Thursday, 30 April 2009

A hint of truth on the 100th Day

The 100th day of the Chosen One’s new reign in America was celebrated in various sections of the UK Press yesterday, in the “right on” London Metro even the daily 118 118 cartoon strip advert got in on the act. This was not a surprise, as readers of the Metro, may have noticed, the 118 118 strip invariably signals its state approved devotion to diversity by ensuring that any group or crowd it depicts includes the requisite quota of ethnic minority figures, so we can guess where the artist's loyalties lie.

In yesterdays cartoon strip, one character mentioned Obama’s 100 day anniversary, to which another responded “He’s achieved a lot in that time”. She did not go on to list any of the “achievements” she had in mind, but the reader was obviously expected to accept without question that there had been a series of them.

It is on the basis of such unquestioning belief that popular wisdom so often trumps a closer analysis of the facts. However, popular wisdom is seldom factually accurate.

This is not to say that there have not been actions during the 100 day Honeymoon, many of them deliberately crowd pleasing, but an act takes more than adoring headlines to count as an achievement, however much the spin doctors might like to pretend it does.

Obama's supporters would doubtless point to the announced closure of the Guantánamo Bay detention centre on Cuba, the banning of so called water boarding as an interrogation technique, and the proposed withdrawal of troops from Iraq as achievements, whereas they are, in fact, actions, crowd pleasing gestures designed to delight both his liberal fan base and closest ideological supporters.

It could be argued that these acts have won America some international friends, however, it is an open question as to how many of those friends were not already anxious to be friends with an Obama lead America, and how many of the others are paying lip service to friendship whilst continuing to plot behind the scenes.

We will have to wait and see whether these gestures have achieved anything, or whether they have actually made America, and, by extension the West considerably more dangerous. It is significant that these were amongst the first acts which Obama took, what does it say about a President that his first priority is to please the likes of Bill Ayres, Michael Moore, George Galloway and the Stop the War coalition?

What is certain is that irrespective of the PR aspects, these acts have done little to address the very real problems facing America. In that respect the Obama administration produced the stimulus package, where, as in Britain, eye watering sums of money were given to banks and businesses out of tax-payers money, leaving the American people hugely in debt and with no guarantee that they will ever get their money back. Other funds have been earmarked for re-generation, but with so many politically correct “non-white, one legged, transgender only” clauses that they are likely to have about as much effect as taking a sherbet hose to a bushfire.

On the plus side, America is now fully on-board with the rest of the world in its efforts to tackle climate change, which, if you are convinced by the science, is certainly a step in the right direction. However, in this the Obama administration benefits from the pig-headed, head in the sand attitude of its predecessor, without who’s intransigent and ill conceived policy, the One would no now be winning plaudits by reversing it. (I take the view, that the potential consequences of the scientists being right are so terrible that they far outweigh those if they are wrong, and as such, we can not afford to take the risk. In any event, the downsides associated with burning both coal and oil are so significant that efforts to find alternatives can only be beneficial, with or without climate change.)

There is little point in saving the world for our children if we destroy the environment they are expected to live in, therefore, I personally support this more, and hence I am prepared add a positive point to Obama’s score card in this respect, whilst appreciating that many of my readers will be less generous.

(NB: I do not plan to respond to comments about climate change, none of us, including scientists on both sides, know enough to be sure who is right)

On Obama’s 100th day the true nature of what he represents and what we will have to face from this administration gave us a glimpse of its ugly face as the House of Representatives passed the latest hate crimes bill. (As if they needed another one). The new hate crimes legislation, as with almost everything else Obama has done exposes the truth of the claim to offer “change” which was repeated ad-nauseam throughout the election campaign. It is now clear that this “change” means to be a bit different to Bush in some respects, but absolutely no different from the madness which has infested US Society for the last couple of decades.

Do not get me wrong, the murder of Matthew Shepherd, after whom this legislation has been named, was a terrible and deeply evil crime, the scum who beat him to a pulp and left him to die, deserve every miserable day they rot in prison for what they did. Anyone who seeks to minimise or justify what was done to Matthew on the grounds of either his sexuality of their religion, do not believe in the same God which I do, and I have no wish to know their God. I differ from many in the Nationalist community in that I do not have an issue with gay people, I believe their lifestyle is their nature and not a choice, they have been part of the human condition throughout history, and are entitled to fully equal treatment within society.

However, the key word here is equality, and it the fundamental lack of equality which makes this bill so objectionable and so unconstitutional (perhaps unsurprising coming from Kenya's favourite son). It is extremely symbolic of the hypocrisy within liberal American society that America's first African American president, has, within his first 100 days presided over legislation which further enshrines discrimination into US law.

This bill and those which went before it only offer protection to selected groups plucked from the liberal lexicon of preferred victims, and as was to be expected, heterosexual white people are not amongst those groups. This is despite the fact that the most powerful man in America is black, whereas, in numerical terms, the largest single group living in poverty and deprivation, and therefore amongst the most vulnerable, are white.

I am not sure that many people in America are aware that a gang of black men could beat and torture a white man to death, as they so frequently do, and there is no way the act could constitute a hate crime under this legislation, even if they shouted “We hate you Honkey” whilst doing so. Whereas, were a white man to call a black man a “black idiot”, the white man could potentially be charged with a hate crime, and almost certainly would he were he to slap the black man's face while saying it.

We in the Nationalist community are frequently accused of hate, however, it is uncomfortable to contemplate the level of hate which must have gone into drafting such inequitable legislation.

The legislation is also inequitable because it applies different values to different victims. How can it be fair to punish someone more severely for hitting a thirty year old man because he is black or gay than for hitting a sixty year old one because they want his pension book? Surely both crimes should be treated equally, and subject to equal degrees of deterrence.

However, this bill has nothing to do with fairness or justice, it's purpose is to bolster a liberal fantasy and to perpetuate the myth that hate crimes are a predominantly white against black / gay phenomenon.

This agenda driven and discriminatory piece of legislation is typical of what we can expect from this administration, which, due to a combination of white guilt and black racism, has transferred the mindset of the humanities department at a second rate university to the White house.

Despite what the 118 118 cartoon strip sought to imply, the Kenyan Messiah's achievements in his first 100 days were more modest than they like to suggest. However, what he did achieve was to show anyone ready to look who he really is, where is is going, and what we can expect from him.


Dr.D said...

Most of Zero's "accomplishments" have been of the negative sort, not the kind that most people would call accomplishments but rather fumbles.

Regarding AGW, I think you are mistaken about America being "on board" with this idea. The Zero administration is backing it, but the American people are quite resistant to the idea. I'd say the idea is rapidly loosing ground here. Only the hard left believes this.

As regards Matthew Shepherd, the latest information I have read on him is that this was not an attack on him because he was a homosexual at all. Rather it was a drug deal/robbery that went wrong. That still does not justify his death in any way, but it does change the perception of it considerably.

I would suggest to you, Sarah, that you are getting a very filtered view of America, the view purveyed by the mainstream media. Of course, that is all that is available to you, but please realize that this is not an accurate description of the country as a whole. It presents what they want you to understand. I live out in the big middle of America, what is spoken of as "flyover land," and things look considerably different here. Washington can pass all the laws it likes, but it may have some difficulty getting the in operation on the ground.

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Actually I do not buy the filtered view of America sold to me by the main stream media, I get my information from many sources, the MSM being but one.

When I said that America was on board with the rest of the world on tackling climate change, I meant the administration was. I am aware that there is scepticism elsewhere in America, however, I am afraid I am with the Administration on that issue.

I am aware that Congresswoman Foxx has raised questions about Matthew Shepherds's death. I would question her motives for doing so, especially as what she says conflicts with the evidence which came out in court.

In any event what she is doing is small minded and nasty, particularly as it make no difference, given the nature of the Shepherd murder a severe sentence was merited irrespective of the motive.

It would be as inequitable were his killers to get a more severe sentence for beating him to death because he was gay than they would for beating him to death in the course of a robbery as it would for the reverse to apply.

Foxx is muddying the water to no purpose, because these crimes do happen, the issue is whether they should be treated differently.

alanorei said...

Thank you for the article, Sarah

This is the view a month ago (extract only) from US commentator, Lynn Stuter, (Sorry if the extract is a bit long, I think it was necessary for retaining the context).

LS is not best pleased with BHO, and apologises to everyone for actually having voted for him.

Today, the United States of America lays in shambles. In 77 days since usurping the Oval Office, the Also Known As (AKA) Obama Administration has done more damage to this nation than any president before him.

In that short time-frame, AKA …

• has signed into law legislation that will, in one year, put this nation $1.8 trillion further into the hole, bearing in mind that the total deficit spending of the Bush Administration, in eight years, was $400 billion!

• waits to sign into law the GIVE Act (HR 1388) which begins the process of establishing the "national security force"; the brown-shirt goon-squads needed to assert control over the American people!

• has, through bailouts – the illegal and unconstitutional taking (stealing) of money from the American people – moved to …

• nationalize banks!

• nationalize private enterprise!

• moved to bring the 2010 census under his power and control!

• begun the move to turn over the sovereignty of the United States to global governance via the Financial Stability Board (FSB), a body of central bankers (mostly European) from each of the G20 states and the European Union; the purpose of which is a global economic union with uniform regulations and bylaws for all participating nations "with [the] authority to intervene in U.S. corporations by dictating executive compensation and approving or disapproving business management decisions."

The biggest grab for power in the history of this nation, all under the banner of economic stimulus and economic recovery, neither of which will occur as the nation sinks further and further into the crisis orchestrated to bring about the wanted solution, the emergence of the Marxist state.
i.e. LS fears that, as we say in the UK, US electors are turkeys who've just voted for Christmas.

Re: Climate Change (so-called), I note your intention not to reply on this sub topic, but just to indicate that Genesis 8:22 was drawn to my attention on the subject by another Christian believer. I think it is significant.

While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.Man is a more than a bit arrogant to think he can actually change the climate. But that kind of arrogance is par for the course these days. (Atmospheric CO2 levels are about 0.03-0.05% of which roughly 3% issues from manmade sources. Still, if BHO thinks he can reduce that 0.03-0.05% to a more (politically) acceptable level, I'm very willing to listen to him explain specifically how.)

Dr.D said...

I'm sorry to hear that you have bought into the AGW scam, Sarah. As an engineer, I am quite confident that this is pure political foolishness, pushed by people with absolutely no scientific credibility and done for political ends only. Have you noticed that it comes almost entirely from the Left? You are, of course, entitled to your opinion, but I think you have chosen to side against freedom and our people on this one.

alanorei said...

Hello again, Sarah

This poem below is from Roy Moore, the Alabama judge removed from his judgeship by pressure from the ACLU for displaying the 10 Commandments in his courtroom foyer. The ACLU is now trying to have him debarred from practising law in the state of Alabama, once part of the Bible Belt.

I think the judge's poem is a good comment on BHO's first 100 days. I don't think he's addressed any of the issues Judge Moore has raised.

Apologies again it's a bit long, insightful, though, I think.

America the beautiful,
or so you used to be.
Land of the Pilgrims' pride;
I'm glad they'll never see.

Babies piled in dumpsters,
Abortion on demand,
Oh, sweet land of liberty;
your house is on the sand.

Our children wander aimlessly
poisoned by cocaine
choosing to indulge their lusts,
when God has said abstain

From sea to shining sea,
our Nation turns away
From the teaching of God's love
and a need to always pray

We've kept God in our temples,
how callous we have grown.
When earth is but His footstool,
and Heaven is His throne.

We've voted in a government
that's rotting at the core,
Appointing Godless Judges;
who throw reason out the door,

Too soft to place a killer
in a well deserved tomb,
But brave enough to kill a baby
before he leaves the womb.

You think that God's not angry,
that our land's a moral slum?
How much longer will He wait
before His judgment comes?

How are we to face our God,
from Whom we cannot hide?
What then is left for us to do,
but stem this evil tide?

If we who are His children,
will humbly turn and pray;
Seek His holy face
and mend our evil way:

Then God will hear from Heaven;
and forgive us of our sins,
He'll heal our sickly land
and those who live within.

But, America the Beautiful,
If you don't - then you will see,
A sad but Holy God
withdraw His hand from Thee.

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

It was probably a bit pompous to say I did not intend to respond to comments about global warming. However, I did not want the thread to get diverted into a debate about global warming, which is what always happens if you even mention the subject.

I don't think I have fallen for a hoax, however, whatever people say if the scientists are wrong, and yet we take their advice, then it is not the end of the world, but if they are right, and we ignore them, it could well be the end of the world.

It is madness to take the risk.

I can't see that it is an attack on our people. The survival of our race is not dependent on the burning of coal and oil. In fact our dependence upon oil means we are permanently in thrall to nasty little dictators in the middle East, whereas coal is an unpleasant, dirty pollutant.

We are an inventive and resilient people, surely we can find something better.

Dr.D said...

From a report on the nasty hate crime legislation in Congress....

Unfortunately for them, Rep. Foxx was correct … according to an ABC report from 2004 in which the killers - Aaron McKinney and Russell Henderson - were interviewed, along with various witnesses, law enforcement officials, and Cal Rerucha, the prosecutor. I’ve emphasized the most relevant parts of the story:

Shepard’s Friends Suspect Attack Was Hate-Motivated

Just hours after Shepard’s battered body was discovered, and before anyone knew who had beaten him, Shepard’s friends Walt Boulden and Alex Trout began spreading the word that Shepard was openly gay and that they were concerned the attack may have been a gay-bashing.

Boulden told “20/20″ in an interview shortly after the attack in 1998, “I know in the core of my heart it happened because he revealed he was gay. And it’s chilling. They targeted him because he was gay.”

Prosecutor Rerucha recalls that Shepard’s friends also contacted his office. Rerucha told “20/20,” “They were calling the County Attorney’s office, they were calling the media and indicating Matthew Shepard is gay and we don’t want the fact that he is gay to go unnoticed.”

Helping fuel the gay hate crime theory were statements made to police and the media by Kristen Price, McKinney’s girlfriend. (Price was charged with felony accessory after-the-fact to first-degree murder. She later pleaded guilty to a reduced charge of misdemeanor interference with police officers.)

Price now says that at the time of the crime she thought things would go easier for McKinney if his violence were seen as a panic reaction to an unwanted gay sexual advance.

But today, Price tells Vargas the initial statements she made were not true and tells Vargas that McKinney’s motive was money and drugs. “I don’t think it was a hate crime at all. I never did,” she said.

Former Laramie Police Detective Ben Fritzen, one of the lead investigators in the case, also believed robbery was the primary motive. “Matthew Shepard’s sexual preference or sexual orientation certainly wasn’t the motive in the homicide,” he said.

“If it wasn’t Shepard, they would have found another easy target. What it came down to really is drugs and money and two punks that were out looking for it,” Fritzen said.

‘All I Wanted to Do Was Beat Him Up and Rob Him’

Asked directly whether he targeted and attacked Shepard because he was gay, McKinney told Vargas, “No. I did not. … I would say it wasn’t a hate crime. All I wanted to do was beat him up and rob him.”

But if the attackers were just trying to rob someone to get a drug fix, why did they beat Shepard so savagely?

Rerucha attributes McKinney’s rage and his savage beating of Shepard to his drug abuse. “The methamphetamine just fueled to this point where there was no control. It was a horrible, horrible, horrible murder. It was a murder that was once again driven by drugs,” Rerucha said.

Dr. Rick Rawson, a professor at UCLA who has studied the link between methamphetamine and violence, tells “20/20″ the drug can trigger episodes of violent behavior.

“In the first weeks after you’ve stopped using it, the kinds of triggers that can set off an episode are completely unpredictable. It can be: you say a word with the wrong inflection, you touch someone on the shoulder. It’s completely unpredictable as to what will set somebody off” Rawson said.

“If Aaron McKinney had not become involved with methamphetamine, Matthew Shepard would be alive today,” Rerucha said.

Vanishing American said...

alanorei's quotes from the Lynn Stuter article are very accurate. I suppose from the point of view of the far left, the new regime has been spectacularly successful, but for traditional America, it's been disastrous.

I too have heard the alternative version of Sheppard's death, though I don't know anything about Congresswoman Foxx or what she has said. I can't judge her motives, but it would seem to me that there would be more reason to doubt those of the MSM and the gay activists, who definitely exploited the murder to further their cause and agenda. Sensationalistic TV movies and documentaries turned Sheppard into some kind of sainted martyr, because of his sexual orientation, where many other similarly gruesome, or even more heinous crimes went unremarked because there was no leftist propaganda to be mined from them, and no political hay to be made.

I think the global warming issue is now being called simply 'climate change' so as to cover all the bases,
since a cooling trend might instead be happening.

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

None of us who were not there can know the truth about the murder of Matthew Shepherd. From both possible accounts it seems that he was the totally innocent victim of a vicious unprovoked crime. He also appears to have been a pleasant young man, blessed with beautiful looks and numerous friends.

I am grateful to those who have contributed that none have attempted to devalue him or his life for the sake of making a political point.

Shepherd's murder was a terrible crime and his killers were justly punished. However, as a result of this new legislation, which the house symbolically passed on Obama's 100th Day they would have been punished more severely for killing him because he was gay than they would have for killing him because they wanted £20.

I think we are all in agreement that that is as morally wrong, as if it were the other way round. (As in the account mentioned by both Dr D and Vanishing America it suggests his killers may have initially imagined)

As I said, this legislation further enshrines discrimination into US law, and that was the point I was seeking to make, rather than to debate the death of a beautiful young boy who has been used as an ideological punch bag by both sides for far too long.

Any law which attempted to minimize crimes committed for motives of bias would be rightly seen as outrageous, but for the same reason that this bill is outrageous because it actively applies different values to different victims for nothing more than ideological reasons.

That should be offensive to everyone, gay, straight, black or white.

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Thanks for both your posts Alanorei, as ever they give a different and interesting perspective to issues.

The Moore poem may have been long, but it was certainly worth posting in full as it is very poignant and moving.

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Thanks for your post Vanishing American, I am a regular reader and fan of your blog , which is one of the more intelligent and thoughtful around at the moment, and I am grateful that you have contributed to this thread.

I would certainly agree with you that there have been a number of murders which have been more gruesome and violent than Matthew Shepheard's, or indeed that on James Byrd in Texas, which would never be viewed as hate crimes because the victims do fall into categories which this evil, ideological law considers worthy of protection.

Indeed, I think we are all probably in agreement on the broader issue, I am simply anxious that we avoid any temptation to suggest that victims are less innocent or deserving on account of who or what they are, because by doing so, we seek to do exactly what this law is doing.

With respect to climate change, whilst respecting the views of those who are sceptical about this issue, I have to say that, not one of them have shown me conclusive evidence that it is not happening, and that we are not causing it. We have polluted the seas to the point that there isn't a desert island anywhere in the remotest ocean where you will not find bits of plastic. We have devastated the worlds wildlife to the extent that there have been hundreds of extinctions in my child's lifetime, let alone my own. We have destroyed forests, emptied seas and strip-mined areas the size of small counties, how can anyone be totally certain we have not done similar damage to our climate.

The fact that it could be happening, makes the possibility that it might not be totally irrelevant. If there is a 1% chance that there is a lion living in next door's garden, I am fixing my fence and my kid's not going outside, whatever the sceptics might say.

You are correct that the science of climate change allows for the possibility of regional cooling, Western Europe for instance, is unnaturally warm given its latitude because of the gulf stream. If the gulf stream changes direction, as it could if to much melting ice from the ice caps flows into the Atlantic. If that were to happen, in the short term (for the next century or so) we could end up an average of 10 or 20 degrees colder. That does not sound like mad science to me, its the rudimentary physics I learned at school.

You may not believe the scientists, but until someone shows me conclusive evidence they are wrong I believe the world needs to take precautions.

alanorei said...

Thank you, Sarah

I always appreciate your fair-minded approach.

Although I have mentioned him before (I think), another commentator worth following, in my opinion, is martial arts expert and former actor, Chuck Norris, who produces a weekly column for WND, reproduced on the Creators Syndicate.

This is what he has to say about the all-important topic of education (primarily private education in the article) and how Obama's administration is seeking to control it. The article also impinges on cetain other important issues that your latest post raises, as you will see.

I think this will also be of interest to Dr. D and VA as well (thank you also for your comments, gentlemen).

An extract from Chuck Norris's article follows:

"I was speaking to a friend in California who has taught in public schools there for 30 years. She told me the school no longer begins its day with the Pledge of Allegiance, but a "patriotic observance." During the presidential election, teachers were lined up in the library to take a photo with a stand-up cut out of Barack Obama (no other candidate offered). Without any prior consent or vote, the school union allocated $1 million to fight pro-Prop 8 (anti-gay marriage amendment). At the beginning of a faculty meeting, a teacher spoke up to remind everyone to vote against Prop 8, to which no rebuttal was welcome. My friend told me that at this point conservatism in any form is completely ostracized in her school – something that has radically changed over the past three decades. But aren't we supposed to be offering education rather than merely Left indoctrination?"Good question and one that surely demands an straight answer (no pun intended).

Chuck also describes California as ""The Left Coast"", which is not surprising.

Dr.D said...

Sarah, I do believe "the scientists." Its the pseudo-scientists that I don't believe, and the folks screaming "Global Warming" or "Climate Change" or whatever almost all fall in the latter category. They are the ones claiming "consensus" and "discussion closed."

In terms of science, consensus and closure of discussion are almost certain synonyms for error. The reason is that nature does not give a hoot about what man thinks, so consensus is simply irrelevant; they can all be wrong, every last one! Closing the discussion simply means an end to searching for the truth. Unfortunately, in the era of political correctness, the concept of truth has been perverted beyond recognition, but it still exists.

Sarah, your desire to err on the side of safety is certainly understandable. Unfortunately, it is not really possible. you can cripple yourself and your country economically while the rest of the world continues business as usual, or you can continue to participate in the game of international commerce and try to improve things. You cannot do both. What do you think China and India will do?

Sarah Maid of Albion said...

Without question, ways have to be found to get India and China to cut their emissions as well, otherwise it would be rather pointless for us to do so, and we might as well just start building the spaceship.

I don't think it is necessary to cripple our economies seeking to find a solution, we will eventually have to anyway, oil and coal are by their very nature finite, if we do not find an alternative at some point we will find ourselves up Mandelson creek without a paddle anyway.

With respect however, this thread is not about climate change it is about Obama, but as always happens when climate change is mention it dominates all discussion. It is the reason why I said I didn't want to answer comments on it in the first place.

Cicely Scudd said...

What or where is "Mandelson Creek"?

alanorei said...

Hi Dr. D

As you'll appreciate, I agree with your stance on climate change but to save space on Sarah's blog w.r.t. what is only a subsidiary topic, I draw your attention to an item I had reproduced here a couple of years back.

The item may be of summary interest.

P.S. Re: Mandelson Creek (most apt, Sarah), Cicely, it's like being between a rock and a hard place, with particular reference to a certain Rt. Hon. Lord (saints preserve us) Peter Mandelson, who is the UK Government's Secretary of State i.e. Minister for Business, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform.

He's held a number of senior government posts since nulab came to power in 1997 and been a spectacular failure in every one of them.

One of his responsibilities in his present job is to oversee UK endeavours to cut carbon emissions. UK environmentalists don't have a lot of confidence in him (a point where they are in agreement with the vast majority of Britons, regardless of either politicial or environmental affiliation) and to emphasise this verdict, one of them threw a consignment of green custard in his face recently.

Dr.D said...

Alan, thanks for that link to your article at the Donkey's View. I thought that was quite good.

alanorei said...

Thanks, Dr. D

My aim was to put forward a comprehensive view, while leaving no doubt w.r.t. my own stance.