Oct 23 2009

No Tolerance for Common Sense

Category: education,societyharmonicminer @ 9:10 am

Here’s the story of a New York Eagle Scout Suspended From School for 20 Days for Keeping Pocketknife in Car

A 17-year-old Eagle Scout in upstate New York has been barred from stepping foot on school grounds for 20 days, for keeping a 2-inch pocketknife locked in a survival kit in his car.

Read the whole thing.

Then ask yourself what’s wrong with the public schools, the education system, the courts, and maybe America in general.  Some people have well and truly lost their minds, and unfortunately they are the ones with power over the rest of us, and our children.

It’s simply embarrassing.  What would the American founders say about this?  What would anyone even 50 years ago say about this?

I do know this.  If I am ever in a tight situation, an earthquake maybe, or tornado, or flood, or just in need of help, I won’t be getting any useful assistance from the nitwits who pass these kinds of laws and make these kinds of regulations, but I will be getting help from any Eagle Scouts who happen to be around.  They will be the ones who are prepared to help, which means having both knowledge and the proper tools.

I don’t know whether to laugh or cry.


Sep 14 2009

911 memorial at Azusa Pacific University

Category: government,media,society,terrorismharmonicminer @ 11:30 am

This is the flag memorial put up by a small group of students, funded by a small group of faculty and students, on the campus of Azusa Pacific University, to commemorate the murdered on September 11, 2001, by placing a flag for each murdered person.  These few proactive students are to be commended, for bothering to do something public about the memorial.

When you remember these events, and when you talk about them with other people, remember that who did the killing, and why, is an essential part of the memorial.

It makes no sense to remember “the dead” of 9/11, or “the circumstances of 9/11” without also discussing who killed them, and exactly who caused those circumstances to come about. Is it possible to have any kind of reasonable memorial of Pearl Harbor and Dec. 7, 1941, without mentioning Japan, emperor worship, and Japanese imperialism?

About the same number of people died in auto accidents in the USA in that same month.  Because the Islamic terrorist attack was an act of war,  and not merely because a few thousand people died, we said, “We will never forget.”  But, of course, most of us have.

So, in case you haven’t considered it lately, because of all the obfuscation of the major media and our politicians:

1) About 3000 innocent Americans were murdered on Sept. 11, 2001.  The American flags are the correct memorial symbol, because the dead were murdered for being Americans.

2) The killers were Muslims who believed that Allah and his designated representatives had given them both permission and instructions to do this murder. In doing it, they quoted the Koran, and the facts of Mohammed’s life that seemed to them to be both justification for and precursors of their acts.  They believed that there are no “innocent people” in the West, particularly America, and that all civilians were legitimate targets, regardless of age, gender, or occupation.  They didn’t particularly care exactly who they killed, as long as the dead were mostly Americans.  The simultaneous destruction of symbols of American power and success was especially sweet to them.

3) Large parts of the Muslim world were thrilled. Some parts of it yawned. Almost none of it was particularly distressed.

4) The Islamic forces in the world who funded the indoctrination of these killers are still in full operation, with no sign of reducing their activities. They are teaching exactly the same brand of hate around the world, including in the USA.   Saudi Arabia is the biggest funding source for the teaching of hatred world-wide.  The Saudi government denies official complicity with this, but doesn’t take the steps necessary to end it.  In the meantime, the Saudis simply own, outright, enormous numbers of American politicians, former politicians (including presidents!), lobbyists, former bureaucrats, academic departments in universities, think tanks, etc., not to mention the majority of American mosques that are funded by the Saudis.  If you’re interested, Iran is number two in funding world wide hatred for the West, possibly because it’s spending a lot of its money on developing nuclear weapons.  Between the two of them, despite their putative differences over the Sunni/Shia divide, they make a powerful tag team, the Saudis funding mostly propaganda and “soft power,” and Iran distributing weapons to anyone who will kill Americans or their allies.

5) The war with radical Islam is nowhere near over. Make no mistake: it IS a war, though it is of a new type, and harder to fight than some have been in the past.  It is not a failure to communicate.  Many Americans have largely forgotten that fact.  Our enemies have not.

Sadly, the American public will be reminded. It’s only a matter of time. When that reminder comes, huge numbers of Americans are going to forget their own foolishness, and in looking for someone (else) to blame, they are going to zero in on the government and the media for their failures to think farther ahead than the next election or ratings season.

I often suspect that, as time goes by, George Bush is going to be given very mixed reviews for his presidency, in particular for his prosecution of the war with radical Islam.

The reviews will be mixed because, by then, he is likely to be seen as not having gone far enough in defending America from its radical Islamist enemies, and their enablers.

But even when America finally wakes up, the dead will still be dead.

Do I sound too pessimistic, too doom obsessed?

That’s exactly what some people were saying about those who were predicting such things on Sept 10, 2001.

What has changed since then that would make anyone think it won’t happen again?

Too many of us talk about it as if a tornado just happened to come through New York and take the towers down, as if it were an “act of God.”

Of course, some parties to the day’s events saw it that way, too.


Sep 12 2009

You can’t make this up, #2

Category: societyharmonicminer @ 9:38 am

It seems that Planned Parenthood is getting interested in modern art, with condoms as the media:

As kids across the country are going back to school, meeting their new teachers and seeing their old friends, Planned Parenthood will continue to target these young people with its contraceptive and pro-death mentality.

I won’t even mention what Planned Parenthood is trying to do in kids’ classrooms; the Planned Parenthood facility in Binghamton, NY will be celebrating the killing of more children and destroying more young peoples’ lives by looking at condoms as “art”. Seriously, Planned Parenthood is that stupid.

This organization will display a “prom dress,” made out of condoms and will be placed on a backseat of a car and an “evening gown” made out of condoms will be placed next to a bed. This is Planned Parenthood’s vision of healthy behavior for our young people.

Hey, I’ve got an idea, let’s teach our kids about respecting their bodies and the bodies of others through something called common sense, AKA chastity. Kids are not looking for sexual relationships, they’re focused on their friends, their homework, sports, Planned Parenthood wants to rob our children of their innocence and make it into some kind of joke. In the meantime, this organization kills 289,750 preborn babies each year.

A prom dress made of condoms, displayed on the backseat of a car….    because every high school girl’s dream is to lose her virginity in the backseat of a car on prom night, and Planned Parenthood just wants to help.

What a commitment to public service.


Sep 07 2009

Crystal ball redux

Category: Islam,media,Obama,societyharmonicminer @ 9:35 am

Someone asked me the other day how my post-election predictions were turning out, regarding press coverage of Obama and other matters.

It’s a bit early to know.  But one thing is becoming apparent:  the electorate is significantly less happy with the reality of Obama than the hope and change they thought they voted for.  So far, the press has not begun to savage Obama in the ways I thought might happen.  But Obama is finally beginning to be criticized for his sheer incompetence, the biggest evidence of which is his mismanagement of the process and the message surrounding his attempted takeover of US healthcare, though his astronomical deficit plans are a close second.  And, of course, the matters are related.  Those enormous deficits are the projections of Obama’s plans if the government takeover of healthcare is NOT passed.   If it is, everything is worse.  Far worse.

To be fair, it was bound to be a hard sell.  Americans are a cantankerous lot when they see (though they are a bit slow) that their freedom is about to be stolen.  But Obama’s twin errors were: 1) leaving it up to Pelosi and Reid to craft a bill and 2) telling obvious lies that could be checked (“You can keep your current health insurance if you like it, even if this plan becomes law.”)  Pelosi and Reid are so far inside the beltway that they simply had no concept of how bad it was going to look to Americans that congress-critters hadn’t read the bill, didn’t understand it, couldn’t defend it based on facts about its contents, but wouldn’t themselves be willing to live under “the public option” as a matter of course.   Obama was foolish to trust them in this.  Of course, Obama’s lack of experience in national politics, and in managing a political situation not in control of a Chicago-like machine, is what really betrayed him.

He compounded it by doubling down on obvious lies.  Nothing in the bill would stop any employer from throwing employees into the “public option,” and plenty in the bill would provide them with motivation to do so.  Americans began to see that the promises were mutually incompatible, which included coverage for the “uninsured,” lower prices, freedom to choose your providers, no tax increase, and no rationing.  It was as if someone tried to convince them that you really CAN have it “good, fast and cheap.”  Americans know better, when they start paying attention.

Many Americans felt robbed by the arbitrariness of “cash for clunkers,” knowing that it was a straight government giveaway for which THEY could not qualify, but would surely pay.  Twinned with this is the planned trillion-dollar-deficits-per-year for the next decade, even if the Obama, Pelosi and Reid are NOT able to extend government’s already partially accomplished takeover of healthcare.  And that’s probably optimistic, based on current projections.  Americans got numb to billions….  but trillions is something else entirely.  And they simply don’t want to pay it.  To be blunt, they’re terrified of it.

Regarding another prediction I made, I continue to believe that if the terrorists want Obama to be president for two terms, they’d be wise to just hold off attacking the US until his second term.  Such an attack, in the face of Obama’s prosecution of those who would protect us, namely the CIA, would surely result in yet more support peeling off from him.  He might try to regain that support by taking some dramatic action… but it would probably be of no more worth than Clinton bombing aspirin factories in the Sudan.

Support is also peeling off on Obama’s left.  In particular, the anti-war types who were seduced by Obama’s Iraq pullout plans have to be disappointed that he is adding troops to Afghanistan, and seems relatively serious about following the advice of his generals….  nearly the only thing Obama has done right so far.  Peaceniks are getting off the bus in droves, apparently having signed up for the wrong tour package.

In the meantime, I think one aspect of my predictions is right.  The press is STILL not seriously criticizing Obama’s policies, but it is starting to criticize Obama the man and president for his failures to carry them out.  As disdain for the puerility of their annointed choice begins to grow, some of that may yet lead to the investigative journalism that should have been done before the elections.

There is such a thing as a need to survive.  As the public distrust for Obama grows, if the press continues to support him and/or his policies unrealistically, its credibility gap will only grow.  At some point, the people who own the newspapers and networks that are hemorrhaging readers and viewers will start to count the cost.

When and if major media outlets start reporting on how other outlets sat on stories that would have damaged Obama during the election season, you’ll know the world has shifted.  There are probably a lot more of these than we know.  The dynamic will be simple: reporters share info over drinks.  One lets slip that his editor sat on something damaging to Obama.  The other reporter, desperate to salvage a sinking career and job prospects (and there are a LOT of people in that situation), talks his similarly desperate editor into publishing or broadcasting.  And the feeding frenzy begins.  There’s a LOT of that stuff out there.

I wonder how many more job losses NBC and MSNBC will have to have, how many more major newspapers will have to cut jobs or worse, before simple survival instinct sets in.  It’s a toss up… are they just loopy, or are they lemmings?

But no one believes them anymore.


Sep 05 2009

What slogan would Jesus use?

Category: religion,societyharmonicminer @ 2:24 pm

Having become recently weary with claims made by various folks about how Jesus would do this, or wouldn’t do that, or just the very silly WWJD (What Would Jesus Do) line that some people seem to think is the all-time discussion ender, I have a few to propose myself.

What baby would Jesus abort?
What mother would Jesus tell, “It’s your body and no one should tell you what to do”?
What person would Jesus rob to provide for someone else?
What child would Jesus fail to protect?
What person would Jesus make helpless by stealing her only weapon?
What person would Jesus send federal marshals to, in order to collect unpaid taxes to be used to support other people?
What school system would Jesus sue, for allowing prayer to Him?

Some will say these are unreasonable questions, and that others are just as fair.  I’ve heard a few.  Here goes:

What person would Jesus allow to starve? Answer:  many hundreds of thousands during His lifetime and ministry, based on likely world population at the time and known economic conditions.  “You will always have the poor with you.”  It is simply impossible to make the case that Jesus’ life and death were mostly about “taking care of the poor” in an absolutist, goal oriented sense, where that goal is understood as transcending almost all others, because He did not Himself live that way, nor did he demand that others do so.  He spoke against “injustice” in relation to the poor.   You may argue about what that means, but only in the light of the fact that He did not Himself attempt, even with his human abilities, to spend every moment and every resource in taking care of the poor, let alone His divine power, which could have been used subtly in very many ways to essentially end poverty in Palestine…  and elsewhere.  We have no reason to think there were not still plenty of hungry people when he left one town for the next, and scripture gives us no reason to think otherwise.

What person would Jesus arm?
Answer:  Shepherds.  “Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me.”  Who is responsible to protect sheep, and themselves, so they can protect the sheep?   Who ARE the sheep?  You decide.

What would Jesus drive?
Answer:  Whatever would get him where he needed to go, within reason.  I don’t suppose he’d have driven a semi-truck.  Maybe on food deliveries.  Probably not.

Who would Jesus bomb? Answer:  See above about arms and shepherds.  Sometimes, life is hard.  But Jesus would surely not have suggested that Britain allow itself to be bombed without self-defense, which, sadly, often means “bombing back.”  Response question:  Which British child would Jesus have selected to be killed because British forces didn’t return fire on German factories and infrastructure, even admitting the limited accuracy of then-current technology, and knowing innocents would be killed?  Secondary question:  Which Polish Jewish child would Jesus select to be gassed because the Allies were stupid in their prosecution of the war, starting with when Hitler occupied the Rhineland with military forces?  It is safe to say that all of Europe could have done with better “shepherds” than Chamberlain and Daladier.

The point: very few slogans are up to the job of telling the truth.  And particularly, I am very suspicious of slogans involving the name of our Lord.


Sep 04 2009

The double standard of photographic realism

Category: abortion,media,military,societyharmonicminer @ 3:21 pm

The AP has decided to print the photo of a young marine as he is dying, despite the expressed wishes of his family and the Secretary of Defense that the soldiers privacy be respected and the photo not be released. The AP is doing this in the name of “journalistic realism” and “telling the real story of the Afghan war.”

The AP reported that the Marine’s father had asked, in an interview and in a follow-up phone call, that the image, taken by an embedded photographer, not be published.

The AP reported in a story that it decided to make the image public anyway because it “conveys the grimness of war and the sacrifice of young men and women fighting it.”

The photo shows Lance Cpl. Joshua M. Bernard of New Portland, Maine, who was struck by a rocket-propelled grenade in a Taliban ambush Aug. 14 in Helmand province of southern Afghanistan, according to The AP.

Gates wrote to Thomas Curley, AP’s president and chief executive officer. “Out of respect for his family’s wishes, I ask you in the strongest of terms to reconsider your decision. I do not make this request lightly. In one of my first public statements as Secretary of Defense, I stated that the media should not be treated as the enemy, and made it a point to thank journalists for revealing problems that need to be fixed, as was the case with Walter Reed.”

“I cannot imagine the pain and suffering Lance Corporal Bernard’s death has caused his family. Why your organization would purposefully defy the family’s wishes knowing full well that it will lead to yet more anguish is beyond me. Your lack of compassion and common sense in choosing to put this image of their maimed and stricken child on the front page of multiple American newspapers is appalling. The issue here is not law, policy or constitutional right, but judgment and common decency.”
……………

Morrell said Gates wanted the information about his conversations released “so everyone would know how strongly he felt about the issue.”

The Associated Press reported in a story about deliberations about that photo that “after a period of reflection,” the news service decided “to make public an image that conveys the grimness of war and the sacrifice of young men and women fighting it.

“The image shows fellow Marines helping Bernard after he suffered severe leg injuries. He was evacuated to a field hospital where he died on the operating table,” AP said. “The picture was taken by Associated Press photographer Julie Jacobson, who accompanied Marines on the patrol and was in the midst of the ambush during which Bernard was wounded. … ‘AP journalists document world events every day. Afghanistan is no exception. We feel it is our journalistic duty to show the reality of the war there, however unpleasant and brutal that sometimes is,’ said Santiago Lyon, the director of photography for AP.

It is the policy of essentially every mainstream news organization, including the AP, NOT to print photos that show the reality of abortion, and what aborted unborn human beings look like.  They won’t show what aborted human beings look like after being aborted at 9 weeks, or 15 weeks, or 24 weeks, or 30 weeks.  It would be “too disturbing,” it seems.  But they will show other, equally or even more distubing photos without apparent restraint, whenever it fits the news agenda of the day. 

Some newspapers won’t even run print ads paid by pro-life organizations if they tell the truth too accurately about abortion, and they may even object to accurate descriptions of abortion, let alone photos of the killed human being that results from it.  I would go further with this…  but you already know it’s true, don’t you?  Because you have just about never seen a picture of an aborted baby in any major newspaper, newsmagazine or network TV broadcast, have you?  But you have routinely seen bodies piled high in Holocaust photos, people being shot in the back of the head in executions by totalitarian regimes, and many other horrible, but true, events.

The cognitive dissoance is stunning, because on the one hand the mainstream media buys into the lie that aborted babies aren’t really people, just some kind of thing that could have developed into one…  and on the other hand, it is apparently more disturbing to them to show a photo of an aborted fetus than to show the murder of someone they DO accept as a full human being.  I guess it’s just too disturbing to show a photo of the death of a non-person.

It seems that photographically telling the truth about abortion is NOT on the news agenda….  but showing the last moments on earth of a mortally wounded soldier IS.

Pray for the family of the deceased soldier, as their pain is increased by this barbarous decision.


Aug 29 2009

A pretty cheeky cop

Category: societyharmonicminer @ 12:49 am

I guess there are some things you just can’t say or show in America anymore.  Maybe the Age of Aquarius has come or something.

Now imagine if this was a white cop telling a black protester that he could not show a caricature of George Bush at a townhall, which is supposed to be the very quintessence of free speech.  Imagine the white cop telling the black protester that “he [the cop] can arrest him [the protester] for anything he wants to.”

I think Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton would probably set new speed records getting there and getting on camera.

The ACLU would sue the supervising agency and municipality of the cop.

Barack Obama would call the cop “stupid,” and this time he’d be right.  And he wouldn’t invite the cop for beer.

I think a certain Officer Cheeks needs more training.  A lot more training.  How did the noble constable make it past psychological screening for academy entrance?  Come to think of it…  he doesn’t really look like he could survive academy this year.  But he’ll fit right in as sergeant at arms at your local re-education camp.  He will be the one not carrying a copy of the Constitution in his back pocket.

Look for him and his friends, coming soon to a town near you.


Aug 23 2009

Catch 22

Category: government,societyharmonicminer @ 9:32 am

You may be familiar with the notion of a CATCH 22. It has recently appeared in regard to the marketing of a device to make a copy of commercially copy-protected DVDs, which resulted in lawsuits by the film industry to suppress the manufacture and sale of the device.

“The court appreciates Real’s argument that a consumer has a right to make a backup copy of a DVD for their own personal use,” Patel wrote, but noted that “a federal law has nonetheless made it illegal to manufacture or traffic in a device or tool that permits a consumer to make such copies.”

Got that? You have the right to make the copy, but not the right to make or sell a device that allows the copy to be made… which means you don’t have the right to make the copy.  The film industry insists on distributing their products in a form that makes it essentially impossible for citizens to access their right to make a backup copy.  It would be far more honest for the law to simply say that you have no right to make a backup copy, good luck, better take care of the DVD and don’t play frisbee with it.

The law giveth and the law taketh away….  blessed by the name of the law.

In many places, you have the right to self-defense, but not the right to have a weapon with you, which makes the right to self-defense of marginal usefulness, unless you happen to be a martial arts master, as well as young, strong and healthy….  which those accosting you are likely to be.  It would be far more honest for the law to say that the right to self-defense is limited to pleading for your life in the face of force majeure…  which seems to be the case in Britain these days.

Another excellent example is the case of nationalized health care, which may be imposed on people based on the notion that “health care is a right,” and which always and everywhere results in the denial of health care for certain people, in certain situations, with certain diseases, at certain stages of life.  It would be far more honest to say, “You have the right to as much healthcare as some people who never met you think you might deserve, and if they turn you down, you don’t have the right to get it anywhere else, either.”  Of course, “unavoidable delays” are the same thing as denial of care, even though they aren’t called that directly.  You can easily die waiting for care that is your “right” to have.

Lady Justice is indeed blind.  But she is watching you very closely.


Aug 18 2009

Is there such a thing as conservative sociology?

Category: higher education,societyharmonicminer @ 9:24 am

Some of have suggested that “conservative sociology” is an oxymoron.  Sociology at most universities, even ostensibly more conservative “Christian” universities, is essentially a free bully pulpit for faculty bent on “progressive” social change, meaning let’s all move Left in quick march, double-time.  That’s the norm, like it or not.  It seems that having Karl Marx as one of the founders of your discipline does have a certain effect.  Here are a few excerpts from a very interesting conversation between some “conservative sociologists” on the topic (conservative being a relative term, of course).  But compared to the run of the mill sociology prof, these folks do seem a bit more reasonable, and I recommend the whole thing for a fuller flavor:

Continue reading “Is there such a thing as conservative sociology?”


Aug 05 2009

The Next Great Awakening, Part 8: The Responsibility of the Church

Category: church,religion,societyharmonicminer @ 8:02 am

Frank Turek lays the blame for many ills in our society at the feet of the church for not being what it was supposed to be, or doing what it was supposed to do. His closing paragraphs (all worth reading):

So if you’re a believer who is upset that life is not being protected; that marriage is being subverted; that judges routinely usurp your will; that our immigration laws are being ignored; that radical laws are passed but never read; that mentioning God in school (unless he’s Allah) results in lawsuits; that school curriculums promote political correctness and sexual deviance as students fail at basic academics; that unimaginable debt is being piled on your children while leftist organizations like Planned Parenthood and ACORN receive your tax dollars; and that your religion and free speech rights are about to be eroded by “hate” crimes legislation that can punish you for quoting the Bible; then go look in the mirror and take your share of the blame because we have not obeyed our calling.

Then start over. Reengage at every level of society. Treat every job and every person as sacred. Be a beacon for Christ and truth in whatever you do and wherever you are. There is hope if you act. After all, we believe in redemption.

Shall we accept the indictment?  It depends.  If you know that YOU’VE been doing what you can to move culture in a better direction, so be it.  But we do have a very large problem.  Too many of our “para-church” organizations have desired respectability in secular eyes more than they’ve desired to be God’s agents in the world…  and they can’t have it both ways.  Sadly, this is true for educational institutions, community organizations, charitable organizations, you name it.  And, even more sadly, some churches have watered down their message and diffused their focus in the name of appearing more tolerant and accepting.

In a word, sometimes we have let the secular left make the rules, and have tried too hard to play their game, instead of playing our own game according to God’s rules.

Each of us is responsible first to God, then to our families, to the church, and then to the wider organizations of which we’re a part, and to society.  Given that hierarchy, it’s pretty safe to say that those of us who are lionized by society would do very, very well to examine ourselves individually, to ask if we’re really God’s person in the world, or just using God-talk as a means of pursuing essentially secular objectives that are respectable to the world even without the God-talk.

As the church, if we don’t take strong, united stands against clear, unambiguous sin, we abdicate one of our chief responsibilities to God and society.  If we don’t do it, who will?


« Previous PageNext Page »