Blog Tools
Edit your Blog
Build a Blog
RSS Feed
View Profile
« March 2012 »
1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31
You are not logged in. Log in
Entries by Topic
All topics  «
Decline of the West
Freedom's Guardian
Liberal Fascism
Military History
Must Read
Politics & Elections
The Box Office
The Media
Virtual Reality
My Web Presence
War Flags (Website)
Culture & the Arts
The New Criterion
Twenty-Six Letters
Monday, 19 March 2012
From the Department of Unintentional Hilarity
Topic: Liberal Fascism


Good news for Barack Obama and the socialist cause: “Supermodel Elle Macpherson Loves Obama: 'I’m Socialist—What Do You Expect?'”


Elle, you’re exactly what I’d expect. You are, in fact, the very model of a modern socialist: rich, super-privileged, out of touch with reality and contemptuous of all those little people who just don’t understand what’s good for them. Marx, that wicked old sinner, must be rolling over in his grave…

Posted by tmg110 at 8:31 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Sunday, 18 March 2012
A Lost Cause
Topic: Freedom's Guardian

Incidentally, I don't disagree with Fisk's opinion that the US is losing the war in Afghanistan. I suspect, however, that we'd disagree as to the reason. He would no doubt insist that the war was always "unwinnable." That's the Left's standard line on any war undertaken by America. I blame the debacle on President Obama's feckless, politically driven policies. We didn't so much lose this war as give it away. And considering the number of American troops who've been killed or wounded there on Obama's watch, I'd say that he's got some explaining to do…

Posted by tmg110 at 3:36 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
The Face of the Enemy
Topic: Liberal Fascism


The vile and vicious anti-Americanism of the Left is well on display in this story from the odious Robert Fisk, who has seized upon the massacre of sixteen Afghan civilians by a US soldier to spew out this nonsense (Fisk is referring to General John Allen’s cautionary statement to his troops after six NATO soldiers were killed in revenge for the burning of desecrated Korans):


Now this was an extraordinary plea to come from the US commander in Afghanistan. The top general had to tell his supposedly well-disciplined, elite, professional army not to "take vengeance" on the Afghans they are supposed to be helping/protecting/nurturing/training, etc. He had to tell his soldiers not to commit murder. I know that generals would say this kind of thing in Vietnam. But Afghanistan? Has it come to this? I rather fear it has. Because—however much I dislike generals—I've met quite a number of them and, by and large, they have a pretty good idea of what's going on in the ranks. And I suspect that Allen had already been warned by his junior officers that his soldiers had been enraged by the killings that followed the Koran burnings—and might decide to go on a revenge spree. Hence he tried desperately—in a statement that was as shocking as it was revealing—to pre-empt exactly the massacre which took place last Sunday.


Of course, what Fisk suspects is in no way backed up by anything like evidence, and we can probably discount his claim to expertise where generals are concerned. Anyone who has actually served in the military could have explained to this jerk what General Allen was thinking, and there was nothing “extraordinary” about it. He well understands that even well-trained professional soldiers are vulnerable to the atavistic emotions roused by the dehumanizing conditions of combat. One of the purposes of military discipline—indeed, its most important purpose—is to manage these emotions. That’s what General Allen was doing.


Atrocities have of course occurred in all wars, and they are of two types: those resulting from a breakdown of discipline, either individually or at the unit level, and those carried out as deliberate policy. Examples of the first type are My Lai and the recent massacre in Afghanistan; examples of the second type are the Nazi German campaign in the Soviet Union and Islamofascist terrorism.


Fisk pretends to see no difference between an atrocity resulting from a lapse of discipline and one resulting from a deliberate policy of terror. To call him intellectually dishonest would be too gentle a condemnation of the America-hating hard Leftist. He’s an implacable enemy of America—and the fact that he’s alive and well and spewing out this garbage is a sufficient proof of the difference between America and its Islamofascist enemies.

Posted by tmg110 at 3:31 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Your Papers, Please
Topic: Liberal Fascism


One of the many ways in which progressives betray their intellectual dishonesty is the jihad against laws that require voters to present an ID before casting a ballot. This, the Left insists, discriminates against “minorities” who are deemed too stupid and incompetent to obtain in ID—though not too stupid and incompetent to vote. That appears to be the ACLU’s position


Considering that ID is required nowadays for so many daily transactions—cashing a check, obtaining public assistance, getting a job, etc.—the claim that “minorities” may not possess an ID is incredible in both senses of the word. Furthermore, it betrays the condescending, not to say contemptuous, attitude that progressives take toward their officially designated mascot groups. It also shows that the Left has very little regard for the integrity of the vote. For progressives, winning isn’t everything—it’s the only thing. And if winning requires illicit votes, why, that’s just fine.


So I’m wondering: If you’re a black American, or a Hispanic American, or a gay American, how do you feel about the progressive claim that you’re too helpless and pathetic to be treated like a responsible citizen?

Posted by tmg110 at 9:11 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Friday, 16 March 2012
Angelica, I Fart in Your General Direction...
Topic: Liberal Fascism


A superb piece of socio-political commentary from one of America’s most notable thinkers: Angelica Huston: US Returning to “Dark Ages”


That her conception of the Dark Ages is no doubt based on a boozy viewing of Monty Python and the Holy Grail in no way detracts from the scalpel-like incisiveness of Ms. Huston’s analysis.

Posted by tmg110 at 5:37 PM EDT
Updated: Friday, 16 March 2012 8:32 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Barry's Improbable History
Topic: Decline of the West


Anyone who still thinks that our community organizer-in-chief is a master of political rhetoric should review his remarks yesterday to students at Prince George Community College: “Obama delighted [the students] by blasting his Republican critics for their resistance to investing in alternative energy sources, comparing their stance to the beliefs of those who thought that Christopher Columbus would sail off the edge of the world.”


But as Clayton Cramer notes, the President showed himelf to be as ignorant of history as the students who applauded him so wildly:


Now, if you attended high school, or college, you would know (or should know) that there was no educated European who thought the Earth was flat. None. The dispute that made it hard for Columbus to get funding was that he insisted the Earth was 18,000 miles in circumference, so the Indies were a plausible voyage west from Spain. The experts who told the various governments of Europe that Columbus wasn't going to be successful thought the Earth was closer to 25,000 miles around—and sailing west to the Indies was going to be a failure. Had there not been the Americas in the way, Columbus and crew would have died of thirst.

Given the sad state of American public education, it’s no surprise that the students at Georgetown Community College gave no clue. And come to think of it, it’s no surprise that Obama is also clueless. The chief distinguishing characteristic of a know-it-all is that he’s unteachable.

Posted by tmg110 at 8:41 AM EDT
Updated: Friday, 16 March 2012 8:46 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Minimizing the Bad News
Topic: The Media

So last evening I received the following news alert via email from the New York Times:

Representative Gary Ackerman, a longtime member of Congress from Queens and Long Island, announced on Thursday that he would not seek re-election, in an unexpected development that brings an end to a colorful political career.

In a statement, Mr. Ackerman said: “The residents of Queens and Long Island have honored me with their trust and support for the past 34 years, first as a New York state senator, and for the past 15 terms as a member of Congress. I’ve been truly privileged to have had the opportunity to fight for the beliefs of my neighbors in both the state capital and in the halls of Congress.” His term will end Jan. 2, 2013.

And it seemed to me that something was missing. But what? Oh, right, the Times neglected to mention that Ackerman is a Democrat. To be fair, the full story does allude to his party affiliation, if only to reassure nervous liberals. After noting that Ackerman's announcement has "suprised and baffled" his fellow Dems, the story went on to opine, no dount hopefully, that his redistricted seat is unlikely to flip to the GOP. Really? Maybe the retiring congressman knows something that they don't know…and that the Times is too discreet to mention…

Posted by tmg110 at 8:17 AM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Thursday, 15 March 2012
Guess Who Came To Dinner?
Topic: Decline of the West


I know that standards have slipped since King Charles X of France was deposed in 1830, but really—this is the bloody limit! One of the weirdest, most crack-brained intellectual degenerates on the World Wide Web is Andrew Sullivan, whose widely broadcast obsession with Sarah Palin’s last pregnancy literally makes one’s flesh creep. And he, of all people, was invited to the state dinner that President Obama threw in honor of British Prime Minister David Cameron. Why not just go the distance and bring in Bill Maher to do some gynecological standup?

Posted by tmg110 at 9:42 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
A Very Typical Shambles
Topic: Decline of the West


That column of smoke you see rising in the distance marks the crash sight of what passed for Barack Obama’s Afghanistan policy. The fiasco in which he has embroiled the United States was foreordained from the day he accompanied the Afghanistan troop surge with a politically calibrated “exit strategy.” Prepare for bad news when a politician with a war on his hands starts bloviating about his “exit strategy”: It’s a euphemistic way of conceding defeat.


As is usual with our philosopher-president, Obama thought he could have it both ways: look tough by surging troops into the battle zone; look touchy-feely by pledging to get out by a date certain. This merely ensured (1) that the hardships and sacrifices of the troops deployed would be in vain, (2) that our ally, the government of Afghanistan, knowing that we’d soon be gone while the Taliban remained, would begin to hedge its bets and (3) that the Taliban would have no incentive to negotiate. Today, to the surprise of no one except Obama and the clueless dolts who mismanage foreign policy on his behalf, (1) the Taliban broke off talks with the US and (2) the government of Afghanistan demanded an acceleration of the US/NATO withdrawal. “If it were done when 'tis done, then 'twere well it were done quickly.”


Why, indeed, should the Taliban negotiate when Afghanistan will soon be theirs for the taking? And why should the government of Afghanistan trust the Obama Administration, with the precipitous abandonment of Iraq so green in memory? No one in the Obama Administration seems to have raised these obvious questions. Perhaps they trusted in Barry’s godlike powers of persuasion. Or something.


Two years ago, there were good arguments both for prosecuting the war in Afghanistan with the aim of scoring a clear-cut success, or of cutting our losses and pulling out. Obama couldn’t see this. Instead he tried to split the difference. Result: a humiliating debacle that will alarm our allies and embolden our enemies. How, for example, can Israel reasonably be expected to trust the promises of a feckless, light-minded US president?


“Let them hate as long as they fear” is a key principle of foreign policy—and “Can’t we all just get along?” is no substitute.

Posted by tmg110 at 7:40 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink
Topic: Virtual Reality

Just a note to advise that WAR FLAGS, my website devoted to military and naval flags of the world, past and present, has been updated with new content. The Featured Flags are the King's Standard and Regimental Standard of the 4th Regiment of Horse (British Army, 18th Century). Look for them on the front page. In the Showcase: current naval flags of Romania. Click on the "Latest Updates" link to see what else is new.

Historical Flags of the World, the WAR FLAGS special section devoted to flags of historical significance (not necessarily military) has been updated with a page covering the flags of the Boers of South Africa.

Posted by tmg110 at 3:02 PM EDT
Post Comment | Permalink

Newer | Latest | Older