philosophy whom I consulted had heard his name either. Perhaps he is a “theologian”. For some years now, Craig has been increasingly importunate in his efforts to cajole, harass or defame me into a debate with him. I have consistently refused, in the spirit, if not the letter, of a famous retort by the then president of the Royal Society: “That would look great on your CV, not so good on mine”.

What a disgusting coward! As I have repeatedly noted, Dawkins is simply not very intelligent. He clearly doesn’t understand how contemptible this makes him look to those who are not disposed to mindlessly cheer his every action. His paltry original contributions to the catalog of atheist arguments are both trivial and defective; of all the various atheist apologists currently extant, only Sam Harris is more easily refuted. He is only comfortable “debating” elderly English churchmen, who are too genteel and polite to directly engage his flawed arguments; one need not be a believer to expose their copious logical and factual flaws.

And his rationale for ducking the debate is just intellectually appalling. Given that I am much more famous around the world than nearly everyone who comments here, should I similarly decline to address anyone’s arguments who does not look good on my resume? If I followed his example, I would be rightly castigated my cowardly pomposity. Dawkins, it is now eminently clear, is more a propagandist and a social climber than a genuine intellectual. He has sold quite a few books, to be sure, but then, so did Bertha Runkle.

Who is Bertha Runkle, you ask? Precisely.

UPDATE: The Fowl Atheist comments: “So Richard Dawkins has taken the time to explain why he refuses to debate William Lane Craig. It’s a terrific put-down. I’m going to have to steal from it next time that importuning dweeb Vox Day starts pestering me to debate him.”

I find it amusing that you’re still desperately trying to justify your cowardice, my chubby little atheist friend. And there is one small problem with your attempt to utilize what shall henceforth be known as “the Dawkins Defense”. I am more famous and successful than you are. You’re a professor at a community college. I’ve assisted Sam Harris on his most significant neuroscience project, interviewed John Julius Norwich and Umberto Eco, worked with most of the top entertainment companies, written four Billboard-charting singles, and published seven more books than you. My readership is bigger. One can even reasonably argue that my contribution to science exceeds anything you have done now that my hypothesis concerning atheism being a form of autism has been supported by the research being performed at Boston University, to say nothing of my modification of the core mechanism underlying the operation of the Austrian business cycle.

So, how on Earth is debating you going to help my resume?