Though outraged, @AETV is happy to take “flyover folks’” money

December 20, 2013

My blog-buddy ST has already eloquently written about the intolerant, anti-Christian, anti-Southern bigotry behind A&E’s craven capitulation to liberal fascist pressure groups over “Duck Dynasty” star Phil Robertson’s comments about sin and sinners, including homosexuality (1). Apparently, paraphrasing St. Paul’s first Epistle to the Corinthians is now enough to get one banned from television (2).

While ST has covered that angle admirably, I noticed something else. Last night I was watching a couple of episodes (coincidentally, I only started watching the day before this brouhaha exploded) of Duck Dynasty and stayed tuned in to catch another show called “Rodeo Girls.” As you can tell from the title, this show is not about a group of post-modern urban hipster liberals sitting around in their jammies, drinking hot chocolate and talking about healthcare. No, it’s about young, attractive women who compete in the rodeo circuit. (3) And the cultural similarities to Duck Dynasty got me wondering about the rest of A&E’s shows. (I don’t usually watch the network.) Let’s take a look at their line-up, shall we?

First, Duck Dynasty. Note that, as of today, Phil is still featured:

A&E Duck Dynasty

Next, American Hoggers. Just screams “Manhattan metrosexual,” doesn’t it?

A&E American Hoggers

Then we have “Crazy Hearts, Nashville.” A little country, a little sex:

A&E Crazy Hearts

But wait! There’s more! “Rodeo Girls!” Bikini-clad cowgirls riding stallions. (4) Yeah, I’m sure they’ll be lunching with Anna Wintour real soon.

A&E Rodeo Girls

Finally, we have “Storage Wars, Texas.” I wonder what they think of gun control and the individual mandate?

A&E Storage Wars

Notice a pattern? All these show involve people from what is disparagingly called “flyover country,” those lands beyond the pale the denizens of which the urban progressive elites like to patronize and treat like sub-normal children. And yet these are more than half the shows A&E has featured on their site. It seems pretty obvious that A&E is happy to promote shows featuring unsophisticated mouth-breathing hicks and earn money from the unsophisticated mouth-breathing hick audiences that watch, just so long as none of them express their unsophisticated mouth-breathing views.

Or maybe A&E’s honchos misread their audience:

Living in the echo chamber of the MSM’s ivory tower may well wind up costing A&E and their owners quite a bit.

Footnotes:
(1) To clarify, while I disagree with my esteemed co-blogger, Phil Robertson, and St. Paul about homosexuality being a sin, I respect their beliefs and wouldn’t want to ban them from the public square. Unlike A&E.
(2) No, I don’t think this is all that comparable to what happened to Martin Bashir. He spewed scatological, unhinged, hate-filled words at Sarah Palin. Phil just expressed his opinion in answer to a question, cited Scripture, and said it was up to God to judge. Huge difference.
(3) Watch out, Jessica! That Anthony is no good for you! (BTW, last night’s episode was set in Red Bluff, California. Not all of us are “L.A.” or “San Francisco” elitists.)
(4) Sigmund Freud, call your office.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Seattle: Do not say “brown bag” or “citizen,” for they are offensive and, yes, racist

August 4, 2013
"Even the monkey is embarrassed"

Even the monkey is embarrassed

Once again, I’m relieved to know my beloved California doesn’t hold the West Coast monopoly on moronic political correctness. In Seattle, aka “San Francisco North” (1), the city Office of Civil Rights sent a memo around to Seattle employees and… Well, read on, but try not to hit your head against the tabletop too much:

The memo went on to offer politically correct alternatives that could be used in official documents and discussions.

‘Luckily, we’ve got options,’ Elliott Bronstein wrote in the internal memo, according to Fox News. ‘For “citizens”, how about “residents”?’

Mr Bronstein defended the ban on a Seattle radio station, and said that the term ‘brown bag’ had historically been used as a way to determine skin color.

(…)

To avoid bringing up its racist connotations, city workers in Seattle must now use ‘sack lunch’ or ‘lunch-and-learn’, according to Komo News.

Oh, for Pete’s sake. The memo says some workers were offended by the use of “brown bag” because it reminded them of a test for acceptable skin color used more than 50 years ago, and so obscure that I bet 90% of the nation hasn’t even heard of it.

You know what? “Mickey” and “Mick” were mildly offensive terms for Irishmen many years ago. My ancestors were Irish, and so this offends me. I demand everyone in Seattle with those names immediately stop using them.

But wait, there’s more!

They must also replace ‘citizen’ with ‘residents’ because many people in the northwest city are not U.S. citizens.

‘They are legal residents of the United States and they are residents of Seattle. They pay taxes and if we use a term like citizens in common use, then it doesn’t include a lot of folks,’ Mr Bronstein said.

According to City Data, 94,952 – or 16 per cent – of the city’s inhabitants are foreign, with most coming originally from Asia.

Call me a reactionary racist hater, but I thought “citizen” was a term of honor, something one aspired to become. It not only meant that you lived in a place, but that you that you had a special stake there in its governance, its prosperity, and, indeed,  in its fate. It was part of your identity.

The ancient Greeks took pride in being citizens of their city-states; Roman citizenship was a mark of distinction, something non-citizens sought to earn. Tens of millions have come to America over the centuries, leaving behind their old lives and striving to become citizens here.

And yet now for Seattle’s government, a government founded by citizens, “citizen” has become a word to be shunned for fear of giving offense.

This is another expression of the vapid multiculturalism the Left finds so attractive: not only that all cultures are equal, but that to assert any special distinction on the part of one’s own culture is somehow arrogant and chauvinist, something to be condemned. In fact, it’s a denial of American culture or civilization, for how is this culture defined and set apart? Not by land or language or religion, unlike much of the rest of the world, but by a set of shared ideals, among which is the concept of citizenship, of being a “citizen.”

Something which, in Seattle, is apparently a bad thing.

RELATED: At Legal Insurrection, William Jacobson discusses brown bags, chinks in the armor, and other weapons of control wielded by the Language Police.

Footnote:
(1) Or is that title held by Portland, now?

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


#GunControl as a sign of liberal cultural superiority

March 31, 2013

I came across an article this morning by Tim Carney of the Washington Examiner in which sees the current efforts to restrict our Second Amendment rights as another front in the “culture war,” a war in which the Left sees itself as morally superior to everyone else. That is, you can’t have rational reasons for disagreeing with them on gun-rights issues, you must be morally wrong.

The spark for his essay is a new book by Dan Baum, who’s both a Jewish liberal Democrat and a gun owner, called “Gun Guys.” As someone who sits in both worlds (the liberal and the gun-fan), Baum is able to understand how both sides thinks. Carney introduce’s Baum’s book with some examples of how the left sees gun enthusiasts as not just wrong, but inferior, even evil. Here are a couple:

The Post’s Gene Weingarten in 2011 spat on the Second Amendment as “the refuge of bumpkins and yeehaws who like to think they are protecting their homes against imagined swarthy marauders desperate to steal their flea-bitten sofas from their rotting front porches.”

After Columbine, a Boston Herald op-ed described the average participant in a 1999 Boston Common pro-gun rally as a wannabe “hicksville cowboy, as in way out there, somewhere off the Mass Pike or at the far reaches of 93. From towns with something to prove and lots of Amvets posts.”

And President Obama in 2008 famously told a wealthy crowd at a San Francisco fundraiser that rural voters “get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy toward people who aren’t like them … “

Well, the “antipathy toward people who aren’t like them” clearly is mutual.

From this, Carney segues to Baum’s discussion of the liberal-left’s loathing for the culture that guns represent and how they think they can use the law to control or destroy that culture:

Liberals, Baum writes, “recognized the gun as the sacred totem of the enemy, the embodiment of this abhorrent world view. They believed that they could weaken the enemy by smashing his idols — by banning the gun if possible … “

Many liberals hate it that some conservatives have a different set of values, morals and aesthetics — and so these liberals want to use the federal government to fix that.

(…)

“Assault rifles,” writes Baum, “were just as powerful symbolically as they were ballistically. A renewed assault-rifle ban would really smash the enemy’s idols.”

Also, when speaking about sales without background checks, gun controllers always refer to “gun shows.” Most guns used in murders aren’t bought at gun shows — they’re stolen or bought on the street. But gun shows are large gatherings of the “gun tribe” — and so they must be shut down.

Not mentioned directly, but certainly a subtext in this article and, I suspect, Baum’s book, is the idea that gun control as an assault on the so-called “gun tribe” is, as Dan Bongino put it, a form of people control. And that is the real objective of progressivism.

Makes sense, when you’re convinced you’re superior.

RELATED: And if you need another example of how the other side sees us, don’t forget, if you oppose gun control, you might be an Antisemite.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Random thoughts on SCHIP and adult children

November 29, 2012

SCHIP is, for those who don’t know, is the State Children’s Health Insurance Program. Under changes enacted in 2010 by the Unicorn and Skittles Obama Administration, parents can keep their children on their insurance until the “children” are at most 26 years old.

Since we’re now defining childhood to last through age 26, shouldn’t we…

  • Raise the voting age to 27?
  • Require parental consent to marry for anyone 26 and below?
  • Require parental consigning for any contracts the “children” may undertake?
  • Prohibit alcohol purchases to anyone 26 and younger?

I  mean, if we’re going to be giving college-age and in-the-workforce adults the benefits of being children, shouldn’t we treat them as children?


Kurtz: Don’t expect the culture wars to end any time soon

August 13, 2012

Rock’em-Sock’em Politics?

National Review’s Stanley Kurtz (1) looks at the “Red/Blue map” of America that first became famous in the 2000 election, then considers the current race with its sharp ideological contrast between Obama-Biden and Romney-Ryan, and comes to the conclusion that our ideological war over the nature of the United States is only going to get sharper and louder before it ever gets better: “Two Tickets, Two Americas.”

First we need to understand that our political divisions are real and growing. They are rooted not in top-down political rhetoric but in profound and lasting social and cultural differences. For a while, analysts tended to make light of our polarization, fruitlessly predicting year after year that our culture war (still raging) was just about to end. If anything, the culture wars have expanded now to include the whole of politics. It used to be that only arguments over gay marriage or abortion were stigmatized as moral abominations. Now even differences over health care reform and the deficit are super-charged with moral accusation.

Whichever way this election goes, these divisions will only deepen. Fundamentally, this is because what President Obama and the increasingly left-leaning coalition he leads actually want is impossibly far from what red America is willing to accept. Until very recently, this gulf has been hidden by Obama’s refusal to level with the American people about his goals. What the public still doesn’t understand, despite the president’s somewhat more open left-turn of late, is just how far left his second-term agenda aims to go. I’ve laid out some of it here, and Americans are simply not prepared for what is about to hit us should Obama win. So while an Obama victory would indeed allow the president to entrench some of his most controversial policies, his restless tendency to push things ever further to the left will almost certainly generate dynamic new movements of opposition.

Kurtz goes on to point out that a Romney victory, even if a landslide as I and others believe possible, won’t end this struggle. The Left has had a taste of what it can achieve and, controlling as it does the still-dominant culture-shaping media, it will likely see a conservative win as only a temporary setback.

Hang on to your hats; this ride has only just begun.

Footnote:
(1) Kurtz is the author of, so far, two great books about Obama: “Radical in Chief,” a political biography of Obama that I reviewed here, and “Spreading the Wealth,” which looks into Obama’s plans for a second term and which I’m currently reading.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Dear Senator McCain: you’re dead wrong, it *is* the culture

July 31, 2012

And I write that with all due and genuine respect for a man who suffered much for his country and was a true leader to the men who were prisoners of war with him.

But, this is just utterly wrong:

It’s government, “not cultures” that define the difference between Israelis and Palestinians. That’s according to Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), who appeared to differ with presumptive Republican nominee Mitt Romney as he tried to defend him.

“I am sure that Gov. Romney was not talking about difference in cultures, or difference in anybody superior or inferior,” said McCain, a chief Romney foreign policy surrogate, today during a news conference after an event here with Sens. Kelly Ayotte (R-NH) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC). “What I’m sure Gov. Romney was talking was that the Israeli economy has grown and prospered in a dramatic fashion. And unfortunately, the Palestinians have not had that same economic development.

“And that goes to the leadership of the Palestinians. Everybody knows that Yasser Arafat was corrupt. And we also know that the Palestinian people have not been blessed with the kind of government that has lower regulations, less taxes, entrepreneurship, which have caused the Israeli economy to be one of the world’s most successful. It has nothing to do with cultures. It has nothing to do with superiority or inferiority. But facts of the booming Israeli economy has to do with the kind of government that the Israeli people have freely and democratically elected which has given them a very prosperous country.”

McCain noted he had not seen or heard Romney’s remarks, but that didn’t stop him from defending what Romney meant.

He has it exactly backwards: culture determines the type of society a nation has and shapes its form of government. Both are a reflection of the values of that society. Western civilization, which includes Israel, echoes the Judeo-Christian/Greco-Roman and, yes, for parts, Anglo-Saxon values that shaped it. It is a culture that values the individual and individual liberty, fosters initiative and wealth-creation, and that recognizes life is precious and not something to be taken carelessly. (1)

Arab Islamic culture on the other hand… What has it given the world lately? Dictatorship? Kleptocracy? Contempt for democracy? The near-enslavement of women? Honor killings? Suicide bombings? “We are going to win, because they love life and we love death“?

You want an example of the difference in cultures, Senator? Here’s just one from among hundreds. Israelis fight to save the life of a mother and child, even though they come from their sworn enemies. Palestinians murder Israeli children in their sleep, and the culture celebrates the killers as heroes.

Those values ripple throughout the respective cultures, and you can bet your bottom dollar they make a difference.

Natan Sharansky wrote a brilliant book called “The Case for Democracy.” In it he discusses the difference between what he calls “free societies” and “fear societies.” The Israelis are an example of the former, the Palestinians the latter, and the differences explain why, as Mitt Romney pointed out, Israel is successful, while “Palestine” is a failure.

You should read it, Senator. You might for once know what you’re talking about.

But I guess that’s a bit much to expect from a man who doesn’t even bother to check what his party’s nominee said before bloviating on it.

via Slublog

Footnote:
(1) Yeah, far from perfect, but also far better than the alternatives.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


“We’re not really people to them.”

March 3, 2012

Jim Geraghty on what the Left’s reaction to the death of Andrew Breitbart reveals about them:

I had observed, yesterday, that there were not merely a handful of folks on the left sneering about how happy they were that Breitbart had suddenly died. There were gobs and gobs of them, all over Twitter and the web at large. If you need examples, Charlie Spiering collected plenty here, though I’d urge most of sound mind to avoid putting themselves through reading that.

You can call this whatever you like — the Daily-Kos-ification of the Left, perhaps — but it confirms what many of us suspected and/or feared. I didn’t want to believe it, really. I personally know too many people I’d identify as Democrats, if not liberals, who are too decent to ever express such raw hate and cruelty. But a large chunk of the rank and file of the Left — way more than a small percentage — really don’t believe that their opponents deserve anything resembling basic human dignity or respect.

We’re not really people to them. It’s not an accident that [a] New York Times columnist referred to his critics on Twitter as “right-wing lice.” They’re not good, decent Americans who just have some different ideas about how to make the world a better place. They run on hate. It appears their entire sense of self-worth is driven by demonizing those who disagree with them and celebrating their political viewpoints as the cardinal measurements of virtue and good character. They are positively energized by the thought of lashing out at those of us who have the audacity to think differently than they. They really do project and accuse the opposition of all their worst traits: rage, closed-mindedness, cruelty, intolerance, bigotry, and an inability to empathize with others. And they completely lack self-awareness. They are blind to the irony of their actions. As someone said on Twitter today (I can’t find the comment now), “How many of the people celebrating Andrew’s death have a ‘NO H8? icon on their avatar?”

Time and again we see this violent emotional reaction whenever someone challenges left-liberals’ own (self-assumed) wisdom and moral superiority. Call it a “fascist mentality,” “immaturity,” or even a simple lack of decency, but an inability of so many in their camp to deal reasonably with those who disagree is a sign of something very wrong deep-down, something innate in the progressive philosophy that affects thought and behavior.

It’s disturbing.

via the PJ Tatler

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


In Memoriam, Andrew Breitbart (1969-2012)

March 1, 2012

I’ve just seen the news and, to say the least, I’m shocked. My deepest condolences to his family and friends. Apparently Breitbart collapsed outside his home last night and was rushed to UCLA, where he died.

Andrew’s death is also a great loss for the Right and the cause of liberty in this country. I had never met him, but I’d come to admire his work exposing the hypocrisy of the liberal-left and the pernicious effect of the Left’s hold over our culture.  Most of all, I admired his fearlessness and willingness to fight back. His value to the Tea Party movement is almost incalculable. Sometimes he might go a bit too far or over the top, but often –far more often than not– he and the exposes his sites published were right on the mark. Their influence over the last few years has been enormous. Just ask ACORN.

You were and are inspirational, Andrew. Rest in peace.

UPDATE: And if you ever wanted an example of the immaturity, churlishness, and flat-out rot that lurks in the heart of the American Left, here ya go.


Culture Wars: Han shot first, and the emasculation of heroism

February 18, 2012

In this episode of Afterburner, Bill Whittle looks at how George Lucas has bowdlerized one of the great scenes in the original Star Wars and what it tells us about the cultural elite’s perceptions of heroism and manhood:

It’s not for nothing that people still respond to heroes actors like John Wayne, Humphrey Bogart, or Gary Cooper, whose heroic characters didn’t wallow in angst before doing what had to be done.

And George, stop lying. Han shot first.

(For the record, I detest the modern habit of powerful directors to re-edit their original work that people loved and somehow “improve it.” Spielberg and “E.T.” is another example.)

UPDATE: Edited to correct a lack of clarity pointed out by a friend on Twitter.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Something is wrong…

January 5, 2012

When someone is breaking into your house and is armed with a big knife, and you feel you have to ask permission of the police to protect yourself and your baby:

A young Oklahoma mother shot and killed an intruder to protect her 3-month-old baby on New Year’s Eve, less than a week after the baby’s father died of cancer.

Sarah McKinley says that a week earlier a man named Justin Martin dropped by on the day of her husband’s funeral, claiming that he was a neighbor who wanted to say hello. The 18-year-old Oklahoma City area woman did not let him into her home that day.

On New Year’s Eve Martin returned with another man, Dustin Stewart, and this time was armed with a 12-inch hunting knife. The two soon began trying to break into McKinley’s home.

As one of the men was going from door to door outside her home trying to gain entry, McKinley called 911 and grabbed her 12-gauge shotgun.

McKinley then got on the phone and called 911 for help and inquired if it was okay to shoot the men if they got inside. Kudos to the 911 dispatcher who told her to do what she had to do to protect her infant, and to McKinley for having the presence of mind to overcome her hesitation and fire.

But why in Heaven’s name is it even a question one should think to ask? Two big, armed men breaking in are obviously not there for tea and cookies.

The article notes that only roughly 30 states have enacted into statute the common law “Castle doctrine,” under which a person has the right to protect his home and life from invasion. The other 20 or so states require the soon-to-be-victim to make a reasonable effort to flee before using deadly force, otherwise he or she may face prosecution (1). Surely I’m not the only one who thinks this is (to be polite) dumb?

Thankfully, Oklahoma is not one of those 20 states, but it’s still disturbing that we’ve so bred into our society a sense of dependency that, even in the most conservative, self-reliant regions of the country, there are people who feel they have to ask if it’s okay to protect themselves… or their baby.

via Legal Insurrection

Footnote:
(1) The news report notes that they could find no instance of anyone in the US being prosecuted for similar self-defense shootings. But, while I can’t find a citation at the moment, I’m sure I’ve read of homeowners in the UK being prosecuted for shooting housebreakers.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


When outrage is your friend

December 12, 2011

I don’t know about you, but, when I hear someone say they are outraged by something, or that something is “outrageous,” it sounds odd to me. Seemingly quaint and a bit archaic, even Victorian, it brings to mind images of a stuffy old fuddy-duddy harrumphing over skirts that go above the ankle.

In other words, outrage is out of date. Obsolete.

In this episode of Afterburner, Bill Whittle disagrees and looks three recent incidents that should educe outrage in any sensible and decent person, why that’s a good thing, and how that sense of outrage is actually what’s needed these days:

As Bill says, Election Day 2012 will be an excellent time to make our outrage known.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Bill Whittle: the Western Way and the #Occupy Way

November 15, 2011

In the latest edition of Afterburner, Whittle first compares the flourishing orchards of the Israelis to the barren lands of their neighbors (1) and then distinguishes the attributes of successful small-businessman with a high-school degree from the qualities of the typical Occupier. The difference he finds is the difference between the Western way of thought and, well, everything else.

Footnote:
(1) Though it would have been a digression, Bill could have devoted his entire essay to how the different mindsets of the Israelis and their Arab neighbors also illustrate his thesis. For a good, brief analysis of the cultural ossification of the Arab Muslim world over at least the last 500 years, see Bernard Lewis’ “What went wrong? The clash between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East.”

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Bill Whittle: the truth is out there

September 2, 2011

No, Bill isn’t doing a remake of The X-Files (1), though the way the Left plays with the truth and claims there are multiple “truths,” all equally valid, might well be a puzzle worthy of Mulder and Scully. What they’re really doing, of course, is disguising “opinion” as “truth” and using that to deny any arguments against their cherished beliefs.

Bill Whittle is having none of this nonsense and proceeds to shred Pacifica Radio’s (2) Amy Goodman with –what else?– the truth.

Enjoy.

Footnotes:
(1) Though Bill on The X-Files would be kind of cool. The Smoking Man wouldn’t stand a chance.
(2) For those not familiar with the local Pacifica Radio affiliate Bill refers to, KPFK, most of us around here think of it as “Radio Moscow.”

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Power Line contest winner: “The Spending is Nuts!”

August 2, 2011

Here’s the winner of the Power Line contest for art in any medium that would best educate the public about our national debt problem. A modern-day Aesop’s Fable using squirrels and nuts to make it’s point, the video is by Justin Folk, who earns a cool $100,000 for his efforts:

I have to admit, this wasn’t my favorite (this one is), though I think it’s a worthy choice. It’s a bit long and lacks something of the laugh-out-loud humor that I think is so important when giving people a message that normally will scare them. (When you scare them, they may stop listening. Make them laugh, though… ) Folk, interestingly enough, creates the backgrounds for Andrew Klavan‘s marvelous videos, which I’ve often posted here. I think this would have been improved by having Andrew collaborate on the script.

But those are quibbles; I think it’s good. But, more importantly, I think this contest was a great idea, one that should be repeated. I wrote before that conservatives and libertarians need to engage in pop culture and the arts to get their views back into the marketplace of ideas where people are likely to see them and be influenced. For too long, that ground has been ceded to the liberals and the Left. (But I repeat myself), and efforts like this from Power Line or in general from sites such as Big Hollywood are invaluable.

I’m looking forward to next year’s contest.

PS: You can see all the best contest entries here.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Video: The Debt Star

July 26, 2011

For most of the past summer, the Power Line blog has been running a contest offering $100,000 to the person or group who could, in any medium, best illustrate our national debt problem. The judges have made their decisions, and the winners are being gradually announced. My favorite so far is number eight, called “Weight.” I like to think of it as “The Debt Star,” for reasons you’ll see:

It carries a serious message and yet made me laugh. Well done!

You can see more finalists here.

One of the problems conservatism has had in modern America in getting its message across has been the surrender of popular culture and art to the Left. Countering this is one reason Andrew Breitbart founded Big Hollywood. The Power Line contest is another strategy in that same battle. (1) But it will only work if you spread the word (rather than the wealth). As John Hinderaker writes:

My request to you is: steal these videos! Email them to your friends; post them on Facebook; tweet them; if you have a web site, put them up. The idea of the Power Line Prize contest was to stimulate the creation of a lot of new ways to educate people about the debt crisis, not just a few. So the more people who see these videos, hear the songs, and view the other media, the better.

I’m looking forward to the rest.

Footnotes:
(1) Oh, no! Violent, martial rhetoric! Run!

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


The Cannes film festival: Antisemitic or just plain irrelevant?

May 28, 2011

There was a controversy at this years Cannes Film Festival when Danish filmmaker Lars von Trier admitted his sympathies for Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. While he was expelled from Cannes for his remarks, Poliwood’s Roger L. Simon and Lionel Chetwynd take it as an opportunity to look at Antisemitism and anti-Americanism in the larger European artistic community, as well as questioning whether Cannes as a vehicle for great movies has degenerated into irrelevance:


Andrew Klavan and the hilarious world of abortion

May 6, 2011

Recent accusations of possible serious crimes at Planned Parenthood have lead to renewed discussion of the topic of abortion. Offering its own unique take on the matter, Klavan on the Culture asks “Why shouldn’t mothers have the right to kill their children whenever they want?”

Indeed.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Andrew Klavan on the Mean Streets of Sesame Street

March 25, 2011

Following up on the Project Veritas videos exposing Progressive bigotry at NPR, Klavan on the Culture has conducted its own video sting revealing the shocking truth about an American institution: Sesame Street.

Elmo and Big Bird are statists? Say it ain’t so!

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


What people value: compare and contrast

March 17, 2011

Some of the most profound lessons are taught through irony, that striking contrast between what we would expect to happen in a sequence of events and what really does happen.  Last week, the Fogel family was nearly wiped out, parents and children –an infant!– slaughtered as they laid down for the evening by Muslim jihadists of the Palestinian Al Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades.

Then, yesterday, a Palestinian woman rushes to the gates of the village where the Fogels’ relatives were sitting shiva and begged for help to save her baby. Did the Israelis, still in mourning for the dead and still angry over the atrocity, do the predictable thing and turn her away?

No, in fact:

Just as IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz arrived in Neve Tzuf to offer his condolences, a Palestinian cab raced towards the community’s entrance. In it, soldiers and paramedics discovered a Palestinian woman in her 20s in advanced stages of labor and facing a life-threatening situation: The umbilical cord was wrapped around the young baby girl’s neck, endangering both her and her mother.

The quick action of settler paramedics and IDF troops deployed in the area saved the mother’s and baby’s life, prompting great excitement and emotions at the site where residents are still mourning the brutal death of five local family members.

And so a people whose culture values life –“l’chaim!” “To life!”– rush to save the life of a mother and child, even though they come from their enemies and even though they themselves are still reeling from what happened.

Meanwhile, a people whose culture values death over life pass out sweets to celebrate the successful murder of a mother and her children.

Quite a contrast.

via The Jawa Report

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Teaching toddlers Jew-hatred

February 25, 2011

You want to know just how enlightened and tolerant the Islamic world  is? Watch as a Saudi Egyptian toddler on Iqra TV in 2002 is praised for how well she’s learned her lessons in antisemitism:

From the transcript:

Amer: How old are you, Basmallah?

Basmallah: Three and a half.

Amer: Are you a Muslim?

Basmallah: Yes.

Amer: Basmallah, do you know the Jews?

Basmallah: Yes

Amer: Do you like them?

Basmallah: No.

Amer: Why don’t you like them?

Basmallah: Because.

Amer: Because they are what?

Basmallah: They are apes and pigs.

Amer: Because they are apes and pigs. Who said that about them?

Basmallah: Our God.

Amer: Where did he say that about them?

Basmallah: In the Koran.

That toddler would be about 12 or 13, now. I wonder what other lessons she’s learned?

By the way, Iqra TV described its mission as:

“…presenting the true moderate face of Islam to people in the West where media does not present an objective view on the Islamic Law.”

I don’t know about “moderate, but it is an objective view of Islam.

Oh, and the accusation that a Jewess poisoned Muhammad is part of canonical Islamic teachings. Given the circumstances, I’m surprised only that she stopped at poison.

via MEMRI


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 12,193 other followers