Global Villainage

Ann Coulter's latest

2004-07-08T11:25:00.000-04:00

In Desperate Move, Kerry Adopts Puppy
July 7, 2004

I guess with John Kerry's choice of John Edwards as his running mate, he really does want to stand up for all Americans, from those worth only $60 million to those worth in excess of $800 million.

In one of the many stratagems Democrats have developed to avoid telling people what they believe, all Edwards wants to talk about is his cracker-barrel humble origins story. We're supposed to swoon over his "life story," as the flacks say, which apparently consists of the amazing fact that ... his father was a millworker!

That's right up there with "Clinton's stepdad was a drunk" and "Ted Kennedy's dad was a womanizing bootlegger" on my inspirational life-stories meter. In fact, I'm immediately renouncing my university degrees and going to work for the post office just to give my future children a shot at having a "life story," should they decide to run for president someday.

What is so amazing about Edwards' father being a millworker? That's at least an honorable occupation -- as opposed to being a trial lawyer. True, Edwards made more money than his father did. I assume strippers make more money than their alcoholic fathers who abandoned them did, too. This isn't a story of progress; it's a story of devolution.

Despite the overwrought claims of Edwards' dazzling legal skills, winning jury verdicts in personal injury cases has nothing to do with legal talent and everything to do with getting the right cases -- unless "talent" is taken to mean "having absolutely no shame." Edwards specialized in babies with cerebral palsy whom he claimed would have been spared the affliction if only the doctors had immediately performed Caesarean sections.

As a result of such lawsuits, there are now more than four times as many Caesarean sections as there were in 1970. But curiously, there has been no change in the rate of babies born with cerebral palsy. As The New York Times reported: "Studies indicate that in most cases, the disorder is caused by fetal brain injury long before labor begins." All those Caesareans have, however, increased the mother's risk of death, hemorrhage, infection, pulmonary embolism and Mendelson's syndrome.

In addition, the "little guys" Edwards claims to represent are having a lot more trouble finding doctors to deliver their babies these days as obstetricians leave the practice rather than pay malpractice insurance in excess of $100,000 a year.

In one of Edwards' silver-tongued arguments to the jury on behalf of a girl born with cerebral palsy, he claimed he was channeling the unborn baby girl, Jennifer Campbell, who was speaking to the jurors through him:

"She said at 3, 'I'm fine.' She said at 4, 'I'm having a little trouble, but I'm doing OK.' Five, she said, 'I'm having problems.' At 5:30, she said, 'I need out.'"

She's saying, "My lawyer needs a new Jaguar ... "

"She speaks to you through me and I have to tell you right now -- I didn't plan to talk about this -- right now I feel her. I feel her presence. She's inside me, and she's talking to you."

Well, tell her to pipe down, would you? I'm trying to hear the evidence in a malpractice lawsuit.

To paraphrase Oscar Wilde on the death of Little Nell, one must have a heart of stone to read this without laughing. What is this guy, a tent-show preacher? An off-the-strip Las Vegas lounge psychic couldn't get away with this routine.

Is Edwards able to channel any children right before an abortionist's fork is plunged into their tiny skulls? Why can't he hear those babies saying, "Let me live! Stop spraying this saline solution all over me!" Edwards must experience interference in channeling the voices of babies about to be aborted. Their liberal mothers' hands seem to muffle those voices.

And may we ask what the pre-born Jennifer Campbell thinks about war with Iraq? North Korea? Marginal tax rates? If Miss Cleo here is going to be a heartbeat away from the presidency, I think the voters are entitled to know that.

While making himself fabulously rich by taking a one-third cut of his multimillion-dollar verdicts coaxed out of juries with junk science and maudlin performances, Edwards has the audacity to claim, "I was more than just their lawyer; I cared about them. Their cause was my cause."

If he cared so deeply, how about keeping just 10 percent of the multimillion-dollar jury awards, rather than a third? In fact, as long as these Democrats are so eager to raise the taxes of "the rich," how about a 90 percent tax on contingency fees?

For someone who didn't care about the money, it's interesting that Edwards avoided cases in which the baby died during delivery. Evidently, jury awards average only about $500,000 when the babies die, and there is no disabled child to parade before the jury.

Edwards was one of the leading opponents of a bill in the North Carolina Legislature that would have established a fund for all babies born with cerebral palsy. So instead of all disabled babies in North Carolina being compensated equitably, only a few will win the jury lottery -- one-third of which will go to trial lawyers like Edwards, who insists he doesn't care about the money.

Despite the now-disproved junk science theory about C-sections preventing cerebral palsy that Edwards peddled in the channeling case, the jury awarded Edwards' client a record-breaking $6.5 million. This is the essence of the modern Democratic Party, polished to perfection by Bill Clinton: They are willing to insult the intelligence of 49 percent of the people if they think they can fool 51 percent of the people.

So while Michael Moore, Al Franken, George Soros, Crazy Al Gore and the rest of the characters from the climactic devil-worshipping scene in "Rosemary's Baby" provide the muscle for the Kerry campaign, Kerry picks a pretty-boy milquetoast as his running mate, narrowly edging out a puppy for the spot. Just don't ask the Democrats what they believe. Edwards' father was a millworker, and that's all you need to know.

Ann Coulter.org

The real John Kerry

2004-07-08T10:23:00.000-04:00

Go here to read quotes from real men who served in Vietnam, some alongside of this great pretender. I just read it, and I am flabbergasted. I'm way past flabbergasted. This guy is the most self-serving, manipulative little hypocrite I have ever seen. It's not like I didn't know that already, but this really brought it home. God help us if the foolish amongst us are a large enough number to elect this mongrel. It is just incredible how gullible so many people are who question an honorable, decent, courageous man like George Bush, and swallow every drop of poison from the mouth of this charlatan like it's the elixir of life.

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Remember folks, you heard it here second

2004-07-07T21:19:00.000-04:00

Drudge dredged this story from a Scandinavian newspaper about this band playing in Oslo that likes to get controversial. Their idiot leader yells "How far are you willing to go to save the world?," and two people come onstage, strip, and have sex, all in the name of saving the "rainforest". Seems they belong to some environmentalist wacko group called, (now, hang on to your frozen yogurts), "Fuck for Forest", who have sex in public in order to put focus on the "rainforest". Oh, yeah--the band's name is Cumshot.

Lovely.

Deja Vu all over again

2004-07-07T09:04:00.000-04:00

Here's another ridiculous story, except this time a pompous judge enters the picture, or rather, several, being the Louisiana Supreme Court. Who do these assholes think they are? "In the twenty-first century, it is simply archaic to cite protection of women from the sights and sounds of a locker room environment as an excuse for excluding them from the public dining area as it exists in this country club," Justice John L. Weimer wrote for the unanimous court. This is a PRIVATE club, public dining area or not. Whether these guys want to break their own rules (dress code) is irrelevant. There have to be a lot of women's private clubs out there. You don't hear anybody screaming discrimination over that. What a bunch of doo-doo.

How the mighty have fallen

2004-07-05T14:21:00.000-04:00

2004-07-04T23:25:00.000-04:00

Iraqi National Guard and U.S. troops watch fireworks in Tikrit

A fraud has been perpetuated on the American people

2004-07-03T21:46:00.000-04:00

Look at this picture of "John Kerry". Now, look at the picture below of actor Harry Dean Stanton, excellent portrayer of creepy guys in movies. Now, I ask you, ladies and gentlemen--if you can tell me the difference, then I'm Zoltan, King of gypsies. There IS no John Kerry! We've been lied to! It's a vast left-wing conspiracy! Call the ACLU!

Move over Kournikova

2004-07-03T21:36:00.000-04:00

And this one can PLAY!

And now, for something completely different

2004-07-02T14:01:00.000-04:00

You won't believe this.

Cosby breaks bad

2004-07-02T08:42:00.000-04:00

Bill Cosby lashed out at young blacks at a Rainbow Coalition shindig yesterday, which I'm sure will cause a stir amongst the brothas. What he was doing hanging out with race warlord Jesse Jackson is beyond me, but you can find the story here.

"Wake up, Maggie, I think I got somethin' to say to you..."

2004-06-30T16:15:00.000-04:00

Since there seemed to be a moderate amount of interest (and quite a flap about one in particular) in my "literature logs" from English Comp class, here I post my final entry from that hollowed omnibus.

I forget the exact context of this quote, but it must have had something to do with the idea that men and women are equal in every aspect, which is, of course, horse hockey. Following are the quote, and my reaction.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“In the double standard of friendship, for once the female version was becoming accepted as the general idea.”

From “The Tapestry of Friendship” by Ellen Goodman

My question is “Why does there have to be a ‘general idea’?” Once again—now, read my lips—women and men are different. Why is this so not ok with so many women? Men are logical; women are emotional. Of course, there are always exceptions to every rule. Must I make a disclaimer every time a definitive statement is made, just to keep some nitwit from being up in arms? Seems so, these days. But, I digress.
I just don’t get why there has to be a “war of the sexes” because men and women are different. I say, vive la difference! I like women. I’m glad they’re different. I like women who like men. If we’re different, then let’s pool our strengths and become a team.
It seems to me that a desire to reverse a wrong and be on top is at the heart of feminism, not a desire for equality. Men have wrongfully lorded it over women, so now they just want to turn the tables. Hell, that’s no fun! And I didn’t do it. We’re not all guilty, you know, just because we have a penis. Hmmm. That brings up another point. Could the “battle” have something to do with penis envy? I wonder…

Some like it hot

2004-06-29T14:20:00.000-04:00

My friend, The Sicilian, posted a picture recently of one of our other compadres in the war on stupidity, Neil, performing a lewd and lascivious act upon a cardboard cutout. Not to be outdone, I feel compelled to share with you, my loyal fans, (or anyone who gives a shit, or not...) my own dark journey into the world of lust after inanimate objects. Happy birthday, Mr. President.

Hmmm...Isn't this in the Communist Manifesto somewhere?

2004-06-29T13:47:00.000-04:00

First of all, my apologies to my legion of three fans for my lack of interesting and witty repartee as of late. I'd like to say that I've been too busy to blog, but the sad fact is that I was just too damned lazy! Not to fear, my ever curious and inquisitive mind is as active as ever, and hopefully there will soon be much posted here to entertain, educate, and just give you an all-around sense of "you know, I never thought of it that way. This guy might just be right."

So, let's get on to the next subject. As you can see, above is a picture of the Evil Queen. I ran across this article posted on Drudge telling of her and Bill's adventures in wonderland, San Francisco, where they can be expected to be coddled and worshiped and placed on their exalted pedestal, above and beyond the great unwashed, where they belong.

While out there stumping Bill's book and stumping for Barbara Boxer (wouldn't THAT make a threesome!), Hillary told several hundred supporters that they could expect to lost some of the tax cuts Bush gave us if Democrats won the White House and Congress back in November.

"Many of you are well enough off that ... the tax cuts may have helped you," She said. "We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good."

Now, Democrats don't usually come right out and say that they're socialists--they couch it in semantics and then steal from you when you're not looking. Now, she's showing her true colors.

Where's Sirhan Sirhan when you need him?

Bubba's book

2004-06-20T11:25:00.000-04:00

That bastion of liberal propaganda, The New York Times, has a scathing review of Clinton's new book.

News flash! News flash! Clinton committed "terrible moral error"!

2004-06-16T23:31:00.000-04:00

Ladies and gentlemen, you won't believe this, but former President William Jefferson Clinton stated in an interview with Dan Rather that will air Sunday night on "60 Minutes" that he committed a "terrible moral error" in his infidelity with Monica Lewinsky that put him "in the doghouse" with the Queen Mother. Folks, I can't believe it! This is devastating news! Bill Clinton? A "terrible moral error"? My God! What's next? Ted Kennedy on a drunken weekend with a secretary? This is the story of the young century! Extra! Extra! Read all about it! here.

Hooray kids!...

2004-06-16T22:55:00.000-04:00

...it's time for another episode of "Adventures in English Class". Last time, Our Hero was blasting away at gun control wackos with both barrels. Today, it's a little dose of "Sex and the Workplace". Our story begins with, (well, really IN) another story, by one Barbara Ehrenreich. It seems Babs had a little problem on the job--some guy made a pass at her. Well, let me tell you, she was PLENTY mad! So mad that she went home and wrote an essay called "What I've Learned from Men". She complained about macho men and mousy women, and I forget exactly what it was she learned from men, but, as usual, Our Hero had a different take on the situation. The passage in question was “I, a full grown feminist, conversant with such matters as rape crisis counseling and sexual harassment at the workplace, had behaved like a ninny-or as I now understand it, like a lady.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Don’t get me started. What is that high-pitched whine I hear? Could it be another poor, oppressed feminist, blaming men for her lack of backbone? Yes, I believe that’s exactly what it is. Instead of slapping the creep’s face and walking out, she blithely carries on the conversation as if nothing is going on, then goes home and writes an article about what bastards men are, wherein her thinly veiled anger, blaming men for certain shortcomings in women, flies it’s true colors.
For instance, is it the fault of men that some women are self-deprecating about their accomplishments? Can we, the male of the species, be blamed for the “small acts of deference” some women perform on their jobs, like smiling unnecessarily? Could it be possible that some of these jobs require a little smiling and friendliness no matter which position the toilet seat is in when that employee takes a break? Or even possibly they actually like their job and like people and, God(dess) forbid, like to smile? Moses, smell the roses!
Then she castigates macho movie stars for just being guys while at the same time encouraging women to be more like them. Besides, there were some very tender moments between Mel Gibson and his family in “Mad Max.”
I’ll tell you this: I’d rather have Clint Eastwood covering my ass in a foxhole than Gloria Steinem. Any day.

I like big ones as much as the next guy, but, geez...

2004-06-15T13:17:00.000-04:00

It seems there is a proliferation of 18 year olds who are getting breast implants these days, and what's more, getting them for a graduation present. The numbers have well more than doubled from '02 to '03, according to this story on Fox. Another sad commentary on the current state of cultural affairs. I don't have any kids, and I'm sure it must be a hell of a challenge to raise them these days, but that sure isn't the way to send them a good message. I can't imagine wanting to go around with a foreign substance, serving no medical purpose, inside my body. Just a thought.

Ultimatum Schmultimatum

2004-06-14T15:54:00.000-04:00

An article I found on Drudge says the Red Cross has issued an ultimatum to the U.S. to either charge Saddam, let him go, or "break international law". I was just sort of, kind of, wondering exactly where in the Constitution it says we are subject to some "international law"? If anybody has a fix on that, I would LOVE to know. And what idiot would dare even think of releasing this mass murdering madman? Just go ahead and execute the bastard. I doubt if he's giving up much, anyway.

I would say this to anyone who is more concerned over the welfare of Saddam Hussein than what "international laws" are being trifled with: You are a pretentious hypocrite, ignoring the thousands of victims of this monster, all the while feigning concern over human rights. Decent people who really care are sick of you.

Conservative t-shirts

2004-06-14T00:01:00.000-04:00

Hey, check out this great site for cool conservative t-shirts. It's called ThoseShirts.com. I bought "Viva la Reagan Revolucion" and "Celebrate Diversity". I think I want to get "Not Fonda Kerry", too, as we edge closer to November. And no, for all you anti-capitalists out there, I'm not making one red cent here--just providing a little free advertising for a great site. But--so what if I was?

More Ann

2004-06-13T19:24:00.000-04:00

I don't mean to be harping on Ann Coulter, but you should go read her latest column. Another biting look at liberal head games.

More sensitivity from the left.

2004-06-12T10:34:00.000-04:00

I have a few more from English class. This one was based on a piece by Molly Ivins, a lefty with a huge mouth and a huge empty cranium. It was titled "Get a Knife, Get a Dog, but Get Rid of Guns". The passage was “How do they know it was the dearest wish of Thomas Jefferson’s heart that teenage drug dealers should cruise the cities of this nation perforating their fellow citizens with assault rifles? Channeling?”

My thoughts were:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A: Thomas Jefferson didn’t write the Constitution.
2: The guns in the hands of teenage drug dealers are already illegal.
III: making something illegal obviously doesn’t “get rid “ of it. Look at this ridiculous “drug war.” Does this idiot think that banning guns will insure that there will absolutely be no more guns and everyone will just be safe and sound? Utter tripe! No matter what laws are passed, criminals will always get guns. If more of the laws we already have would be enforced there would be a lot less of these criminals on the street in the first place. We don’t need more laws.
Not all people who believe the populace should have the right to be armed are “gun nuts." I am not a “gun nut.” I don’t own a gun. I think I should keep one beside the bed, and I hope I get around to it before something happens, but I am not a “gun nut.” But, if some maggot breaks into my house at 3 a.m. and I have a .357 in hand, you can rest assured he’ll be carried out in a body bag.
There are many different tragic scenarios that do occur with guns, and she does make one or two decent points, but largely, as usual for a left “wing nut”, she’s full of crap.

What's wrong with this picture?

2004-06-11T21:41:00.000-04:00

The breaking news is that the Terry Nichols jury was deadlocked, thus sparing this maniac the death penalty. What I'd like to know is who the hell these people are that get on these juries determining the fate of a multi-murderer where there is NO question of guilt, and have ANY question as to what should be done with them? Am I missing something here? Should this have taken more than 5 minutes, after which it's "off with his head"? Outrageous.

It so happens one of my "literature logs" from English Comp was about this very subject, and coincidentally, it ended with a reference to Mr. Nichols cohort, who got what he deserved. The quotes are, of course, from the original story, "A Hanging", by George Orwell.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The tragedy of the experience of an execution, stark and emotional though it may be, takes nothing from the necessity of performing the horrid task. He saw “the mystery, the unspeakable wrongness, of cutting a life short when it is in full tide,” yet mentions not once the reason why it must be done. By far, most executions are for murder-the taking of an innocent life “when it is in full tide.” The difference here is the innocence. The murderer has lost his, and now must forfeit what he has wrongfully taken from another. The wails of protest rise from without the prison walls on the night of the execution, yet who wails for the forgotten victim? No, the dead cannot be brought back, but there must be a like retribution. Timothy McVeigh is dead. That is good.

Good-bye, Brother Ray

2004-06-11T08:55:00.000-04:00

Would that we had them both back

2004-06-10T21:58:00.000-04:00

A man is known by his friends...

2004-06-09T19:01:00.000-04:00

This is just to show you that I must be pretty smart to hang out with people like this. I wish you could have known him.

Speak English!

2004-06-09T14:54:00.000-04:00

Yet another in the blockbuster series "My Adventures in English Comp". This one was based on a story called "The Struggle to be an All-American Girl" by Elizabeth Wong.

It seems that after years of trying to fit in with American culture, she had some regrets in adulthood. I didn't really comment on that in my piece except to acknowledge that struggle in the beginning. The passage I wrote on was “I thought of myself as multicultural. I preferred tacos to egg rolls; I enjoyed Cinco de Mayo more than Chinese New Year. At last, I was one of you; I wasn’t one of them. Sadly, I still am."

I had another angle on the story, which is:

Her tinge of regret at the end is an interesting twist after spending her entire life trying to assimilate into American culture. There must be a delicate balance between adapting to the culture and customs of a new country and preserving those of the old, and that being all the less attractive to a young girl probably born here.
Her later misgivings notwithstanding, I think she has done well to assimilate, and I think the people of Asia do a better job of it than anyone else who comes here.
If I undertake to permanently move to, say, France, then I think it behooves me to learn the French language and eat escargot. Likewise, if someone comes here from, say, Guatemala, it behooves him or her to learn English. The idea that we must adopt Spanish as a second language, or, God forbid, have to declare English as the “official” language in America, is patently absurd.
If you come here, learn English, and assimilate. Like the Chinese.

O'Frankenstein

2004-06-09T14:37:00.000-04:00

I got XM and the left's new talk radio outlet, Air America is on there. As you might expect, it's incredibly lame, uninteresting, and un-educational, unlike several shows on the right side of the fence.

As you've probably heard by now, Al Franken hosts a show from noon to 3 eastern called "The O'Franken Factor", of course, taking off on O'Reilly. Now, Rush and Boortz, and probably other conservative hosts, have always said that liberals don't make it in talk radio because they have to deal with live callers exposing their nonsense, thus driving them off the air. Well, today, I listened to Franken for about 2 hours, and only ONCE did I hear him give out the number to call in, and the only calls I ever heard him take were when his guest Bob Wier of The Dead was playing "name that tune" with a couple of callers.

Evidently, he agrees with Rush on this one.

Did J Lo marry Marc Anthony?

2004-06-09T14:35:00.000-04:00

WHO GIVES A F*#K!

2004-06-09T10:58:00.000-04:00

Ann and Mr. Reagan. Check out Ann's latest great column here

"If you don't, you're a pussy!"

2004-06-09T09:18:00.000-04:00

Here's one for the girls, from News of the Weird:

At the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's "Sex Out Loud" Health Awareness Fair in March, the Feminist Majority organization sponsored a "giant vagina structure" for which students could pay a dollar and stick their heads in to have their pictures taken. Said a spokesperson, "There are a lot of phallic symbols in society, and we wanted to put a vaginal one out there." [Daily Illini, 3-19-04]

More from English class

2004-06-08T09:47:00.000-04:00

This one was from "A Twofer's Lament" by Yolanda Cruz. Apparently, one who recieves two positions, grants, or whatever, by means of affirmative action is called a "twofer" in certain circles. This particular author did not appreciate having been given her job on the basis of ethnicity. The passage in question is:

“Imagine my shock, then, when one of my second year grad students came up to me, shook my hand, and said that he had been looking forward to meeting the ‘twofer’ who had been accepted that year.”

Following was my take. (The "hand out, not a hand" was another quote from her story, not me).

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

How refreshing to see the blatant ridiculousness of affirmative action honestly questioned by a non-white woman, a “twofer.” This gets right to the heart of one of the things that is wrong about affirmative action—the debasing of the very people it is supposedly trying to elevate. Does her getting a hand-out, not a hand, (very well put, I thought) make her feel good about all the years of hard work she put into what it took for her to get where she got? No. Now, she may well have been the best qualified person for that position regardless of the fact that it was handed to her for the wrong reasons, but that doesn’t justify the wrong reasons.
The other side of the coin, of course, is the qualified people who get left out because they are not a minority, or protected group.
It’s really very simple—so simple that it pains me to even have to utter the words—but the heads of those who want to blind themselves to the obvious truth are hard:
“LET THE JOB GO TO THE MOST QUALIFIED PERSON, TOTALLY DISREGARDING RACE OR SEX AS A FACTOR WHATSOEVER.”

More from English Comp class

2004-06-07T11:35:00.000-04:00

In the same English Comp class I spoke of in the previous post, Ms. Birkenstock had us do these "literature logs". You chose a passage from a short story in this particular book, and wrote a page about it. Following is one of mine based on this passage from "A Fable for Tomorrow", an allegory written in the 50s about the environment. (Yes, they started whining way back then). The passage was: "A grim specter has crept upon us almost unnoticed, and this imagined tragedy may easily become a stark reality we shall all know."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This piece, though put forth as a fable, ironically and sadly (and perhaps dangerously) is no fable in the minds of many environmentalists today. They actually believe something as drastic as the death of all nature on planet earth is eminent because a measly few hundred million internal combustioning automobiles are spewing forth enough carbon monoxide to accomplish such a huge task. What unbelievable nonsense! A: The ecosystem is way too vast and impenetrable to be that adversely effected by it, and; 2: Can one really believe, with technology advancing at the exponential rate it currently is, that we will still be driving internal combustion vehicles in 50 years? Or even maybe 25? I think not.
What I do think is this: I think a lot of these people have another agenda. They’re anti-capitalism. They would love nothing more than to see the economy of the United States destroyed, and for it to sink into the morass of socialism. Which is exactly what would happen if we had signed the Kyoto treaty. Is there global warming? Yeah. Is it normal throughout history that there are natural climate changes? Yeah. Can it be proven (aside from unreliable computer models based on the agenda of environmentalist extremists) that man is causing it, and that the greenhouse effect exists? NO. Is the sky falling? NO.
Talk about a fable. Here’s one for the ages. God help us.

Welfare slavery

2004-06-06T12:31:00.000-04:00

I'm working on a degree in IT Networking at the local Community College, and a couple years ago I took an English Comp. class. The prof was wearing panty-hose with Birkenstocks the first day. I knew I was in trouble.

One day, the prof asked us to make a controversial statement, then the class would discuss it. Being the only outspoken conservative there, that was easy enough for me. I said "I don't think people who receive welfare should be allowed to vote." As you can imagine, that caused no small stir.

We had to write four essays during the course of the class. Following is one of mine, concerning the aforementioned subject. Some of the stats are a tad out of date, but the principal certainly applies~now more than ever.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

It is my assertion that people who collect welfare entitlements should not be allowed the privilege of voting. A radical statement? An outrageous state of affairs requires radical change. The outrageous state of affairs is this: a large portion of the American population is benefiting to some degree from the labor and earnings of others who act in a responsible manner to take care of themselves. Consider these statistics from The Tax Foundation and the IRS:
In 1983 the top 1% of income earners were paying 20.3% of all income taxes. The top 10% were paying 49.7%, and the top 50%, 92.8%. That left the bottom 50% of the entire population paying only 7.2% of all taxes.
In 1993 the top 1% payed 28.7%, the top 10%, 58.8%, and the top 50%, 95.2%, leaving only 4.8% paid by the lower 50%. This trend continues. It is true that if you toss a frog into boiling water, he will jump out. However, if you place a frog in cold water and gradually turn up the heat until the water boils, he will allow himself to be boiled alive. This is the current state of affairs in America. The heat is on. Those who point out the flames are labeled kooks and extremists.

"In general the art of government consists in taking as much money as possible from one class of citizens to give to the other."
--Voltaire

Will someone please tell me just where the idea that it is a function of the government to feed, clothe, house, and provide employment for its citizens came from? Dependency leads to bondage. Who's in charge--the giver of the handout or the recipient? Who are the recipients going to vote for, but the party who promises to keep the faucet open? How else can this cycle progress, but to create more dependency and greater rule by the hand of a few who seek power? I have a word for it. Slavery. Ironic, isn't it?
This nation was founded on the principles of individual freedom and individual responsibility. The notion that a man could slough off his responsibility, yet expect his neighbor to take up the slack was abhorrent. In Jamestown, if you did not work, you did not eat. Such "cruelty" would certainly not be tolerated in today's politically correct society. The screams of "that's not fair!" would rise from all quarters, and the Senate Majority Leader (then Mr. Daschle) would come to the rescue, galloping on a White Horse, holding a sack of "other people's money."

"Give a man a fish; you have fed him for today. Teach a man to fish; and you have fed him for a lifetime"-Author unknown.

To take from the productive and give to those without the initiative to even provide for their own basic needs is clearly in antipathy to the very heart of the free enterprise system that has made this the greatest economic power in the history of civilization. To allow those who presume upon the sacrifices and efforts of the self-sufficient to participate in the decision-making process is a slap in the face of that greatness. The suffrage clause in the Constitution should be amended.

"America's abundance was created not by public sacrifices to "the common good," but by the productive genius of free men who pursued their own personal interests and the making of their own private fortunes. They did not starve the people to pay for America's industrialization. They gave the people better jobs, higher wages and cheaper goods with every new machine they invented, with every scientific discovery or technological advance -- and thus the whole country was moving forward and profiting, not suffering, every step of the way." (Ayn Rand)

2004-06-05T23:57:00.000-04:00

Ronald Wilson Reagan 1911~2004

2004-06-04T09:26:00.000-04:00

All Hail the Queen. Doesn't she looked so bored being a lowly Senator? She's dreaming of the day when she, the great and magnanimous, shall be ruler of all the land, and we, her loyal subjects, shall be enslaved under her tyrannical reign, waiting in the dole line, ever thankful that all is taken care of.

Well, which way is it, then?

2004-06-02T16:26:00.000-04:00

Remember just a few short weeks ago when Woodward's book came out how the Democrats were screaming about Bush's alleged deal with the Saudis to keep gas prices down to better his chances in November? Now, they're screaming that it's his fault prices are skyrocketing! So, so typical.

Guess who?

2004-05-31T23:22:00.000-04:00

In recent months I have spoken many times about how difficult and dangerous a period it is through which we now move. I would like to take this opportunity to say a word about the American spirit in this time of trial.

In the most critical periods of our nation's history, there have always been those fringes of our society who have sought to escape their own responsibility by finding a simple solution, an appealing slogan, or a convenient scapegoat. Financial crises could be explained by the presence of too many immigrants or too few greenbacks.

War could be attributed to munitions makers or international bankers. Peace conferences failed because we were duped by the British or tricked by the French or deceived by the Russians.

It was not the presence of Soviet troops in Eastern Europe that drove it to communism; it was the sell-out at Yalta. It was not a civil war that removed China from the free world; it was treason in high places. At times these fanatics have achieved a temporary success among those who lack the will or the vision to face unpleasant tasks or unsolved problems.

But in time the basic good sense and stability of the great American consensus has always prevailed.

Now we are face to face once again with a period of heightened peril. The risks are great, the burdens heavy, the problems incapable of swift or lasting solution. And under the strains and frustrations imposed by constant tension and harassment, the discordant voices of extremism are heard once again in the land. Men who are unwilling to face up to the danger from without are convinced that the real danger comes from within. They look suspiciously at their neighbors and their leaders. They call for a 'man on horseback' because they do not trust the people. They find treason in our finest churches, in our highest court, and even in the treatment of our water. They equate the Democratic Party with the welfare state, the welfare state with socialism, and socialism with communism. They object quite rightly to politics' intruding on the military -- but they are anxious for the military to engage in politics.

But you and I and most Americans take a different view of our peril. We know that it comes from without, not within. It must be met by quiet preparedness, not provocative speeches.

And the steps taken this year to bolster our defenses--to increase our missile forces, to put more planes on alert, to provide more airlift and sealift and ready divisions--to make more certain than ever before that this nation has all the power it will need to deter any attack of any kind--those steps constitute the most effective answer that can be made to those who would sow the seeds of doubt and hate.

So let us not heed these counsels of fear and suspicion. Let us concentrate more on keeping enemy bombers and missiles away from our shores, and concentrate less on keeping neighbors away from our shelters. Let us devote more energy to organize the free and friendly nations of the world, with common trade and strategic goals, and devote less energy to organizing armed bands of civilian guerrillas that are more likely to supply local vigilantes than national vigilance.

Let our patriotism be reflected in the creation of confidence rather than crusades of suspicion. Let us prove we think our country great by striving to make it greater. And, above all, let us remember that, however serious the outlook, the one great irreversible trend in world history is on the side of liberty--and so, for all time to come, are we.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The preceding was not a speech by George Bush, Newt Gingrich, Rush Limbaugh, or any other "right-wing radical". JFK Nov. 18, 1961.

What were once Republicans are now Democrats, and what were once Democrats are now Socialists.

Remember

2004-05-31T13:08:00.000-04:00

Yesterday America's Greatest Generation finally got a long deserved memorial on the mall in Washington. Please remember to pause at 3 p.m. today and take a few moments to reflect on the sacrifices they, and all veterans back to the revolution, have made for our freedom. Can you imagine a world without a country this great? I can't. Don't forget to remember those who made it possible today.

"Status Quo": Latin for "the mess we're in"

2004-05-30T20:01:00.000-04:00

Hello, and welcome to Global Villainage. I'm your host, Villainous Vic. Villainage is defined in WordNet on Webster's online dictionary as "the legal status or condition of servitude of a villein or feudal serf." The sense in which it is used here is, obviously, a play on the phrase "global village", which term liberals and their ilk like to banty about. Global this, global that, global lobotomy. As any thinking person knows, if the viewpoint of the left was carried out to it's logical conclusion, the result would be Global Disaster; thus they are the very villains they portray conservatives, capitalists, and anyone who believes in true freedom, with responsibility, to be, while the whole world would become villains (serfs) according to the old definition under their "plan".

So, welcome to Global Villainage, and feel free to comment. I would be especially happy to hear from liberals, because I truly believe you truly believe what you believe, and I would hope to be able to point out the deficiencies in your thinking, or at least shake up the status quo.