CNN: War on Islamic Woman, too!

One cannot read this CNN op-ed entitled "I'm a Feminist, and I Converted to Islam" without considering for a moment it might simply be satire designed to gather web hits rather than pass on a rational perspective..

I am a Muslim, but I wasn't always. I converted to Islam in November 2001, two months after 9/11. I was 21 and living in Baton Rouge, Louisiana. It was a bad time to be a Muslim. But after four years of studying, poking and prodding at world religions and their adherents, I decided to take the plunge.

Well OK then. The barbaric act of 9/11 pushed her over the edge and she converted shortly thereafter to the religion of the attackers. Moving along..

I was drawn to Islam's appeal to intellect and heartened by the prophet Mohammed's quote, "The acquisition of knowledge is compulsory for every Muslim, whether male or female."

I was astounded that science and rationality were embraced by Muslim thinkers such as Al-Khawarizmi, who invented algebra; Ibn Firnas, who developed the mechanics of flight before Leonardo DaVinci; and Abu al-Qasim al-Zahrawi, who is the father of modern surgery.

Yeah, but what have they done for us lately?  And she appears to be offhandedly dissing Christianity, the mainstream religion in play during the advances of Western Civilization, which included landing on the Moon and Mars.  Obama didn't appoint the NASA Administrator to outreach to the Muslim world because they'd already been there.

We continue, getting into the meat of the title (Islamic feminism)..

But when I asked a Muslim woman "Why do you wear that?", her answer was obvious and appealing: "To please God. To be recognized as a woman who is to be respected and not harassed. So that I can protect myself from the male gaze."

Ah, the male gaze.  Conservative, like Quakers or Amish. No wait, they are not cool because they don't believe in science and learning, Insha-allah! Muslims use air conditioners and women drive cars after all. Well, some women drive cars, if allowed by their menfolk. Onward..

She listed right after right that women in Islam held nearly 1,250 years before women's lib was ever thought of in the West. Surprisingly, Islam turned out to be the religion that appealed to my feminist ideals.

Which is completely incoherent.

The essay continues..

It might shock you to know that I had an arranged marriage.

What says feminism more than an arranged marriage?

I have been spat on, had eggs thrown at me and been cursed at from passing cars. And I have felt terror when the mosque I attended in Savannah, Georgia, was first shot at, then burned down.

Curiously, it's hard to find even one mainstream media story--even from CNN--about a mosque being burned down in Savannah.  One would think that such an act of Islamophobia, especially with the likely culprits being redneck hillbilly gun-toting racists, during the reign of George W. Bushitler, would have been the top story for months on the cover of the NY Times had it happened. Yet the only story about it in the first 5 pages on Google is from an Islamic grievance website. Finally:

In my journey to Islam, I came to learn that Muslims come in all shapes, sizes, attitudes, ethnicities, cultures and nationalities. I came to know that Islam teaches disagreement and that shouldn't lead to disrespect, as most Muslims want peace.

Most of all, I have faith that my fellow Americans can rise above fear and hatred and come to learn the same.

It's comforting to know that MOST Muslims want peace.  It's just hard to figure out which ones when the terrorists tend to live underground in western societies for years before suddenly blowing up somewhere.

But as stated, not only is she a victim of the hateful American gaze she's now a victim of the potential backlash from the un-Islamic Islamic State terrorists because their interpretation of Islam (or shall we say "disagreement") is more in line with the 19 Muslims who attacked America on 9/11 causing her to convert.

It's almost as if CNN made up this entire story.   But they didn't.  And some people will take it seriously, using it to condemn western civilization as the evil Christian bullies again. 

At the same time, it's a toss up as to whether any American feminist organizations will even weigh in on the story.   That might force them to defend bashing the GOP as engaged in a war on women when true injustices remain rampant in many majority Muslim lands.  Calling for equal rights for all Islamic women might be dangerous, after all, and certainly not productive to the cause.  Look at what happened to Bill Maher when he urged liberal consistency on the issue.

No, if this lady wanted to really make her point she could have mentioned the brave Islamic ladies actually engaged in the fight against the "un-Islamist" ISIS....

Wonder what she thinks about these liberated Islamic women?  

Portland Shooting and other Crazy Things

Welcome to upside down world.

So there's a random shooting at a mall--during Christmas shopping season--by this guy...

By the way, is that a keffiyeh he's wearing?  And yet, there no mention of possible terrorism.  The media scratches its collective head and says, "we may never know the motive".  Well hell, other than some kind of insane crazyperson justice there are a few other possibilities.  Perhaps he just saw the Mohammed video. 

Apparently we've reached a point where the media doesn't even bother quoting an FBI guy ensuring it wasn't connected to terrorism before an investigation has even begun anymore.   Now the media is perplexed because he had no apparent connection to the victims.  Yeah--just like the 9/11 hijackers, Major Hasan, Abdulmuttalab, Abdulhakim, Shehzad and almost all jihadists or highway serial killers.  But don't worry, evidently Barney and Andy up there in the Clackamas PD will be handling it.

MORE..  Jawa says "crazy guy".  Yessir, he's crazy regardless of whether he's a lone nut, lone sudden jihadist, lone wolf, lone hockey mask killer, lone mall killer, etc.   That fact has never been in question.  During the Clackamas Sheriff press conference the spokesman did address the terrorism angle--adamantly dismissing a report that the FBI had taken the lead on the case as a terrorism investigation. 

Other items--his birth name was not Roberts, he was raised by a woman named Roberts, no mentions of his father or background in the press reports so far.  Questions remaining would be who he reportedly stole the gun from and his ancestry.  It's looking like loser snap syndrome.  Not sure which is worse to consider for the future--sudden jihadists or nuts who for some reason can't just kill themselves in a stairwell without first trying to take out scores of others.     
------

Here's a headline for you...

"Tea Party protesters punch Democrat, tear down Center for American Progress tent".

Or how about this one...

"Andrew Breitbart declares a coming 'civil war'".

Yet we have the Crowder punchout and Hoffa, Jr. stories being covered a little differently.  You remember Hoffa, who once appeared at an Obama rally and said they had to 'take these son-of-a-bitches out' referring to the violent, gun-toting "Tea Baggers".     


-----

Finally, Senator Robert Menendez allegedly had an illegal alien sex offender working for him in his office.   The stuff is now hitting the fan--perhaps delayed intentionally until after the election, which he won.  The illegal is in the process of being deported. 

Contrast that to Meg Whitman, who employed an illegal maid through an employment service.  The maid, possibly coerced by the Brown campaign into coming out in return for something, splashed herself all over the media and was likely instrumental in taking out Whitman's bid to become the California governor.  As far as is known that Maid, Nicky Diaz, is still in the country.   She was even honored at a 'gala'.  

Rhode Island School Prayer

The prayer that was removed..

SCHOOL PRAYER

OUR HEAVENLY FATHER, GRANT US EACH DAY THE DESIRE TO DO OUR BEST, TO GROW MENTALLY AND MORALLY AS WELL AS PHYSICALLY, TO BE KIND AND HELPFUL TO OUR CLASSMATES AND TEACHERS, TO BE HONEST WITH OURSELVES AS WELL AS WITH OTHERS, HELP US TO BE GOOD SPORTS AND SMILE WHEN WE LOSE AS WELL AS WHEN WE WIN, TEACH US THE VALUE OF TRUE FRIENDSHIP, HELP US ALWAYS TO CONDUCT OURSELVES SO AS TO BRING CREDIT TO CRANSTON HIGH SCHOOL WEST.

AMEN

OK yeah, it's a prayer.  It even says so.  But it's a pretty basic one, not espousing any specific denomination (and quite possibly not even exclusively Christianity sans the "heavenly father" part), with excellent goals that our kids sorely need everyday.  But nonetheless a prayer.

Now, here's the Preamble to the Rhode Island constitution:

We, the people of the State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, grateful to Almighty God for the civil and religious liberty which He hath so long permitted us to enjoy, and looking to Him for a blessing upon our endeavors to secure and to transmit the same, unimpaired, to succeeding generations, do ordain and establish this Constitution of government.

Just sayin'.

What to do with Vargas

Interesting conundrum for the Obama ICE patrol..

They announced recently that 2400 illegals have been rounded up over the past month. Then today there was also a story about a person shot to death trying to climb a border fence along the Mexican border in California by a Border Patrol Agent. Obviously all those folks met the cold, uncaring arm of the law. Some are even blaming the huge southwestern wildfires on illegal alien trafficking.

But today we also found out that a former Washington Post/Huffington Post reporter--who owns a Pulitzer Prize--is actually an illegal. Not only that, but he got help from California state officials:

His grandfather imagined the fake documents would help Vargas get low-wage jobs. College seemed out of reach, until Vargas told Mountain View High School Principal Pat Hyland and school district Superintendent Rich Fisher about his problem. They became mentors and surrogate parents, eventually finding a scholarship fund for high-achieving students that allowed him to attend San Francisco State University.
..
The newspaper required a driver's license, so Vargas said his network of mentors helped him get one from Oregon, which has less stringent requirements than some other states.

The bold is a creative description of what others might call criminal conspirators. But he seems like a smart, sensitive individual who considers himself American even without papers.

So, what's the next move for Obama ICE? Will they publicly deport a Pulitzer winner and public figure and be left to explain why the other poor bastard trying to cross the border fence deserved a slug (he probably just wanted a scholarship, too). Or will they try to let the story fade away like the undocumented maid who helped scuttle Meg Whitman's chances for governor of California?

The money's on the latter, but the money's also on liberals and perhaps even Obama trying to parlay Mr. Vargas' story and his new "Define American" campaign into amnesty "immigration reform" at some point in the very near future. That of course would keep Mr. Vargas in the news, not allowing the Whitman strategy to work, but then again he might get more press by being deported. Of course that would be pegged on Obama, in effect defeating his status as a reformer.

If only someone could find a way to blame Bush. Wait, Bush was also a reformer! Cheney? No--maybe the Tea Party. Obama can claim he was forced to deport Vargas because America is full of xenophobes clinging to their guns and God who don't want anymore brown people around unless they are cutting the grass. Hey, if anyone could get away with it....

MORE 6/22/11

It appears that while everyone was celebrating TGIF Obama's ICE issued a clarification directive to exercise prosecutorial discretion on whom to deport. There's a long list of do-not-touchers, which you can find by going to this link and drilling down. Can we question Mr. Vargas' timing now? It appears he has nothing to worry about.

Narrative Games

The Trump mystery continues. Here's MSNBC parroting an AP story that suggests the Donald has forced all the presumptive GOP candidates to 'take a stand' on Obama's fuzzy narrative:

In recent days several prominent Republicans have distanced themselves, with varying degrees of emphasis, from the false claim that Obama was born in a foreign country. But with a new poll showing that two-thirds of adult Republicans either embrace the claim or are open to it, nearly all these GOP leaders are not calling for a broader effort to stamp out the allegations.

And right on cue, here's the NY Times corralling a bunch of experts to dissect just how bat crazy those 45 percent are who can't take a faith-based approach to the president:

What drives this kind of false political belief and why is it so hard to dispel?

What drives them? Perhaps it's called a media that didn't do their jobs in vetting this man, and still won't. To illustrate this point, Joy Behar had Trump's trophy wife on and actually said the following about 'vetting' presidents:

"I don't know what skeletons he's got in his closet, but everyone gets vetted when they're going to be president--you know what that means 'vetted'? They've going to look into everything...

Everything, except just about everything for the first black president. We probably know more about Trump than we do about Obama. Which brings us to a clarification--the birther thing isn't really limited to the birth, it's really about the entire narrative. Let anyone question it and.. watch out. For instance, yours truly believes O was born in Honolulu but there might be some interesting factoids on the vital record regards his step-father Soetoro, which might be interesting reading. That along with his masterpiece of fiction likely co-written by a terrorist. But it's all the same to the smear merchants.

Our crafty president is not affected and continues using the issue, one that he created, to gain politically no matter how much it might divide America. It was only a matter of time before the mainstreamers realized they could jump onboard and help the cause, and they are doing so. If they know what Trump is really up to they aren't saying, but it doesn't matter now.

Lots of good speculation out there. A good point was also made on the O'Reilly show tonight regarding star power. Obama is a celebrity. He won by being a celebrity who bashed Bush, in league with the best Saturday Night Live or Comedy Central characters, hip and cool. That may be the model for 21st century America. On a side note, actually running a country is a bit harder, less sexy, boring, and perplexing, but one can always farm out sticky problems to beer summits or blue ribbon task forces (whose laborious ground rules practically guarantee the issue will be forgotten in a 24/7 news cycle). Or just blame the previous guy.

Trump is also a celebrity, so far insulating him from being called a racist for questioning the nativity narrative, but the rest of the field doesn't have that luxury and must answer correctly or be relegated to the dustbin of candidates and a SNL cartoon figure. Obviously this leaves them weak and trembly and defensive. Palin is an outlier--she's clearly also a celebrity (which is why the left pulled a collective groin muscle swarming on her with long knives right off the bat--they saw her persona potential) but she'll easily be called a racist dingbat for not answering correctly. She's less scared, but just as naked to the barbs. So as the AP indicates, Trump is having a negative affect.

That leaves a scenario where if nothing changes America may actually witness an incumbent winning a second term with stagnant employment above 9 percent, high gas prices, 3 wars, and a trail of broken promises only because people are made to believe his opponents are racists. Somebody may yet pop out of the woodwork, or Trump's investigators may actually have something interesting (that's not Jerome Corsi's book), but it better happen soon. Of course, we can't forget Dick Cheney--his book is still in the wings and may have a few surprises. He knows a lot.

MORE 4/23/11

Here's CNN with a "birther" story. It's a factual story about states wanting to pass eligibility bills, but in an overarching sense it's just another "these people are nuts--how dare they demand to know any more information than what we've told them about the leader of the free world" screeds.

Chances are they've published more stories about the crazy birthers than about Obama's past in general. Trump is helping that cause big-time, and the longer he delays entrance or revealing his 'interesting' information, the more damage they can do. Meanwhile none of them will ask biographer Christopher Andersen about why he claimed Ayers co-wrote Dreams or grill the administration on why they lied in the campaign about the relationship in general. But when you're as far in the tank for someone as they are, it must be hard to see the sunlight.

RACIST! 4/23/11

Take a look at the comment section of any story on the birth cert and you'll quickly notice that a preponderance of the attack replies call anyone who questions the birth narrative a racist. A frequent refrain is "if he was white and named John Smith, nobody would be asking these questions".

There might be some truth to that thinking. But it's not a perfect analogy.

Obama has a Muslim-African name. The better analogy would be this-- what if a white GOP candidate, whose father was from Germany, had the first name "Adolph"? Or the last name of "Himmler" or "Goering"? Somehow I think the same people calling the birthers a bunch of racists would be demanding long forms, investigations, etc. etc.

FAIR AND BALANCED 4/24/11

These two stories epitomize the narrative issue to me. First, Fareed Zakaria:

Then there is the ‘birther’ issue. I regard this as coded racism, frankly. I don’t think there’s any other word for it.

For goodness' sake, George Stephanopoulos displayed Obama's Certificate of Live Birth on network TV and this rumor still doesn't die. Put it this way: If the President was a white man named John Smith with the other background issues being the same - foreign student father, mother in Hawaii, etc. - would there be any of these dark insinuations? Trump should be ashamed of himself. But then, I suppose, he wouldn't be Donald Trump.

BTW, not sure about you but I know I've been waiting impatiently for him to finally weigh in! Finally! Next, not an awesome CNN analyst, lowly blogger Tom Maguire:

Yet back in the day, the Times did not assemble a panel to question the sanity of the 9/11 Truthers. Instead, we were given a wry, tongue partly in cheek appraisal of their "work".

I can only imagine your surprise.

ERRATA: Here we have Howard Dean pandering to the truthers on NPR, and John Edwards doing the same at a town hall.

Go to the site for his links, including polls that were almost the same as the birther polls in reverse. Yes, although it seems hardly possible the mainstream media is even more in the tank for this president than they were when they helped him get elected by not completely vetting him (in part due to a fear they would be called racists by the likes of Zakaria).

The Forest and the Trees

This is a very revealing glimpse into the mindset of the Obama White House on terrorism. It features counter terror czar John Brennan sitting in a meeting with the Washington Times editorial board responding to what he thought was an unfair characterization of a speech to Muslims he gave earlier this year at NYU. The affair ended rather abruptly, as chronicled by this video...



There's another video at the link showing an agitated Brennan trying to defend his premise that poverty leads to extremism. While that is probably true as to crime, extremism in the name of Allah has the added component of ideology, which the editorial board points out by saying that many top shelf terrorists of the past 20 years have been from prominent families (bin Laden and Zawahiri come to mind, as does the Times Square guy) and are often graduates of western universities.

America's counter-terrorism czar tries to circle around and call those richer terrorists driven by ideology and influenced by economic, social and political factors in their environment, ie, western meddling and poverty, without acknowledging the jihad-vehicle they are riding that acts to justify the violence. Indeed, when asked to describe jihad in general, including past jihads, he picks up his papers and leaves.

This is not a new question of course--Bush made the case that bringing democracy to the terror swamp could change the paradigm by giving the masses a greater stake in their government, but results so far have been inconclusive. Brennan seems loath to even debate it--we must pander and throw more money, evidently.

Here's another contrast. We just passed the one-year anniversary of al-Megrahi's survival in Libya as a free man after having only a few weeks to live as long ago as March 2008. Brennan recently made his disgust clear about the release and called for Libya to send him back to Scotland to serve out his term. Strong. But he didn't say what might happen if Libya refuses.

Presuming they continue flipping the bird wouldn't America's general disgust be much clearer if Mr. Megrahi were placed on the Rewards for Justice list of wanted terrorists? After all, we placed Ali Hamadei on the list after Germany early-released him for his role in the TWA 847 hijacking and death of a US sailor in Beirut in the 80s, so it would seem consistent to do so with this guy. Unless this message of weakness is some kind of secret reverse psychology program to influence the Arab street. After all, Brennan's a spook.

MORE 8/24/10

Nobody's saying it, but the fact Brennan has joined Obama on vacation probably means they don't want a repeat of the Abdulmuttalob Christmas fiasco. Brennan is there to work not play, and he was out on the podium today speaking to reporters, heralding Obama's successful withdrawal from Iraq. Towards the end this exchange occurred:

Q Bill, one more on Iraq?

MR. BURTON: Okay.

Q Mr. Brennan, is President Obama glad that those Democrats two and three years ago that were advocating an immediate end to U.S. involvement in Iraq did not prevail in their efforts?

MR. BURTON: I’m sorry, can you say that one more time?

Q Yes, is President Obama glad that the Democrats two and three years ago that were advocating an immediate end to the U.S. role in Iraq did not prevail in their efforts?

MR. BURTON: The President laid out in very specific terms what he thought our appropriate objectives were in Iraq in a speech that he gave at Camp Lejeune in February of 2009, and what he’s pleased with is that the brave men and women of our military have achieved that objective.

Notice how spokesflack Burton jumped in, first pretending not to hear, then taking over a question directed to Brennan, the proceeding to not answer it. So allow me--yes, the president is glad his 2007 don't surge-withdraw advice (remember, Hillary had the experience, he had the superior judgment) was not heeded so he can now pretend to fulfill a phony-baloney campaign promise patterned on the SOFA negotiated by the Bush administration in 2008. And no, he's not glad the press is phrasing questions this way.

Israeli Serial Killer Suspect

CNN on the Arab serial killer and Israeli citizen captured in Atlanta:

Fourteen of the 16 victims in Michigan were African-American, police said. Flint is a majority African-American community. In majority-white Leesburg, Virginia, two victims were black and one was Hispanic.

Leesburg Police Chief Joseph Price said he believed the suspect was targeting African-Americans.

"For our community ... when you look at our demographics and you look at the victims here, my belief is he selected the victims in Leesburg based on the color of their skin," Price said.

Quite the interesting twist. First the media ignored this story, then when the composite sketch made him look like a white anglo they ran with the racist serial killer angle. Now when he turns out to be an Arab CNN runs with "Israeli citizen". Nowhere in their story can the word 'Arab' be found.

Here are two screen shots of the story for posterity. The first is the lede and a photo/headline, the second is the end of the story with Firefox's Cntl-F function to look for the word 'Arab' in the entire story:




Anyone reading the story would likely consider the suspect an Israeli--and he is--but most consider Israelis as Jewish. ABC identified the man as an Arab in the first sentence of their story, but the WaPo and the NY Times did not mention it in their early reports.

And of course almost none of them are mentioning the possibility of this being jihad or terrorism despite the suspects ties to the Detroit and lower Michigan area and despite his looks and the Israeli passport (deflection of suspicion). Even if he turns out to be a sicko Coptic Christian or Druze (or even a Jew) the press has an obligation to report on the possible terrorism angle when such things occur. After all, isn't America fighting Muslim extremists all around the world? Aren't Muslim terrorists still our prime enemy, many of whom are Arab or connected to the Palestinian struggle?

Yes Media Matters, it Sounds Weird

The M&M crew is all atwitter over a WaPo reviewer's criticism of Christiane Amanpour's 'In Memoriam' segment yesterday on "This Week":

"We remember all who died in war this week, and the Pentagon released a list of eleven US service members killed in Afghanistan"

Here's the clip that has them in a twit:



And here's the WaPo column. According to them his apparent dislike for Amanpour over Jake Tapper, and the fact he pointed out her poor choice of phrasing clearly makes him a dastardly neocon or something.

But one might think the leader of the reality-based community would recognize grammar errors. "In war" connotes all war, not just our war on terror, or the war in Afghanistan specifically. Also, using the word "and" between the first sentence and the second acts to disassociate the Pentagon's list of fallen troops and her memoriam. Better: "We remember all those who died in battle this past week fighting the war in Afghanistan. The Pentagon released a list...", or, "we remember all who died in the war in Afghanistan this week, and the Pentagon released a list..", etc.

Of course that would leave no doubt Amanpour specifically meant to memorialize just our soldiers and not anyone who died in war (which could include Talibanis). There are always several wars going on all over the world but most Americans only care about the ones our guys/gals are involved in. "This Week" is an American show. And that's the main question here--whether this seasoned and professional journalist parsed her wording carefully so as not to offend anyone overseas as she brings a new and admittedly international perspective to the show or just used poor grammar, as MM evidently seems to be saying.

This Should be a Bigger Story

Right Truth posted this today..



The Imam's ties, especially his vocal support for convicted terrorist Aafia Siddiqui, should have been a red flag for Governor Patrick. Yet he decided to reach out anyway and accept a check towards having Massachusetts state police receive sensitivity training.

Readers are free to make up their own minds as to why he would reach out in that way, politics or otherwise. My theory is that some liberals saw 9/11 as America's fault and decided the only way to fix the problem was to turn us into a giant cuddly socialistic teddy bear who will never threaten anyone again. This obviously misses the point vis a vis Islamic terrorism yet we have many in the current government who seem to think this way.

That's not to say liberals are aligned with terrorists; if anything the far wacko right is more ideologically apt to side with those who decry women's rights, think homosexuality is a mortal sin punishable by death, and the blood on the hands of the Jews (which is why it's not preposterous to believe the Oklahoma City bombers could have been helped by Islamic terrorists). Both are missing the point, just in different ways. Christians try to convert people to Jesus, Muslims try to convert people to Islam, but the price for refusal is a little different when both are based on respective fundamentalist thought.

Anyway, the group who put up the video is here. Some will point to it's founder being a Jew and make the obvious assertions but at least he's trying to reach out in the correct direction. Besides, pre-judging anyone is wrong, right?

The center's latest story details ties between the 'peace activists' on the Gaza flotilla and the Boston Islamic Center.

These People Are Getting Scary

No, not the tea partiers, the cabal trying to smear the tea partiers or anyone else opposed to the policies of this president. For instance, Harry Smith of CBS made news today by shooting hoops (playing basketball for all our white readers) with the president and in the course of the interview, managed to throw down some slams on his hate radio competition on AM, whom he claims to be monitoring. But if Harry has really been listening how did he miss this:



Malloy has in the past wished mental illness for Palin and called O'Reilly a murderer. True, he's only a former Air America nobody and yes, Obama covered himself by mentioning that both sides should turn down the volume. But to use a sports metaphor, everyone knows the score on that one, good buddy.

Obama does this frequently since losing the war to Fox News--slyly hitting both sides with a jab in order to bash the real targets on the right. These White House folks must really think they're the most cunning foxes to ever run the national hen house.

But the media is a different story. Based on a search, Harry Smith never donned a pith helmet and ventured into the roiling moonbat sea to explore hate for the previous president (wait, that was a few days ago); he never went mountain bike riding with Bush and stood by as W dissed the Dixie Chicks or Air America (not as if Bush would have stooped).

But Harry did opine about Bush's long vacations, which included mountain biking, including some folksy wit about his global warming stance. And here's Mr. Smith grilling the late Tony Snow over just about everything including closing Gitmo.

For contrast, here's Smith grilling Robert Gibbs over the promise, but failure, to close Gitmo. And here he is grilling the president over breaking that promise. Almost like drilling him a new navel, word.

Ah shucks though, don't be too hard on the clucks--after all, they helped put the man in office.

Kneejerk Alert

The left seems to be engaged in a colossal knee-jerk over the Texas board of education's reform of text in public school literature. Here's HuffPo, pointing to Think Progress, pointing to the New York Times, all using some degree of hyperbole and scare mongering--including a picture of Jefferson with a red X and rhetoric such as "Jefferson removed".

But those are just liberals being liberals. Did the Texas board really go overboard? Are they re-writing history or just decades of liberal history? Judge for yourself, from the Times report:

Dr. McLeroy, a dentist by training, pushed through a change to the teaching of the civil rights movement to ensure that students study the violent philosophy of the Black Panthers in addition to the nonviolent approach of the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. He also made sure that textbooks would mention the votes in Congress on civil rights legislation, which Republicans supported.

“Republicans need a little credit for that,” he said. “I think it’s going to surprise some students.”

A "dentist" (scorn), as if only lawyers and college professors should have any input on history books. But isn't providing both sides usually called balance?

Mr. Bradley won approval for an amendment saying students should study “the unintended consequences” of the Great Society legislation, affirmative action and Title IX legislation.

Since liberals don't generally believe in any unintended consequences of social programs the anger over this shouldn't be a surprise but it will be nice to see Bill Clinton's State of the Union comment, "the era of big government is over", and his ensuing welfare reform possibly getting some page space.

He also won approval for an amendment stressing that Germans and Italians as well as Japanese were interned in the United States during World War II, to counter the idea that the internment of Japanese was motivated by racism.

This happens to be quite topical with the Tom Hanks' recent comments about wartime racism making news. Wait, were Germans and Italians actually interned? Sort of.

Other changes seem aimed at tamping down criticism of the right. Conservatives passed one amendment, for instance, requiring that the history of McCarthyism include “how the later release of the Venona papers confirmed suspicions of communist infiltration in U.S. government.” The Venona papers were transcripts of some 3,000 communications between the Soviet Union and its agents in the United States.

In other words, McCarthy might have been a pompous ass but he was partially correct, there were communists hiding in plain sight. This is something that usually gets lost in the shuffle of history. Matter of fact, Obama's own communist mentor Frank Marshall Davis most likely moved to Hawaii in the 40s to escape such "McCarthyism".

Mavis B. Knight, a Democrat from Dallas, introduced an amendment requiring that students study the reasons “the founding fathers protected religious freedom in America by barring the government from promoting or disfavoring any particular religion above all others.” It was defeated on a party-line vote.

Sounds like they could have given the Democrats this one since it's clear that while the phrase "separation of church and state" does not appear in the Constitution the founders were wary of religion in state affairs. By the way, wonder if Texas school books include the full history of Jefferson and the Barbary Pirates?

In economics, the revisions add Milton Friedman and Friedrich von Hayek, two champions of free-market economic theory, among the usual list of economists to be studied, like Adam Smith, Karl Marx and John Maynard Keynes. They also replaced the word “capitalism” throughout their texts with the “free-enterprise system.”

Friedman and Hayak weren't already in there?

In the field of sociology, another conservative member, Barbara Cargill, won passage of an amendment requiring the teaching of “the importance of personal responsibility for life choices” in a section on teenage suicide, dating violence, sexuality, drug use and eating disorders.

So Texas conservatives are agreeing with the New York Times, and the Times is upset? Don't they listen to Obama's speeches? And wait, backing up a minute, the welfare reform act of 1996 had a similar label.

The Times ended their coverage with what appears to be an editorial comment:

(Jefferson is not well liked among conservatives on the board because he coined the term “separation between church and state.”)

But surely Jefferson will still be taught in Texas schools, along with all the juicy stuff about Sally Hemmings, etc.

In summary, this kneejerk is perplexing. Leftists usually pride themselves on upholding and demanding fairness in all areas of society, yet for some reason they seem upset about adding some historical balance to school books after decades of one side guiding the ship. A lot of the angst is about the addition of material rather than the removal.

Some of this may be a secret fear these Texas yahoos are getting too close to bringing that Jesus fella into the school books--you know, the one who, if he were around today would likely be a social justice supporter of government-run health care and spreading the wealth around.

But nobody on either side should be for having history controlled by one side of the political spectrum. When it comes to education both sides need to be kept in check as much as possible, so perhaps the board will take a careful look at the reaction to this story before the final vote in May. At least both sides should be able to agree on this one:

[The Board] Struck the word “democratic” in references to the form of U.S. government and replaced it with “constitutional republic.”

Presumably, at least.

Times on the O'Keefe Caper

I don't know what James O'Keefe and his mates were up to in Mary Landreiu's Senate office; it hardly seems likely they were there to either "wiretap" or "sabotage" her offices, terms thrown around by various liberals on boards and blogs. But at the same time it was a whole lot amateurish and ignorant of the sensitivities of federal law enforcement.

Jumping to conclusions is only cool for MSNBC hosts and newspapers these days but O'Keefe has already nullified the need for Obama to weigh on by admitting he acted stupidly. Maybe if this goes to trial we'll get to see the hidden camera video, including how the phony phone men got past the front door security checkpoint.

But this NY Times expose on O'Keefe contains a gem just too good to pass up:

Mr. O’Keefe declined several interview requests, and Mr. Wetmore responded to an e-mail message by sending photographs of Jayson Blair, a reporter for The New York Times who resigned after admitting to plagiarism and fabrication.

Those insufferable conservative provocateurs!

Fensterman Follies

Captain Ed had an interesting back and forth with "Fensterman", the lawyer skewered on O'Reilly the other night for refusing to say the 9/11 victims were murdered. Mr. Fenstermaker contacted Ed after he leaked a memo on why he was booted from the attorney group representing the terrorists at Gitmo, which Ed said was tied to the notion that Fenstermaker was a '9/11 Truther'.

Hmm. Well, tooting my horn a moment, here's what I said about the interview yesterday:

4. "You're gonna hear United States government propaganda", as opposed to plain propaganda? O'Reilly seemed to miss the distinction, which made me think of 9/11 trutherism. If not that then it's the basic 'oil for blood' etc. Bush 41 will not be spared, setting up a Bush two-fer.

That came from 'US govt propaganda', which can only be taken as trutherism or generic 'war for oil' stuff. Fenstermaker's reply to Ed was almost cartoonish:

I don’t know what a “9/11 Truther” is. If you explain it to me, I’ll let you know if I’m one.

Which was followed by the explanation, replied to with this:

I have no idea who attacked the WTC, and couldn’t care less.

Having "no idea" might be his way to protect the terror clients, but "couldn't care less" about an attack on our country puts him into asshat territory.

Meanwhile, it's time for the featured Baluchi item of the day.. Fensterman supplied Ed with a document purportedly from Ammar that features excellent English handwriting and a command of the language.


Website notice -

It also seems to suggest these guys have access to the internet. Are they on Twitter perhaps? Not that we wouldn't be watching every click, but that doesn't always ensure success as the past alludes.

Final Baluchi tidbit of the day... according to wiki Ammar married Aafia Siddiqui, currently engaged in making a circus of her trial in the Apple:

In 2002, 'Ammar directed Aafia Siddiqui--a US-educated neuroscientist and al-Qa'ida facilitator--to travel to the United States to prepare paperwork to ease Majid Khan's deployment to the United States. 'Ammar married Siddiqui shortly before his detention.

Maybe that explains Ammar's language skills. As to his wife (ex wife?), many think she's angling to get off on an insanity rap. Of course, many also consider murdering in the name of God insane. Others are curious, curious as to the mystery (Fensterman would approve).

Climategate

Not sure they are quite in this category but the leaked climate emails certainly show a new side to the cliqueish group of self-important zealots who want to control the world for the next fifty years or so.

Arrogance in this field is nothing new. We've had hints for awhile now, brought to light by the Weather Channel's Heidi Cullen (herself a former lab researcher) then later from the chief charlatan's appearance on 60 Minutes when he proclaimed that anyone who refuses to believe what he believes is not just wrong, but a clueless nutcase.

One might think that someone with Mr. Gore's history would create more buzz with his recent geothermal meltdown on Conan (imagine Cheney or Palin saying it) but no, it simply exemplified how invested the major media is to risk noticing.

Case in point, most of them recently ignored another story detrimental to cause:

Meteorologists’ climate change survey results:

· When asked about the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (IPCC) statement that “Most of the warming since 1950 is very likely human-induced,” a full 50% either disagreed or strongly disagreed. 25% were neutral and only 24% said they agreed or strongly agreed;
· 52% of the meteorologists disagreed with the statement that “Global climate models are reliable in their projections for a warming of the planet.” Only 19% agreed with the statement;
· Almost a third of respondents agreed (19%) or strongly agreed (10%) that “global warm­ing is a scam”;
· When the meteorologists were asked to identify the “greatest obstacle to reporting on climate change,” their top answer (41%) was “too much scientific uncertainty.”

One might also think that people look at climate and computer models on a daily basis while laying their professional reputations on the line with each forecast would count for something, but chances are the survey will be mocked and ridiculed by those in the Manns/Jones/Cullen crowd using the same tone.

Now, just exactly where this leaves the president of the United States remains to be seen but it's almost certain he'll never be asked to comment on this story.

Obama's Asian Adventure

Obama's trip to 'Asia' is producing some interesting copy so far. Of course his bow before the Japanese Emperor has made some news as did the dodge of a reporter's question about Fat Man and Little Boy.

The latter was not hard to understand considering the fact he's promoting a world without nukes. As to the bow, just part of the global apology tour.

But some might be surprised by this WaPo story about Chinese racial bigotry:

So nothing prepared Lou, whose father is a black American, for the furor that erupted in late August when she beat out thousands of other young women on "Go! Oriental Angel," a televised talent show. Angry Internet posters called her a "black chimpanzee" and worse. One called for all blacks in China to be deported.

Don't they know it's offensive to use the word "Oriental" in the Orient Asia now?

Ironically, Obama's half-brother lives in the southern Chinese city of Shenzhen. He kept a low profile during the elections, preferring not to be interviewed while the press was recounting Barack's dream of their shared father, a book that mentioned a "Mark" as having a less than rosy recall of the old man.

No wonder we didn't hear from Mark at the time--it appears his view was based more on reality than dreams.

But he's been in the news lately with the launch of a partial biography. Curiously, the Chinese racist angle didn't come up in some recent portrayals, which included mention of a Chinese girlfriend.

Anyway, what's the protocol for greeting a Maoist? Was this it?

In Search of Mr. Jones

Conservative bloggers and pundits were today pointing out the dearth of coverage about Van Jones in the mainstream media. Byron York had this summary late this morning, which showed no results from the majors. None.

York should know they needed more time--Friday morning on a the eve of a holiday weekend is far too early to be expecting any controversial news to come out about the administration. And again, this is really a no-brainer anyway. Who's shocked that Obama hired a radical activist just like Ayers and Wright, then when his activism (that the media forgot to report) was exposed the response is no response, or if pressed to paint accusers as paranoid nuts? SSDD.

Anyway, lacking any household chores or puppies to grind up in the grinder at the moment, I decided to check around a bit myself. Around 430 pm CDT the nation's top newspaper had only mention of the controversy in a search--a mention on a page called "Green, Inc":



Which actually links to a New Republic online column, which is basically a Jones apologia. Nothing in the Caucus Blog or the Opinionator, either, except in the comments section. Here's comment one in the Opinionator:

Meanwhile, Van Jones currently works in the White House. Nary a peep from the Washington Post and NYTimes.

Ha ha, as they say. The Times probably rues the day they allowed the ignorant rabble to comment. Meanwhile the other paper of record in our nation's capital finally added a mention in their "44" blog around 3:52 pm CDT. There were several other items found in a search, all but one added this afternoon.

The WaPo did have a mention of Jones yesterday in their "Post Politics Hour", a feature where journalist Lois Romano is asked questions by readers, which provides some insight. For instance, a reader asked Ms Romano if she was familiar with a pastor who is praying for Obama's death, a story that first appeared in late June, to which she says:

Lois Romano: He's clearly a nut and I dont believe we should give nuts a platform. That being said "The Root" is owned by the Post.

Clearly a nut. And here's her reply to a reader mentioning the disturbance created by Obama's address to the nation's rugrats:

Lois Romano: It's a little odd-- but no odder than the "birthers" claiming Obama is not American.

Birther mention, check. Finally, somebody asks about Jones calling Republicans a-holes, to which she says:

Lois Romano: I looked for that quote and I could never find a primary reference for him saying it. Not sure he did.

Remember, this was September 3 and the quote was already posted on a blevy of blogs and Fox News. And remember this is supposed to be a premier newspaper with access to a top notch research unit. Another reader comments later and provides a link, to which she replies:

Lois Romano: I stand corrected. Unsavory language and name calling is never appropriate. Barbara Bush shouldnt have called Gerladine Ferraro a name that "rhymes with rich" and Dick Cheney should not used a no-no word in addressing Sen. Pat Leahy.

Oh, and remember that time George W. Bush called a N.Y. Times reporter a naughty word into an open microphone??

Manners everyone, please!! Get a grip.

Hey, just a slip of the tongue. Mention Cheney and exit, stage left, of course! And CNN? As of 5:00 pm CDT search of their web page produced the following:



Nothing recent, but an article from July 23 had this to say:

The new special adviser for "green jobs" -- those jobs that help reduce energy consumption and lessen environmental impact -- at the White House Council on Environmental Quality is in some ways like President Obama himself: an African-American community activist and organizer who has rocketed to the highest levels of government.

"...in some ways like Obama himself"? Surely they must hope that notion doesn't catch on.

MORE 9/5/09

Debbie at Right Truth points out Jones' west Tennessee connections, of which I was unaware. It would seem logical for the local paper to be covering this brouhaha then, right? Well... here's a search page of 'van jones' done around midnight 9/5. Must still be hard at work on the stories.

Let's Go to the Video Tape

Hey, at least he's wearing the jacket now. But the question isn't about feet propping--no way he's the first--it's about whether a White House photographer could possibly snap a photo of the boss in such a pose while talking to the PM of Israel then release it to the media without permission.

Since the answer seems a strong 'not a chance' the question becomes why? Why would the Obama administration want this picture in circulation right now?

No wonder some Israelis feel 'cornered'. Talk is cheap, but an American official reportedly told Netanyahu not to interfere with them "changing the world". This seems to fit with Obama's days as a community organizer when he was an advocate of Saul Alinsky tactics (as was the Secretary of State) to achieve social justice. Spreading the wealth around and knocking off the rich are among the goals, and Israel is a rich state. Some believe Israel is preventing the Palestinians from getting their social justice.

What does Obama really think on the matter? Wading through sound bites, TOTUS speeches and blast faxes won't completely uncover the truth but perhaps releasing that lost Rashid Khalidi video tape might help. Recall that was the one the LA Times suppressed before the election, which evidently shows strong opinions being expressed in the company of Obama, Ayers and Dohrn at a going away party for Rashid. It can't be any more incendiary than the interrogation memos or Abu Ghraid photos but it might help bring some sunshine to the debate.

MORE 6/10/09

Speaking of some who think Israel is preventing the Palestinians of achieving their social justice here's one, although he's a bit more blunt in his description:

"Them Jews aren't going to let him talk to me.

A Bully in the Pulpit

Kathleen Parker saw a lot more in the Cairo speech than did other conservatives but she got this part right:

The nearly hour-long speech, which contained many inspired passages, was essentially a teaching moment. A lecture, if you will.

Yes, a lecture. That quality of detachment is what triggers people to call him the "Obamamessiah" or "the One", as if he's from another planet sent here to scold the children of earth for their past silliness, a sort of political version of Klaatu (maybe it's no coincidence the remake featured the hero scolding the planet for not going green. Nonsense? Watch the new GM commercial).

The important thing about Klaatu wasn't his noble suggestions but the massive enforcer robot standing behind him. Obama's "Gort" is the power of government, a close comparison. So far he hasn't used that power to it's full potential sticking mainly with the bully pulpit, but his messages have been targeted and telling.

For instance, when he demonized Wall Street as a prospective career for college graduates he said nothing bad about law school even though part of the health care crisis involves the rising cost of malpractice insurance. Attorney greed is simply not on the agenda right now.

But health care "reform" was on the agenda today as the Congressional Dems introduced a new plan while Obama's folks floated a trial balloon of funding it through taxing the 'wealthy'. Here's how Bloomberg News put it:

President Barack Obama wants Congress to consider taxing the wealthy instead of workers to pay for a health-care overhaul, as House Democrats discuss a plan to require health insurance for most Americans.

Emphasis added to point out the pseudo-Marxist tone of suggesting the 'wealthy' don't really work, leaving a stench of class envy (whether intended or not). And that's coming from Bloomberg! It's not hard to envision how the White House press office might handle detractors, even those who merely want to discuss reforming the present private system without a government takeover. Think "the party of no", "dittoheads", "people who don't care about the poor", Sarah Palin, etc, etc. The strawman cometh.

But it doesn't stop there because after health care will come climate reform. This past Tuesday the global warming deniers, or skeptics, or haters, or flat-earthers--they call themselves realists--had their annual conference and one attendee opined:

"How do you control the weather?" asked Bob Carter, an Australian scholar from James Cook University. "For us to assume we can somehow control nature and regulate weather patterns, when we cannot even predict them correctly, is patently absurd."

Of course. The level of hubris required to believe such a thing borders on Greek God territory but as Ms. Parker illustrates, Obama is such an exalted figure people might actually believe he can lower sea level or change the course of the next hurricane. Meanwhile the 'flat-earthers' will be the ones treated as nutballs. Cue Gort.

Some might shrug and say it's always been this way and they would be right, with a few big exceptions--the bully in the pulpit, the size of the choir, and those writing the bulletins. And the conservatives have no sensible, rational and trusted voice to push back.

Roots

This is vintage Obama. When it suited his needs he used William Ayers. When he needed a church for social status he used Reverend Wright. When it was too risky to honestly discuss the Muslim roots of his father, or even mention the name of his Muslim step-father Lolo Soetoro, he iced up.

But just hours ahead of his major speech to the Muslim world (that will no doubt bash Bush and Cheney) he has suddenly found his past:

During a conference call in preparation for President Obama's trip to Cairo, Egypt, where he will address the Muslim world, deputy National Security Adviser for Strategic Communications Denis McDonough said "the President himself experienced Islam on three continents before he was able to -- or before he's been able to visit, really, the heart of the Islamic world -- you know, growing up in Indonesia, having a Muslim father -- obviously Muslim Americans (are) a key part of Illinois and Chicago."

Zawahiri is unimpressed, but he's a terrorist. The battle here is for the street, and we'll see whether they buy the "polished words" or not. Maybe it would be good for the country if they fall for it but using partisan apologias to pit the world against US conservatives seems a damn funny way to fight a war. After all, Zawahiri is in hiding, not running Egypt as he desires, and this didn't happen by Bush apologizing to the terrorists after 9/11.

The Middle East is a male-dominated region where respect holds a lot more sway than in America, where we tend to elevate performers and winners. Here's Dick Cheney (and daugher) explaining his view.

MORE 6/2/09

Obama told a French journo that America could be thought of as "one of the largest Muslim Countries in the world". That's nice, we have a lot of Muslims in America. But we have astronomically more Christians. Didn't he say that America "is not a Christian Nation"? Some may have trouble with that nuance.

QUESTION 6/3/09

Obama's Rove says of the speech:

"There's been a breach, an undeniable breach, between America and the Islamic world," senior adviser David Axelrod said.

"That breach has been years in the making. It's not going to be reversed with one speech—it's not going to be reversed, perhaps, in one administration. But the president is a strong believer in open, honest dialogue."

First, perhaps they need to define "the Islamic world". As Obama just indicated yesterday, many Muslims live here in America. Is he speaking to them? What is he offering them, a new car?

Second, what "breach" is he referring to, exactly? Is it Iraq, which the Democrats have set up as a golden political calf? Or is he talking about the CIA's action in Iran during the 50s or perhaps the formation of Israel in the 40s? And does self-reflection now partially justify all the past terror? Guess we'll soon find out.

MORE 6/3/09

There are some slight hypocritical issues with this premise, but overall it's really all we've got at the moment. Many thought Obama would be able to leverage his Muslim background to make an impression on the youth of Arabia and perhaps drain a little water from the swamp. The goal of isolating Zawahiri and bin Laden is a good one--surely that's why they've suddenly hit the airwaves in a desperate bid to remain viable--the question is, will it work? Will the old line Arabs see his speech as a scolding and if so, can the younger generation do anything about it (assuming they want hope and change)?

The Tiller Murder

I was going to post on Obama's ostentatious private jet soiree to New York City (after just telling the auto CEOs to "show some restraint") but the Tiller murder seems a more important story.

A suspect is in custody, who appears to be an engaged "Christian" in the abortion debate. But Debbie at Right Truth has the seminal comment on this whole thing:

NO, THIS IS NOT AN EXPRESSION OF 'PRO-LIFE', NEVER HAS BEEN, NEVER WILL BE. This is some nut criminal.

Exactly.

Christians should be prepared for an onslaught. Obama has weighed in and is outraged--as any president would be at the news of vigilantism--but this will also be used to justify that Napolitano Homeland Security report from a few weeks ago. People will likely be accusing Christians of being no different than terrorists, some even making moral equivalency arguments involving bin Laden. The best way to stop it is by joining the condemnation chorus and strongly reminding everyone this act was something Jesus would definitely NOT do or approve.