Obama Hits a Wall! Will Media Highlight MAJOR Obama Gaffe in Berlin Speech?

-By Warner Todd Huston

Obama’s speech today in Berlin, hailed as a “major” address, has at least one major, glaring error that shows that nether Obama nor his handlers and speech writers were thoroughly familiar with the facts. Obama’s main theme was about the “walls” that separate all of us one from another. He claims that many of these “walls” have been taken down and hails that as progress. But in at least one instance he is wrong. In fact more walls have been built where Obama claimed they were taken down.

First the relevant section of Obama’s misconception (my bold for emphasis):

The walls between old allies on either side of the Atlantic cannot stand. The walls between the countries with the most and those with the least cannot stand. The walls between races and tribes; natives and immigrants; Christian and Muslim and Jew cannot stand. These now are the walls we must tear down.

We know they have fallen before. After centuries of strife, the people of Europe have formed a Union of promise and prosperity. Here, at the base of a column built to mark victory in war, we meet in the center of a Europe at peace. Not only have walls come down in Berlin, but they have come down in Belfast, where Protestant and Catholic found a way to live together; in the Balkans, where our Atlantic alliance ended wars and brought savage war criminals to justice; and in South Africa, where the struggle of a courageous people defeated apartheid.

(Full Obama speech transcript here.)

Obama claims that the walls built to separate Protestant from Catholic have come down in Belfast. Well, in fact, they have not. In reality MORE ARE BEING BUILT all the time.

Continue reading “Obama Hits a Wall! Will Media Highlight MAJOR Obama Gaffe in Berlin Speech?”

These are the Torturing, Maniacs Obama Thinks he can Befriend

-By Warner Todd Huston

In 1999 a handsome, earnest young man named Ahmad Batebi defied Ayatollah Khamenei in Iran. His photo caused an instant sensation and became a symbol of the flower of Iran standing ready to oppose the oppression of the Iranian religious regime.

Batebi, 31, became an icon after he was photographed as a handsome young student waving the blood-stained shirt of a fallen demonstrator during mass protests against Ayatollah Khamenei, the supreme leader, and clerical rule in 1999. With his long hair and bandana, he embodied the new spirit of defiance in Iran.

Naturally, he was apprehended by his oppressors and imprisoned under a 15-year prison sentence. While in prison he was beaten with metal cables, suspended by his arms from the ceiling for hours and was constantly threatened with execution. It was demanded that he disclaim his treasonous actions on Iranian TV. Batebi refused.

The price of his defiance can be seen in the deep scars on his shoulders and arms — and other parts of his body hidden by clothing. In prison he was repeatedly blindfolded, beaten and deprived of sleep. Pulling up the sleeves of his T-shirt, he said: “I don’t know what they used to cut me, but they put salt in the wounds to stop me falling asleep.”

Fortunately, Ahmad Batebi found help among the Kurdish underground in Iran and he was able to make his escape to find refuge in America. It is reported that his pursuers chased him from Iran all the way into Iraq and issued the threat that they would eventually get him.

Ahmad Batebi was lucky to have escaped. Thousands of his compatriots have not been so lucky. They languish in prisons deep in Iran being tortured and murdered daily by order of the Ayatollahs.

These are the people Barack Obama imagines he can charm into becoming civilized humans.

Continue reading “These are the Torturing, Maniacs Obama Thinks he can Befriend”

Reuters: Who Felled the Berlin Wall? How ‘Bout Bruce Springsteen! (No, They’re SERIOUS)

-By Warner Todd Huston

In one of the most ridiculous examples of unbridled hyperbole, Reuters has decided that singer Bruce Springsteen is the one responsible for bringing down the Berlin Wall and ending the Cold War. Yes, that’s Bruce “Scorn in the USA” Springsteen, one of the most anti-American rockers on the scene. I know what you’re thinking, “But what about Ronald Reagan?” Forget it, man, it’s Bruce all the way as far as Reuters is concerned. Maybe it was his gravely warbling that Joshua-like brought those walls tumblin’ down, maybe his caterwauling is what turned the trick, but, quite despite any common sense and in a childishly, foolish and overly simplistic review of history, Reuters is sure that Bruce is the hero of Berlin. It is a great example of reductio ad absurdo if there ever was one, not that Reuters is aware of it.

This Reuters piece is so filled with nonsense, so blind to all the complicated political and social influences that really ended the Cold War, that it is hard to know where to start reviewing it. I can but shake my head at its simple minded analysis.

Seriously. Reuters really means it. Oh, don’t confuse them with all that economic and political history gobbledegook. It was one concert that ended a generation of communist oppression not the might of the US and its president determined to destroy the “evil empire.” It was “Thunder Road” and “Born to Run” sung in that less then melodic Springsteen style that brought the end to the Cold War.

Continue reading “Reuters: Who Felled the Berlin Wall? How ‘Bout Bruce Springsteen! (No, They’re SERIOUS)”

Academic Freedom

-By Nancy Salvato

An article published in the Chronicle of Higher Education reflects the notion that academic freedom means being allowed to advocate a personal point of view in the classroom.

Outspoken scholars fared much better than one would have expected in the aftermath of September 11, 2001. Richard Berthold, at the University of New Mexico, incurred only a reprimand for telling his freshman history class that “anyone who bombs the Pentagon gets an A in my book.” At Columbia University, Nicholas DeGenova got essentially a pass when he called for “a million Mogadishus.” Arthur Butz remained a professor in good standing at Northwestern University after he lauded Iran’s president for Holocaust denial. The moderate and deliberative response to such incidents and others suggests that academic freedom is in excellent health.

Others would define the above examples of academic freedom as proselytizing in the classroom or using the classroom as a “Bully Pulpit.”

Continue reading “Academic Freedom”

Baptist Blood Bought Liberty!

-By Don Boys, Ph.D.

Down through the ages Baptists have been about the most hated and persecuted religious group because their distinctiveness made them a threat to religious tyrants.

Baptists believe that salvation comes only through repenting of sin and placing faith in the sacrificial death of Christ. Works and godly living always follow salvation, but they do not produce salvation. By rejecting baby baptism, they insisted that only converted people should be baptized.

Therefore, the cause of the Baptists’ persecution in the middle ages was that they refused to baptize babies. In baptizing babies, a church has been able to keep its thumb on the people. No family wants to be responsible for a child going to hell (which does not happen) so they must “baptize” each baby to “protect” his soul. Religious leaders could see the threat to their religious empire if baby baptism were no longer practiced, so they persecuted Baptists.
Continue reading “Baptist Blood Bought Liberty!”

Baptists, Puritans, and the Witch Hunt!

-By Don Boys, Ph.D.

Hatred of Baptists was not limited to the Old World. The New World had its haters also and Baptists had to suffer the whip, the club, and prison to gain their religious liberty.

Boston authorities imprisoned three Baptists and whipped one of them grievously. This whipping of Obadiah Holmes was witnessed by Henry Dunster, president of Harvard College, and it made a life-changing impression on him. Dunster looked closer at the question of infant baptism and concluded that the Baptist position was the Bible position. When he made that announcement, it produced heartburn in every Puritan in New England.

Dunster was a scholar of Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and the Oriental languages. He was also an able preacher, and his conversion to Baptist principles was one of the most sensational events that occurred during that period. He refused to permit his own child to be “baptized” in the Congregational Church where he was a member! He felt strongly impressed (by the Puritans) to resign his position at Harvard. (Hey, what happened to academic freedom?)

All this sensational news didn’t hurt the growth of Baptists in New England, and they continued to erect buildings (illegally) while the Puritans turned up the heat. The Baptists built a church building in 1679, but the Puritan officials passed a law that required a “license from the authorities.” The Puritan authorities thought they could control the Baptists if they required a license to meet. That is what a license is for today—control.

Continue reading “Baptists, Puritans, and the Witch Hunt!”

Did Baptists Influence Thomas Jefferson?

-By Don Boys, Ph.D.

Baptist people have been the most principled people since the time of Christ. I do not believe that the designation of “Baptist” is nearly as important as the doctrine, but I want people to know where I stand. I am a Baptist, and am proud of my heritage that has made an incredible impact on this world—even Jefferson and the U.S. Constitution!

Baptists have stood for the free exercise of a person’s will and against oppression (religious or political) down through the ages.

The English historian, Skeats wrote, “It is the singular and distinguished honor of the Baptists to have repudiated from their earliest history all coercive power over the consciences and actions of men with reference to religion. They were the proto-evangelists of the voluntary principle.”

While that is true, it is also true that there have always been people, since the time of Christ, who held Baptist principles. In fact, a Methodist historian, John Clark Ridpath, who died in 1900 wrote, “I should not readily admit that there was a Baptist Church as far back as 100 A.D., although without doubt there were Baptist Churches then, as all Christians were then Baptists.” (Emphasis added.)
Continue reading “Did Baptists Influence Thomas Jefferson?”

Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Baptists, and the Constitution!

-By Don Boys, Ph.D.

Americans had won the war with England, written a Constitution under which they would be governed and eleven states had approved it. Virginia and New York approved it with the understanding that a Bill of Rights would be added. The Baptists in those states were the major promoters of a Bill of Rights to guarantee them and others added protection that they believed was missing from the Constitution.

The two recalcitrant states were North Caroline and Rhode Island who rejected the Constitution. In fact, neither state joined the Union until the new government was in operation (under the new Constitution). It took threats from Congress (that the two states would be treated as foreign nations and forced to pay duty on trade items) that made them “see the light” and brought them into the Union.

This young Republic was small with fewer than four million souls, 95 percent of whom lived on farms. America stretched from the Atlantic Ocean to the Mississippi River and from Canada to Florida. We weren’t an awesome power yet, but we had made a believer out of King George III who was still licking his wounds, and trying to pay his war bills.
Continue reading “Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Baptists, and the Constitution!”

The Mike Bates Independence Day Quiz

-By Michael M. Bates

Happy Birthday, America. It’s been 232 years since the Declaration of Independence was proclaimed. Take a quick quiz to see how much you know about this statement that changed the world.

  1. From what country did the American colonies declare their independence?
  2. In what city was the Declaration written?
  3. What colony did George Washington represent when he signed the Declaration?
  4. What two signers died on an anniversary of the Declaration?
  5. How many of the 13 colonies approved the Declaration?
  6. Who signed the Declaration on July 4, 1776?
  7. Whose authorship of the Declaration was treated as a state secret for 24 years?
  8. What U.S. bill depicts the Declaration?
  9. In what year was July 4 declared a federal holiday?
    10. Which signer included where he lived on the Declaration?
    That was fun, wasn’t it? Here are the answers.

  10. Great Britain. You might think everyone knows that, but they don’t. One Gallup poll found that only 76 percent of Americans answered the question correctly.
  11. Philadelphia.
  12. Sorry, that was a trick question. George Washington didn’t sign the Declaration of Independence. He was busy commanding the Continental army.
  13. John Adams and Thomas Jefferson both died on July 4, 1826, the fiftieth anniversary of the Declaration. Political adversaries at times, and friends at others, these two remarkable men were vital to the creation of the United States. In his wonderful biography of Adams, David McCullough writes that, when told it was the Fourth, Mr. Adams answered “It is a great day. It is a good day.” Among his last words were, “Thomas Jefferson survives.” Mr. Jefferson had died several hours earlier.
  14. Only 12 colonies approved the document. New York abstained.
  15. On the great day itself, just two men signed the Declaration. They were John Hancock, the Continental Congress’s president, and Charles Thomson, its secretary. Most of the delegates signed the document on August 2.
  16. Thomas Jefferson. It wasn’t until he ran for president in 1800 that his authorship of the Declaration became widely known. In his later years, John Adams recounted the arguments he used to persuade Mr. Jefferson to write the Declaration: “Reason first: You are a Virginian, and a Virginian ought to appear at the head of this business. Reason second: I am obnoxious, suspected, and unpopular. You are very much otherwise. Reason third: You can write ten times better than I can.” That wasn’t Tom’s recollection, but it still makes a good anecdote.
  17. The $2 Federal Reserve Note. Thomas Jefferson’s portrait has been on the front of the note since 1869. Observing our bicentennial in 1976, the back of note was changed to feature an engraving of John Trumbull’s painting “The Signing of the Declaration of Independence.”
  18. If you knew the answer to this one, you need to get out more. It was in 1870 and, according to the Congressional Research Service, Independence Day, Christmas, New Year’s Day, and Thanksgiving were the first four days thus recognized.
  19. Maryland’s Charles Carroll added “of Carrollton” after his signature. It’s believed that was done so relatives with the same name weren’t confused for him. Signing the Declaration was treason pure and simple, and the courageous men who affixed their names to it were risking everything. Mr. Carroll was also the only Catholic to sign, a not inconsequential deed at a time when people of his faith weren’t even permitted to vote. He was the last signer to die, passing away in 1832.

If your score is 9 or 10: You sure know how to use Google.

If your score is 6-8: Someone was paying attention in high school.

If your score is 4 or 5: Someone wasn’t paying attention in high school.

If your score is 3 or less: Been a Democrat long?

I’ll spend Independence Day trying not to remember it’s my birthday and dwelling on what a blessing it is to have been born in these United States of America.

Have a terrific Fourth!

(This Michael Bates column appeared in the July 3, 2008 Reporter Newspapers.)
____________
Michael M. Bates has written a weekly column of opinion – or nonsense, depending on your viewpoint – since 1985 for the (southwest suburban Chicago) Reporter Newspapers. Additionally, his articles have appeared in the Congressional Record, the Chicago Tribune, the Chicago Sun-Times and the Mensa Journal. He has been a guest on Milt Rosenberg’s program on WGN Radio Chicago, the Bruce Elliott show on Baltimore’s WBAL, the Jim Sumpter show on the USA Radio Network and the New Media Journal’s Blog Radio. As a lad, Mike distributed Goldwater campaign literature and since then has steadily moved further to the Right. He is the author of “Right Angles and Other Obstinate Truths.” In 2007, he won an Illinois Press Association award for Original Column.

His presence on the web can be viewed at www.michaelmbates.com And he can be reached at mikembates-at-gmail.com

Philly Inquirer Says No 4th For You, America is Evil, WOT is a ‘Scam’

-By Warner Todd Huston

You know, I was wondering when this was going to happen, when someone in the MSM would say Bush has ruined July Fourth? The Philadelphia Inquirer didn’t disappoint by wallowing in the worst example of blame-America-above-all as well as the most extreme case of BDS that I’ve seen outside the kind of nutroot sites like Daily Kos and the Democratic Underground. A mainstream paper has now gone that extra mile to let us all know that America does not deserve a July Fourth celebration this year because of Abu Ghraib, Guantanamo, CIA secret prisons, and, lest you imagine otherwise, the fact that we have made George W. Bush our president. “Cancel the parade” because America is evil. It’s all there in all it’s anti-American splendor in A not-so-glorious Fourth, U.S. atrocities are unworthy of our heritage.

Inquirer columnist Chris Satullo thinks that America is fraught with sin and that we don’t deserve a Fourth celebration. “This year, America doesn’t deserve to celebrate its birthday,” he whines. “This Fourth of July should be a day of quiet and atonement.”

We have failed to pay attention. We’ve settled for lame excuses. We’ve spit on the memory of those who did that brave, brave thing in Philadelphia 232 years ago.

We’ve “spit on the memory” of the Founders? Does he mean when the Democratic Party helped us lose Vietnam? How about when liberals somehow divined in the Founder’s name a “right to privacy” in the Constitution? Were either of those times when we spit in their faces? How about when the American left destroyed religion in America, or when they invented a “right” to abortion, or when they turned our various systems of education into places where fringe, wackos reign supreme and American history, civics and… well, anything actually educational… is banished into the mists of the past? Does Our pal Chris Satullo mean those times when the Founders saw the spittle fly?

You can guess that no is the answer to my questions.

No, to Chris Satullo, the only time we’ve “spit on the memory” of the founders is when we reacted to the time when 3,000 of our own were killed in New York City by Islamic terrorists. He is all upset that we’ve tortured prisoners, illegally imprisoned people “for years,” and practiced “rendition.”

Continue reading “Philly Inquirer Says No 4th For You, America is Evil, WOT is a ‘Scam’”

Farnsworth of CBS News Needs American History Lesson

-By Warner Todd Huston

Remember when the 49ers gold rush happened in Maine? How about when Dan’l Boone explored California? Do you remember when Lee surrendered his Confederate army in Fargo, North Dakota? Well, to those famous places with famous incidents we can add that great Revolutionary War battle of Lexington and Concord… Virginia. At least we can do so in the reckoning of one Jamie Fansworth of the CBS News blog “From the Road” because it seems our friend Farnsworth is a little fuzzy on where some of the most famous battles of the American Revolution were held.

Today, in the CBS blog post about McCain declaring “Energy Independence by 2025,” CBS News’ Jamie Farnsworth wrote the following (my bold for emphasis):

Las Vegas, NV — Senator John McCain unveiled the name of his energy project in Las Vegas today as he wrapped up the western swing of his two week energy tour. Deemed the Lexington Project, McCain’s plan states the U.S. will be independent of foreign energy sources by the year 2025.

“For the town where Americans asserted their independence once before,” McCain explained of the plan’s namesake in Virginia. “Let it begin today with this commitment: In a world of hostile and unstable suppliers of oil, this nation will achieve strategic independence by 2025.”

One teenie, weenie problem. The famous battles of the Revolution in question occurred in Massachusetts not Virginia.

In fact, Lexington, Virginia wasn’t even founded until after the great Revolutionary War battle in Massachusetts. We know this because the battle in Massachusetts was what the town in Virginia was named after.

Here is a bit of help for Farnsworth.

The City of Lexington, originally known as Gilbert Campbell’s Ford, was established as the town of Lexington in the Spring of 1778. The name chosen by the Virginia Legislature for the new county seat was in honor of the first great battle of the Revolutionary War, the battle of Lexington, Massachusetts, which had occurred three years earlier.

As Max Smart is wont to say, “Missed it by that much.”

Continue reading “Farnsworth of CBS News Needs American History Lesson”

TNR’s James Kirchick: Pat Buchanan is a Nazi Because His Father Was?

-By Warner Todd Huston

The New Republic has a rather interesting “book review” penned by James Kirchick on its website. It is a piece of work that really takes the cake for name calling, guilt by association, sins of the Father being visited on the son and serves as an all around typical example of a piece that lacks seriousness. It begins well enough, yet ends devolving into simple name calling with Kirchick basically saying author Pat Buchanan is a nazi lover and in sympathy with “authoritarians” because Pat’s father liked “General Franco.”

This TNR posting is supposed to be a review of Buchannan’s latest WWII book where Pat makes the claim that WWII should not have been fought and that the chief culprit for creating an unnecessary war was British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. Buchanan levels a healthy dose of criticism on Franklin Delano Roosevelt, too. Instead of a serious book review, though, and in stark violation of the old Internet rule that calling someone a Nazi pretty much ends any serious debate, Kirchick wildly went for Pat’s throat. The TNR headline says it all, too: “From Pitchfork Pat to Brownshirt Buchanan.”

Now, don’t get me wrong, like William F. Buckley, I am not prepared to say that Pat Buchanan is necessarily innocent of all the charges that Kirchick hurls at him in this TNR “book review,” but Kirchick’s vitriol just seems a bit over-the-top in its tone and seems to lack any serious claim to being a real book review.

Continue reading “TNR’s James Kirchick: Pat Buchanan is a Nazi Because His Father Was?”

Mexican Flag Gets Students Expelled… Oh, Wait…

-By Warner Todd Huston

Our schools are faster becoming the laughing stock of the industrialized world every day. This time three boys were barred from graduation, expelled and harassed by the foolhardy overreaction of school administrators over some flags they had on their trucks in the parking lot. No, it wasn’t the Mexican flag, it wasn’t the Iranian flag or even the Venezuelan flag. It was the Confederate flag.

Even more ridiculously, the kids weren’t using the flags in response to any racial situation, nor were they parading the flags around the school. These flags were merely hanging on their autos on the last day of school. The media couldn’t find a single student that thought the three boys meant anything by the flags other than with the intention to decorate their vehicles with them.

“They weren’t trying to hurt anybody, they just had it on their cars. It’s just freedom of speech” said Landin Lind, one of 75 students who chanted ‘Let Them Walk’ at the school Wednesday morning.

Sadly, this young student really thought that the PC stupidity of “zero tolerance” policies is something with which sentient and honest people can debate.

Naturally, school administrators went overboard with their reaction as well as their faulty assessment of history.

Continue reading “Mexican Flag Gets Students Expelled… Oh, Wait…”

Loyalty to Self Over Country

-By Frank Salvato

Like it or not, the reality is that we live in an extremely self-centered society. If you take issue with this statement just watch how pedestrians enter into crosswalks during rush hour. Ignoring that pedestrians only have the right of way when they are within the crosswalk, today’s bipeds don’t hesitate at all to walk directly in front of moving vehicles, expecting to be protected from trauma by their imagined “right” to occupy a space versus a 4,000lbs vehicle. While this example illustrates how being self-centered – or arrogant…or vacuous – can cause personal harm, these same character flaws can cause harm to the country.

It could be argued that the arrogance prevalent in today’s American culture is a direct by-product of our entitlement society; a society that manufactures high self-esteem and then bestows it on people who have done nothing to deserve it. Logic mandates that when a person believes that he is the “end all be all” it isn’t that far of a stretch for that person to develop a belief that he is owed the good things of life; to expect things rather than to work toward earning them. This can lead to a culture populated entirely with “chiefs” with nary an “Indian” to be found. A society – or an organization, government, team, etc. – cannot function when everyone expects to be the boss.

This prevailing character flaw is effecting more than the individual. Its collective societal impart is corroding the fiber of our nation and doing so in every walk of life.

In education we are seeing teachers, administrators and union infiltrators narcissistically injecting their special interest topics into class curriculum and beyond. Where in eras past the onus of education was on the mastery of the tools that contribute to the gathering of information, its discernment and the development of critical thinking skills, today there is more emphasis placed on sex education than reading and on diversity than the accurate teaching of American history.

Continue reading “Loyalty to Self Over Country”

Paper: I Know, Let’s Compromise Our Rights Away!

-By Warner Todd Huston

Columnist Tom Eblen of the Lexington, Kentucky Herald-Leader has proven to the world that he doesn’t know what a “right” is. He thinks it is something that you can “compromise” over. He thinks it is something that can be endlessly tinkered with. He seems not to realize that a “right” is something that is supposed to be insoluble, unchangeable, permanent. Worse, he has equated an American right to the horse raising industry as if the business decisions made by a handful of ranchers is somehow comparable to the observance and maintenance of our rights. Ridiculously he says that if we don’t compromise this one right, our 2nd Amendment right, it will be taken away. And hypocritically, after using fear to urge us to compromise, he accuses those of us interested in safeguarding the 2nd Amendment of using “fear” tactics.

This latest op ed, “NRA’s slippery slope full of holes,” was the result of some flack he took for touting the existence of a small gun owner’s organization that many NRA members claim is a front group for an anti-gun group. He wrote admiringly about this small group and was assailed by emails and messages informing him that he was giving support to a stealth gun grabbing group and, instead of checking out the group more thoroughly, these emails seemed to set Eblen off. Typical of a self-righteous denizen of the media, instead of finding out if the complaint letters were right and reassessing his original support, Eblen merely lashed out at 2nd Amendment supporters who alerted him to his mistake. (In fact, Eblen doesn’t even bother to try to find out more about the small gun group he wrote about before merely blowing off his obligation to be informed about what he writes.)

So, off Eblen goes wagging his finger at 2nd Amendment supporters telling them that their “hard-line views” and their use of “fear” to sell gun rights is the wrong track to take. He particularly focuses on the fear aspect, claiming that this is an illegitimate way to advocate for our rights. But, even as he claims the NRA illegitimately uses “fear” he uses fear himself to claim that if we don’t compromise our rights away we will lose all of them.

Continue reading “Paper: I Know, Let’s Compromise Our Rights Away!”

Echoes of 1968

-By Michael M. Bates

It’s been 40 years since his passing, but Robert Kennedy is again in the news. One reason is Hillary Clinton’s imprudent mention of his assassination. Barack Obama and media accomplices managed to turn that molehill into a mountain in near-record time.

Another reason is that Obama has invoked Bobby’s memory throughout his campaign. People who weren’t around 40 years ago have been instilled with the fable of Kennedy’s pristine greatness and Barack hopes to benefit by the association.

I wonder how many of Obama’s young, college-educated liberals know much about the real Bobby Kennedy. Would their admiration be diluted if they knew of a 1956 conversation he had with an assistant attorney general in the Eisenhower administration?

“The trouble with you Republicans is that you have done away with the very best man your party has,” Bobby told the appointee. When asked who that was, his reply was Joe McCarthy. Yes, that Joe McCarthy. The official asked if Kennedy were joking. The response: “I am not kidding. I think so well of the man I made him a godfather of one of my children.”

Which is true. Joe McCarthy was the godfather of Kennedy’s oldest child. And when the infamous Red hunter from Wisconsin was buried in 1957, Bobby Kennedy flew to Appleton for the services.
Continue reading “Echoes of 1968”

The Last American WWI Soldier at 107 Years Old

This is a great article as seen at knoxnews.com. It’s a great little read for Memorial Day.
++++++

THE GREAT WARRIOR: Last U.S. WWI veteran has seen, survived much

-By Fred Brown

CHARLES TOWN, W.Va.- Frank Woodruff Buckles is stooped and bent from his 107 years, but he is not bowed. His spirit glows with the life he has lived.

First and foremost, according to the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, Buckles is America’s last doughboy.

Of the more than 4 million who served in World War I, called the Great War, he has outlived everyone. His elder, veteran Harry R. Landis, died at 108 in February in Florida.

Buckles is from an era that has almost disappeared into the dust motes of American history.

Woodrow Wilson was president when a teenage Buckles volunteered almost 91 years ago to serve his nation. He has since seen 16 more men enter the White House.

He began making a living long before Social Security. He learned to drive when driver’s licenses were not required.

Buckles is a walking historical encyclopedia, with experiences and memories spanning more than a century.

He lives today with his daughter, Susannah Flanagan, on a 330-acre West Virginia cattle farm that’s been his home since 1954.

He was honored to serve his country, he says. As for living so long, he says his only thoughts are that it’s been nice to see all the changes.

“Longevity has never bothered me at all,” he says. “I have studied longevity for years.”
Continue reading “The Last American WWI Soldier at 107 Years Old”

Hollywood Feud: Clint Eastwood vs Spike Lee

-By Warner Todd Huston

In this corner, Clint Eastwood, Dirty Harry himself. And in that corner, the self-appointed guardian of America’s black population, Spike Lee. It’s shaping up to be a battle royale, folks, with Lee rabbit punching the aging action star while Eastwood uses his smarts and experience to deliver a knock out blow.

In round one, Lee came out swinging at Director Clint Eastwood’s WWII films, “Flags of Our Fathers” and “Letters from Iwo Jima,” claiming that Eastwood “erased the role of black GIs from history.” Lee tried on his self-righteous air of moral certitude and labeled Eastwood a racist. “Many black veterans who fought in Iwo Jima were hurt that there was no representation of them in both of those films,” Lee said in an interview in Rome last year.

But not to fear for Eastwood losing the bout, as he is about to show us all that Spike Lee doesn’t have what it takes to go toe to toe with a master.

Round two began as the blow fell upon Eastwood in an interview with Focus magazine. Why was Eastwood such a racist, they wondered? Eastwood, momentarily rocked on his heels, came back with a knock out blow showing the world that, aging or not, he was still faster and smarter than the bespeckled, racemongering Lee.

“Does he know anything about American history?” Eastwood told Focus when asked about Lee’s criticism. “The U.S. military was segregated til the Korean War, and the blacks in World War Two were totally segregated. The only black battalion on Iwo Jima was a small munitions supply unit that came to the beach.

“The story was about the men who raised the flag and we can’t make them black if they were not there. So tell him: Why don’t you go back and study your history and stop mouthing off!”

Looks like Lee is on the ropes and being shown for the palooka he really is. The decision goes to Eastwood for showing us all that Spike Lee has no idea what he is talking about. Not that anyone suspected otherwise, mind you.

Dontcha just hate all this actor on actor violence?

Continue reading “Hollywood Feud: Clint Eastwood vs Spike Lee”

Dehumanizing Humanity

-By Thomas E. Brewton

Darwinian evolutionary doctrine and its concomitant faith in the godless political state as the savior of mankind ironically, in practice, reduce human existence to the law of the jungle: survival of the fittest.

Darwinian natural selection has been used repeatedly since 1859 to justify strong-arm political tactics leading to dictatorial tyranny. In National Socialist Germany, for example, Jews were declared unfit to survive, and that declaration was rationalized on the basis of Darwinian “science” and its offshoot, eugenics.

As G. K. Chesterton noted: when men cease to believe in God, they don’t believe in nothing; they believe in anything. In that regard, read Lawrence Auster’s HOW DARWIN’S BELIEF IN NATURAL SELECTION CHANGED HIS EXPERIENCE OF LIFE.
Continue reading “Dehumanizing Humanity”

In Twofer, Paper Makes Fun of American History And Capitalism At same Time

-By Warner Todd Huston

Here is a story in a small paper in Philadelphia that serves as a fine example of the junk that all too often passes for “journalism” in America today. This example is as ridiculously anti-intellectual and dismissive of the importance of preserving our history as it is anti-corporate. It’s a fine example of a journalist who thinks he is smarter and funnier than everyone about whom he writes — even his name reflects that condescension. The arrogance and smarminess is so thick with James Smart’s “Renovating a historic home” that it just drips off the page.

Of course, Mr. Smart’s work isn’t what one would call straight journalism, but more like the sort of commentary one would see from writers such as Dave Barry. Light hearted, ultimately pointless wastes of time that would find readers no better informed after having read them, but no worse off for the four minutes or so of their lives they’ll never get back from the exercise. But, in this particular piece, Smart goes over the edge of simple minded, blather and into uncalled for denigration. It also reveals his intense anti-capitalist feelings. Whatever his past work, this one reveals far more about his generally dismissive attitude against our history and capitalist system than it does about the subject matter.

Continue reading “In Twofer, Paper Makes Fun of American History And Capitalism At same Time”

Appeasing Hitler ‘Not Unreasonable’?

-By Warner Todd Huston

In an effort to back up Obama’s gaffe that he’ll “talk” to anyone, even terrorists, as if diplomacy in and of itself was a cure all, editorial writer Bruce Ramsey of the Seattle Times has made a gaffe of his own that, in essence, makes the claim that negotiating with Adolf Hitler was perfectly reasonable even as each concession given to him by Europe’s prewar powers obviously gave him every reason to be brave enough to start WWII. Ramsey seems to be trying to justify the appeasement of Hitler in order to give Barack Obama the cover he needs to make his inexperience and naiveté seem less detrimental to his presidential ambitions.

Ramsey is worried, he says, about the “continual reference to Hitler and his National Socialists, particularly the British and French accommodation at the Munich Conference of 1938.” He feels that it was completely reasonable to cave in to Hitler in those days prior to the war.

What Hitler was demanding was not unreasonable. He wanted the German-speaking areas of Europe under German authority. He had just annexed Austria, which was German-speaking, without bloodshed. There were two more small pieces of Germanic territory: the free city of Danzig and the Sudetenland, a border area of what is now the Czech Republic.

We live in an era when you do not change national borders for these sorts of reasons. But in 1938 it was different. Germany’s eastern and western borders had been redrawn 19 years before-and not to its benefit. In the democracies there was some sense of guilt with how Germany had been treated after World War I. Certainly there was a memory of the “Great War.” In 2008, we have entirely forgotten World War I, and how utterly unlike any conception of “The Good War” it was. When the British let Hitler have a slice of Czechoslovakia, they were following their historical wisdom: avoid war. War produces results far more horrible than you expected. War is a bad investment. It is not glorious. Don’t give anyone an excuse to start one.

After all, Ramsey says, Europe didn’t want a war, so just giving in to Hitler was not an “unreasonable” reaction to Hitler’s demands. So, since the rest of Europe couldn’t have realized how ruthless and evil Hitler was, their actions were just fine with Ramsey. If it was fine back then, he obviously imagines, it should be fine today. Since we cannot know the future, he seems to be saying, always caving in to tyrants just in case they won’t turn out to be tyrants should be just fine.

This also seems like Obama’s message.

Continue reading “Appeasing Hitler ‘Not Unreasonable’?”

A More Perfect Union Rests on a Balance of Ideas

-By Nancy Salvato

“In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” – James Madison, Federalist #51

Classical Philosophy

By reading the Greek historians Herodotus (484BC-425BC), Thucydides (460BC-395BC), known as the father of scientific history and political realism, Polybius (203BC-120BC), who wrote about political balance, and Plutarch (46AD-120AD) who emphasized the importance of virtue, and philosophers Plato (428BC-348BC), known for his theory of forms and Aristotle (384BC-322BC), who created a system of philosophy, and the Roman philosophers Cicero (106BC-43BC), the famous orator and historians such as Livy (59 BC – AD 17), the framers became well acquainted with the greatest thinkers of Greek and Roman civilizations.
Continue reading “A More Perfect Union Rests on a Balance of Ideas”

Dick Polman’s Skewed, Left-Partisan History Lesson

-By Warner Todd Huston

Dick Polman is a long time Philly columnist and extreme left-winger that rarely makes any attempt to seem “fair and balanced,” so it isn’t surprising that his latest attempt at prescient punditry is a plaintive plea for the Democrats to chill out and just get along so that they can beat the “septuagenarian” McCain. But, his piece is so filled with horribly misconstrued historical analysis that it is hard to let him slide and mark it up solely as another forgettable example of the kind of partisan claptrap most of his work turns out to be. But, with the sort of half informed historical analysis he indulges in to cajole people to vote for the Democrats, this latest piece is too dishonest to just let it slide by. If anything calls for a fisking, this one does.

Polman starts his lamentably bad history lesson with this taunt to the Democrats.

If the Democrats somehow contrive to blow this presidential election, they should be consigned to the dustbin of history – or to a display case at the Smithsonian, where perhaps they can share space with the Whigs.

To which I say, heck, if the Democrats weren’t consigned to the dustbin of history after supporting slavery, starting a civil war, losing that war after 620,000 Americans died, supporting Jim Crow, supporting Japanese internment, continuing to support Jim Crow, fighting civil rights, and building a failed and expensive socialist state, a little primary fight between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton is certainly not going to do them much harm!

Continue reading “Dick Polman’s Skewed, Left-Partisan History Lesson”

POLYGAMY A — Mormon Broad’s View

-By Resa LaRu Kirkland

The latest news on the horrors of man-instituted polygamy has caused me to receive a deluge of emails regarding the LDS church–to which I belong–and the practice of polygamy. While the scandal involves a break off of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, it is still a reasonable question, and deserving of a truthful answer. Only the Prophet can give direction for the Gospel here on earth, but all of God’s children are entitled to ask Him for answers and receive answers when He–and His child–is ready. Between His words to His prophets–from the Old Testament to now–and the personal answers we are all entitled to through study and prayer, understanding the difference between polygamy ordained by God and the selfish, gluttonous, and wicked polygamy of man are plain to see and stark in contrast.

So here it is–the good, the bad, and the ugly of Polygamy.

We believe in the concept of the New and Everlasting Covenant. We are sealed by those in authority to do so beyond this life so that we remain a family in the next life; there is no “’till death do you part” in our religion. We do not believe that God meant for marriage and family–the ONE thing He established when earth started and man came to be(he did not set up farming, business, governments, or politics, but MARRIAGE only)–to be for this life only. Marriage and family are the ONLY eternal profession. It is the most important thing we will ever do.
Continue reading “POLYGAMY A — Mormon Broad’s View”

Maine Uni. Puts U.S. Flags on Floor as ‘Art’

-By Warner Todd Huston

We have another incident of empty showboating by a half-sentient college kid who imagines herself to be making “art” and a “statement” by placing American flags on the floor in hopes that people would disrespect them enough to walk upon them. One Miss Susan Crane of the University of Maine at Farmington decided that her “art” was going to be an exercise in desecration.

Unfortunately, all we have is another disrespectful kid doing the same thing that a dozen other disrespectful kids have done at anti-American campuses across the country over the last 40 years or so. There isn’t a thing “new” or even unexpected about it at this point. This makes her “statement” empty and pointless. But Crane has been fooled by her anti-American professors into imagining she is sparking a “conversation” about patriotism and the flag.

“Ninety-five to 98 percent of the people didn’t walk on the flags,” Crane said of her findings. The other reaction she was hoping for was one of thoughtful reflection on his or her individual patriotism.

“It sparked conversation and thought about how we feel about our flag, which I think is very important. It was a very hard thing for me to do, to put the flag on the floor,” she said.

Oh, we get these sort of self-loathing, anti-Americans every single time there is national turmoil of some sort or another. They imagine they are being “edgy” and “artistic” with their displays of hate for their own country. And they get congratulated by their equally vacuous teachers and professors that were trained in the Marxist work shops of the Weather Underground, the SDS, or the equally Marxist NEA. But, when all is said and done, no “conversation” is sparked. Only emotions.

No one goes away from one of these idiotic displays of hate with any newer understanding of the issues of patriotism or the actions of the government of the United States. No history is learned, no issues settled. All we have is the self-congratulatory, circle-jerking of the hatemongers in our Universities who are so proud to be sending out into the great world another American citizen indoctrinated to hate their own country.

Continue reading “Maine Uni. Puts U.S. Flags on Floor as ‘Art’”

Yes, Let’s Have Democrats Apologize for Slavery

-By Warner Todd Huston

Just a few days ago I wrote an article ridiculing a woman from Connecticut for wasting the state legislature’s time bothering with a resolution that forced the state to apologize for the witch trials carried out by various Connecticut towns during the 1600’s. I mentioned that “apologizing” for things that happened hundreds of years ago was rather stupid. And witch trials aren’t the only things people want our government(s) to “apologize” for, as we all know. Certainly the long-past support of slavery by the United States is one subject most referenced for which apologies are sought.

I maintained then that such apologies do no one any good. Apologies, I claimed, can only be properly offered and only be graciously accepted by those actually harmed directly by a slight. Something that happened hundreds of years ago, I said, cannot be apologized for. Those slights just are. Live with it.

But, I may have found something that has changed my mind on the offering of apologies. It came in the form of an open letter to the Democrat Party penned by Lt. Colonel Frances Rice a retired US Army officer and member of the Lincoln Heritage Institute.

In her Open Letter to the Democrat Party, Frances was asking for an apology over slavery. I’ll specify here that she wasn’t asking for this apology from the “United States,” to be sure. She wants it directly from the Democrat Party. After all, as Frances’ points reveal, it wasn’t really the “United States” that supported slavery, but more specifically a faction of the country in the form of the Democrat Party and its antecedents. And, I have to say, the woman has a point.

Continue reading “Yes, Let’s Have Democrats Apologize for Slavery”

A Good Day, Supreme Court Rules Against Foreign Precedent

-By Warner Todd Huston

In 2003, then Justice of the Supreme Court Sandra Day O’Connor famously posited that our judicial system should take into account foreign court rulings when deciding American cases prompting outraged conservatives to denounce her idea as endangering American sovereignty and destroying the Constitution of the United States of America. This year, the Roberts led SCOTUS has made an important decision that will serve to forestall that possibility.

In October of 2003, Justice Sandra Day O’Connor gave a speech in Atlanta where she predicted that “over time we will rely increasingly, or take notice at least increasingly, of international and foreign courts in examining domestic issues.” Naturally, Americans who revere the Constitution were outraged over the thought that we’d place foreign court rulings before our own law of the land, essentially allowing foreigners to decide questions of American jurisprudence.

The fear over allowing foreign precedent or areas of jurisdiction to overlap into ours raises discussion of the very differences between our system of government and legal traditions and that of the rest of the world. Should we rely on foreign precedent, for instance, the very concept of innocent until proven guilty is put into doubt because foreign rulings will not generally be based on that bedrock principle.

Further, should American courts recognize the kangaroo courts of The Hague and the so-called “International Court of Justice” (or the World Court), foreign institutions such as these would have the authority to incarcerate American citizens for their politically motivated, anti-American “trials” at any time. After all, should we cast away our Constitutional rights by allowing foreign rulings to take precedence over our system, this will be bound to occur. What would stop such a thing from happening, anyway?

Continue reading “A Good Day, Supreme Court Rules Against Foreign Precedent”

Exposed: Another Celebrated Leftist ‘Artist’ Who Supported Hitler in the 1930’s

-By Warner Todd Huston

Ed Driscoll gives us an interesting little video that shines the light of truth on the history of an architect who “fell in love with the Nazi regime” in the 1930’s. Philip Johnson, famed for his “Glass House” design, is one of America’s best known architects.

The left has celebrated Johnson for decades and upon his passing they eulogized him with care and love. But, as Jonah Goldberg reveals in his recent tome “Liberal Fascism”, the left has succeeded in whitewashing the past history of their many heroes who supported Hitler, Stalin, Fascism, Nazism, and Communism — the worst of history’s murderers and their murderous ideologies.

Take a few minutes to give this one a look see…