They Are Sheep

We seem to be living in a world where the bad guys are flaunting their badness.

It’s obvious that Obama is using the border crisis to blackmail Republicans into immigration reform that could create a permanent majority for the Democrat Party. Yet, we convince ourselves is about humanitarianism.

It’s obvious that Hamas wants to destroy Israel and is willing to use children as weapons. Yet, we convince ourselves that Israel is like Nazi Germany and the Palestinians are victims.

It’s obvious that the U.N. is an anti-Semitic, anti-American organization with the latest example being the discovery of Hamas weapons at one of the UN schools. When discovered, they gave the weapons back to Hamas. Yet, we convince ourselves that the UN is the last best hope for world peace.

 

Advertisements

Fourteen GOP Senators Vote for Amnesty

 

Update: 15

 

Gordon Brown Meets Mrs. Duffy

Move over Joe the Plumber…there’s a new voice of the people! UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown shows once again how a career politician just can’t go toe-to-toe with regular folk.

BLUNDERING Gordon Brown has been caught on microphone calling a voter a “bigot”.

The Prime Minister was heard describing an exchange he had just had with lifelong Labour supporter Gillian Duffy, 65 — on the campaign trail in Rochdale, Lancs, today — as a “disaster”.

He made the comments as he got into his car after speaking to Mrs Duffy — not realising that he still had the Sky News mic pinned to his shirt.

He told an aide: “That was a disaster – they should never have put me with that woman. Whose idea was that? It’s just ridiculous.”

She tackled him on a series of issues including the national debt, taxes, student financing and immigration.

Mrs Duffy, a widow, said she was “very disappointed” with Mr Brown’s remarks.

After hearing what the Prime Minister had said about her, she said it was “very upsetting”.

She added: “He’s an educated person, why has he come out with words like that?

“He’s supposed to lead this country and he’s calling an ordinary woman who’s just come up and asked questions what most people would ask him – he’s not doing anything about the national debt and it’s going to be tax, tax, tax for another 20 years to get out of this mess – and he’s calling me a bigot.”

Of course the first thing that gets me – having worked in video production my whole career – is how a trained politician can be so careless around microphones. When you’re miked up, you have to go into a different mode that doesn’t end when the interview is over, it ends when you see the microphone being completely removed from your person. Politics 101 people!

Now to the heart of the matter.

Mr Brown’s unguarded comments were made after the pensioner quizzed him about immigration claiming it was a taboo subject.

During their exchange in the street, Mrs Duffy told the Prime Minister: “You can’t say anything about immigrants.”

She added: “All these eastern Europeans – where are they coming from?”

Mr Brown said a million people had come from Europe but another million Britons had moved the other way.

Mrs Duffy also complained about people on benefits.

She said: “There are too many who aren’t vulnerable and they can claim, and people who are vulnerable can’t get claims – can’t get it.”

Mr Brown said: “But they shouldn’t be doing that. There is no life on the dole for people any more.”

As he went to leave, the Prime Minister shook her hand and told her: “Very nice to meet you, very nice to meet you.”

Amen, sister! You can’t say anything about immigrants in this country either without being called a bigot. Our president gives us pretty much the same treatment.

MORE: Video of Mrs. Duffy receiving the news she is a bigot. Allahpundit calls the look on her face “pure-spun gold.” I completely agree.

Cultural Concessions On A One-Way Street

Fjordman looks at the decline of Great Britain and the for that matter, the English-speaking world.

I’m not sure why the Anglosphere is so bad. In the case of Britain, I strongly suspect it’s partly caused by a Post-Imperial Stress Syndrome for a nation that once ruled much of the world and now cannot even rule its own suburbs. Empire was their identity. Much of the same can be said about the French. Indeed I suspect that one of their motivations for supporting the awful EU project is for them to resurrect some of their past imperial glory in another form.
Yet this cannot explain the actions of the United States, which is still the world’s greatest power although that may not last forever. There is some form of universal proposition nation idea with roots dating back to the Enlightenment at work here. It’s the concept that a country is not a nation based on a shared heritage, but an abstract entity which can be joined by absolutely anybody, a bit like an enlarged video club. If you claim that the United States is a “universal” nation and that Hamas-supporting Muslims, with which Westerners have absolutely nothing in common, can and should be imported to the USA, then you are a supporter of the concept of a proposition nation. This idea will eventually kill the United States as we once knew it.

I don’t necessarily think that there are people that don’t belong in certain countries, it comes down to how you act once you’re there. It’s an unwritten rule for Americans traveling abroad that it’s only polite and correct to at least make the attempt to speak the language of the natives. Nine times out of ten, when they see that you are making this effort, they will then speak English to make it easier for you. If you just expect them to do so from the get-go, it’s considered rude, and that seems more than fair to me. What we are dealing with in the United States and most of the Western nations are immigrants that wish to enter a country and make no concessions whatsoever and in turn, want us to make concessions to them whether it be the language they speak or their cultural practices. This becomes a dangerous game when Sharia Law comes into play.

A Dutch Awakening?

One of the bigger stories lost in this dead week between Christmas and New Year’s is how the Dutch are starting to see the folly of “tolerance.”

Since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks in the United States, the Netherlands had lived through something akin to a populist revolt against accommodating Islamic immigrants led by Pim Fortuyn, who was later murdered; the assassination of the filmmaker Theo Van Gogh, accused of blasphemy by a homegrown Muslim killer; and the bitter departure from the Netherlands of Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali woman who became a member of Parliament before being marked for death for her criticism of radical Islam.
Now something fairly remarkable is happening again.
Two weeks ago, the country’s biggest left-wing political grouping, the Labor Party, which has responsibility for integration as a member of the coalition government led by the Christian Democrats, issued a position paper calling for the end of the failed model of Dutch “tolerance.”
It came at the same time Nicolas Sarkozy was making a case in France for greater opportunities for minorities that also contained an admission that the French notion of equality “doesn’t work anymore.”
But there was a difference. If judged on the standard scale of caution in dealing with cultural clashes and Muslims’ obligations to their new homes in Europe, the language of the Dutch position paper and Lilianne Ploumen, Labor’s chairperson, was exceptional.

The paper said: “The mistake we can never repeat is stifling criticism of cultures and religions for reasons of tolerance.”

Read the whole story from the International Herald Tribune. Very interesting.

Barack Obama’s Road To Serfdom

The Road to Serfdom is paved with good intentions, or at least intentions that have the appearance of being “good.” Barack Obama, in his historic race for the presidency, has put this dictum top of mind for many of us. Every day he says something that gives many pause and today we have a twofer.

A lot of chatter on the blogs about a line in a recent Obama speech: “We have got to have a civilian national security force that is just as strong.” Just as strong as the military, he means. His argument is that we cannot solve international problems with military action along and we need a separate branch of national security full of civilians with expertise in agriculture, engineering, linguistics, etc. Now for many, this conjures up images of the Hitler Youth or the Brownshirts. More specifically, what this is is an attempt to get as many people in the public sector as possible.

“If we’ve got a State Department or personnel that have been trained just to be behind walls, and they have not been equipped to get out there alongside our military and engage, then we don’t have the kind of national security apparatus that is needed,” he said. “That has to be planned for; it has to be paid for. Those personnel have to be trained. And they all have to be integrated.”

Apparently, this is a reworked version of an idea by current Secretary of Defense Gates. Altruistic or not, it means more government, more bureaucracy. Dovetail this with his call for more volunteerism from the nation’s youth and you get quite the little “domestic army” indeed.

On the surface, it’s not necessarily a bad idea, but you have to look at what’s behind it. Take environmentalism. In reality, it’s great when people decide to conserve, be less wasteful, look for alternative energy resources, etc. Those are good things, but the premise behind it is fatally flawed…the premise that mankind is destroying the planet and that consumption of any kind is bad. Here we have Obama looking to start a civilian national security force, but to what end? To help spread democracy in the Middle East? Hmmm…kinda doubt it. To be meals on wheels for the people suffering under appeased dictators? Natch. To brainwash a generation of Americans? Double natch.

And it’s ultimately to our detriment in the area of safety. A civilian army has to be paid for and raising taxes ain’t gonna cover it all. What then? Well, he would cut missile defense:

“I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems. I will not weaponize space.”

Okay, so in a dangerous world where Islamic psychos want to kill us all or at least destroy our way of life, he thinks we should cut back on defense systems that could deter these little kooks should they get nukes and instead fund an army of linguist and agronomists. Feeling safer yet?

And speaking of linguistics, Barack has some interesting ideas on the subject of learning other languages. His belief is that spoiled Americans shouldn’t spend so much time worrying about whether immigrants are learning to speak English and should instead be learning to speak Spanish.

Again, here you have what is actually a good idea, but the premise underneath is ridiculous. It’s always a good idea for Americans or any people on the planet to learn other languages. It makes travel easier and more enjoyable. It’s a learning experience and could lead to other career opportunities. If you speak Arabic (and you’re not gay), you can get yourself a very nice job with the U.S. Military. But again, the premise is completely screwed up. What he’s saying is that it’s our fault. When immigrants have a hard time making it America and assimilating into our society, it’s our fault for not speaking their language, not their fault for not speaking ours. In the same breath, he gripes that we don’t speak European languages when we visit the continent. So which is it? Is it the immigrant’s responsibility or the native’s responsibility to learn the other’s language? As Captain Ed says, it smacks of America bashing.

This is the future, America. Either get used to it, or do something about it.

More Nonsense South Of The Border

There have been a lot of hard lessons this year. A lot of people that showed such promise early in the decade have turned out to be lemons. Vladimir Putin is a good example. Another one is Vicente Fox. When he won the Mexican Presidency in 2000 and ended 70 years of the PRI’s corrupt socialist government, many of us thought it was a new day for our neighbor to the South, but instead he proved to be a huge disappointment. Now this:

NEW YORK (AP) – Former Mexican President Vicente Fox said Monday that the United States is letting racism dictate its policies, especially when it comes to immigration.

“The xenophobics, the racists, those who feel they are a superior race … they are deciding the future of this nation,” he said, without naming names, in an interview with The Associated Press.

Nice. Yes, I’m a racist because I want people to enter the country legally. Unbelievable.