Thursday, April 10, 2008

A Great Day for Stupid Quotes

- Larry Elder, pimping his book and skewing statistics:

As I wrote in my new book, "Stupid Black Men: How to Play the Race Card – and Lose," a Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg poll asked which type of presidential candidate would you not vote for, even if that candidate agreed with you on most issues. More Democrats (17 percent) than Republicans (13 percent) wouldn't vote for a Mormon. For a 72-year-old candidate – again, more Democrats (19 percent) than Republicans (12 percent) refused to vote for someone that age. Likewise more Democrats (4 percent) than Republicans (3 percent) ruled out voting for a black candidate.

A whole percentage point! Those racist bastards.

- Pat Boone also likes to play with stupid statistics:
And in this election year, I feel compelled to pass along some data just provided to me by Frances Rice of the National Black Republican Organization. Quoting statistics combed from the 2004 University of Georgia Selig Center Study, the National Black Chamber of Congress and the 2004 National Urban League's "State of Black America" report:
In 1950, when most blacks were Republicans, 63 percent of blacks were married. By 2002, when most blacks were Democrats, only 35 percent of blacks were married.
In 1960, when most blacks were Republicans, 80 percent of black children were born in wedlock. By 2002, when most blacks were Democrats, only 25 percent of black children were born in wedlock.

The pain, it burns.

- Ellis Washington, trying his hardest to claim that the Teacher's Union is "just like" Joseph Stalin:
As I traveled through Detroit's old neighborhoods, it suddenly came to me like a bright light from heaven. Yes, liberalism, or the secular faith that FDR-style, Big Government programs are indispensable to remedy all societal problems, is viewed by over 90 percent of blacks (and at least 50 percent of whites) as the 11th Commandment. Conversely, what institution or organization put those diabolical ideas inside people's minds?
It was the public schools all along! Stalin was right that the offensive-weapon effects of state-controlled education "depends upon who holds it in his hands and at whom it is aimed." Whose hands are America's public education system in? That's right, the teachers and their powerful teachers union, the National Education Association.

The NEA is less an education association interested in improving quality education for all American students and more of a liberal special-interest group hell-bent on teaching socialist dogma and treacherous propaganda – "America sucks!" "Hip-Hop Summits," "safe sex," abortion, evolution, 2+2=5, outcome-based education, "Heather has two mommies," "Daddy's Roommate," metal detectors and other insanities.
It's amazing they ever get to math or English, seeing as how they're so busy teaching about people's 85 Mommies and making sure that no banana goes uncovered. Incidentally, what does hip-hop have to do with socialism? And why are metal detectors deemed "insane" and pinned on liberals? Next we'll be getting blamed for all the schools that were built with asbestos.
- Jack Cashill, beating the dead horse that is Jeremiah Wright:
On the occasion of the 15th anniversary of Waco, it seems an appropriate time to review the way in which Barack Obama's spiritual mentor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, responded to that tragedy.
Given his famous sensitivity to racial slights, one would think that a tank assault on a multicultural religious community would have caught the good reverend's attention.
After all, more than half of those incinerated at Waco on April 19, 1993, were ethnic minorities, 39 out of 74 to be precise, six of them Hispanic, six of Asian descent, and a full 27 of them black, ages 6 to 61.
After considerable research, however, I could find no evidence that Wright ever so much as questioned the Clinton administration about this unwitting bit of slaughter.
A photo taken of Wright's one recorded meeting with President Clinton five years later shows a smiling, sycophantic pastor too enthralled to be enraged.
Excellent point, Jack. I say we draw up a list of all the jerks that have had their picture taken with slick Willie since 1993 and have NOT used it as an opportunity to bitch-slap him upside the head for Waco. All of these people should then be blacklisted. I say we start with these guys.

- Jane Chastain, hailing the praises of Ben Stein's ode to Intelligent Design, "Expelled":
"This is not a scientific battle; this is a worldview battle," "Expelled" producer Mark Mathis told me. Mathis has encountered unbridled hostility from the scientific establishment, i.e., avowed Darwinists, at previews.
"Expelled" connects atheism and Darwinism with no missing link, one of the film's two major flashpoints.
Darwinism is a specific evolutionary theory that excludes everything but material processes in the design of all life forms. No Intelligent Design allowed.
"What's driving it is Darwinism is a foundational principle – scientific validation of secularism, atheism, liberalism – and that it strikes at the core of who they are," said Mathis.
"Secondarily, these scientists are the high priests of the biggest question ever asked. They have all the authority, knowledge, power, funding," continued Mathis. "This is ground they own exclusively. They look down their elitist noses at the unwashed ignorant religious masses and scoff. That's why they respond with such extreme hostility. They are very concerned that if this monolith cracks, then the whole thing could crash."
Indeed, "Expelled" is already making a difference. Last month, Ben Stein, star of "Expelled," screened it for Florida legislators as they prepared to present a bill guaranteeing academic freedom in their schools. It looks ready to pass. Last week, Stein screened "Expelled" to Missouri lawmakers followed by a press conference promoting three academic freedom bills germinating there.
Wow, "Academic freedom," "Intelligent Design," "Death Tax"? And conservatives dare to complain about LIBERAL new-speak. And I like how any opposition to ID is attributed to elitist liberal scientists being threatened by having their gravy train derailed. As opposed to, say, actual issues with the science. Heavens no.
It goes on...
Not only is Darwinism foundational to atheism, it is foundational to eugenics, the other reason for the left's apoplexy against "Expelled," according to Mathis. They cannot tolerate the connection "Expelled" draws between Darwinism and Adolf Hitler.
Or Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned Parenthood.
"Planned Parenthood is a direct outgrowth of Darwinism," said Mathis. "Sanger was an open proponent of eugenics, and Darwinism is an idea that naturally leads to eugenics, which they are denying," said Mathis. "But they are compatible."
That Hitler and Nazism drew from Darwinism is irrefutable. "Hitler said genocide of Jews was doing good, cleansing the world of 'useless eaters' and strengthening formation of an 'Aryan' race of super-humans," said Mathis.
They can't "tolerate" it because it's inane.
First, I would argue that Hitler's ideology could just as easily be traced to a particularly ruthless Utilitarianism than any theories of natural selection. And perhaps also elements of the German martial tradition, which also went way back. Second, the "this is just like/this influenced Hitler" argument is old, tired, and stupid. There have been a heck of a lot of Christians over the years that have been total bastards. Does that mean that we can toss Christianity out the window because it spawned and motivated such wonderful guys as the Crusaders and Conquistadors?
Incidentally, "compatible" and "causal" aren't the same thing. Not even close. Rape and mass murder have been shown to be "compatible" with Christianity, it doesn't mean that such things are integral to it, or are caused by it.

Last but never least, Pat Boone has apparently dug up his ancestor's coonskin cap and smoked the hell out it, thereby producing a wonderful high and a very fuzzy recollection of American history:
If anybody today is paying even casual attention to the news, it must be obvious that our society is going through cataclysmic changes. While there have always been occasional scandals and public shocks, they've never been the rule. I remember reading about the "Teapot Dome" scandal, involving major politicians in cahoots with unscrupulous businessmen. But that enormous fiasco seemed to effect a wholesale cleanup that lasted perhaps a decade. That's the way it seemed to work: a big shameful mess followed by a period of decorous, moral behavior.
Pat says this like it's something to be proud of: Hey, our politicians are only greedy, dishonest scumbags every other decade! In your face, Russia! And that means we should only have had about 12 major scandals for the 23 decades we've been around. That sounds pretty good... oh wait. Also, has Pat never heard of, say, the Gilded Age? Credit Mobilier, Boss Tweed, Spoils System... and that lasted about 50 years. So much for Pat's "decade-on, decade-off" theory.

For most of our history as a nation, the Judeo-Christian principles that fostered and permeated our Declaration of Independence and our Constitution – our very way of life – dictated that immoral, corrupt, dishonest behavior was simply unacceptable. It was no secret that we all, fallible and failing at times, actually believed that there are unchanging standards of acceptable behavior. And, that failure to live up to those widely accepted standards would bring consequences: loss of reputation, position, compensation and possibly jail time, depending on the enormity of the breach.
Of course, for the several decades it took to get caught, life was pretty sweet. Which probably meant that God was on their side. Also, the massive corruption in a lot of cities seems to belie the claim that "deep down, we all knew right from wrong"- sure, except for everyone in charge of remotely ANYTHING.

I mention "Judeo-Christian" principles. In other words, the Bible. Even atheists, non believers and total reprobates had to acknowledge that America was guided by and founded upon principles from the Ten Commandments and the Sermon the Mount, the Golden Rule and all the well-known biblical pronouncements and examples.
Code of Hammurabi. The Bible didn't invent the Golden Rule, you boob. (Which we've never been that good about following.) And the religious dissenters "had" to acknowledge it because otherwise you accused them of witchcraft and burned them at the stake. (I like how non-believers and atheists are lumped in with "total reprobates," BTW. Thanks for being such a douchebag, Pat.)

Oh, some few agnostics and non-religious people questioned the guidelines, calling the accepted rules "puritanical," as Hugh Hefner did in his long-running, pompous "Playboy Philosophy" in his slick, sick, decadent magazine. And Larry Flynt presented himself as a proponent and "defender" of the First Amendment, even while he abused and degraded it.
Don't you just hate it when "a few" people ruin everything by telling you to get your Decalogue out of a public courthouse? Or say that the Bible shouldn't be shoved down people's throats, whether in court or school? Aren't they totally just like pornographers?

But, for as long as any of us can remember, our currency has borne the slogan "In God We Trust," our national motto.
Yes, it's been on our money since 1864, or about half of our nation's existence. Of course, that also means that for the first 90 years, we got along without it just fine (and didn't care about it not being there). The national motto thing is even later- made official only in 1956, over what had been the long-established (but unofficial) one, e pluribus unum. But never mind the facts, Pat has drug-induced pearls of wisdom to share!

Most of us find it only natural that our Pledge of Allegiance affirms us to be "one nation under God." As much as 90 percent of the populace traditionally has professed some measure of faith in the existence of God and continued to expect us all at least to try to live in a way compatible with the teachings of the Bible – which is, after all, the indisputable source of moral thought.
1. No it's not.
2. Who says that an abstract belief in God, or "a God" means you agree that the Bible is the "indisputable" source of morality?

3. Especially the parts that tell us to do horrible things like wipe out Canaanites and kill rebellious children, right?

WND is sooo not good for my health- physical or mental.

No comments: