Wednesday, June 30, 2004

Charlotte Observer: we must fight terrorists to the death

In an unusually hard-hitting editorial last Thursday, June 24th, the Charlotte Observer condemned the terrorist kidnapping and beheading of Kim Sun-il, 33, an evangelical Christian with degrees in theology, English, and Arabic. It seems that this third beheading by Middle Eastern terrorists, video-taped and broadcast on the Al Jazeera Arabic TV network, finally found its mark in the editorial staff of the Observer. Here are some excerpts:
This is not a religious war, no matter how the terrorists frame their complaints....

But these terrorists are not seeking understanding, they are seeking power. Compromise is not the answer. They have no goal but dominance. Reason is not the answer. How does one reason with monsters whose political tactics include the beheading of innocents?

The terrorists have made their intentions clear: This is a battle to the death. Our choice is to withdraw or fight. To withdraw in the face of their atrocities would not make them go away, it would only make them bolder. Kidnappings and murders can be done by a handful of zealots anywhere in the world. If these murderers are not stopped, no citizen of any nation they consider their enemy will be safe.

The terrorists have dictated the terms of this conflict. The world is their battleground, and they intend to kill us. Our response must be to stop them, using whatever force is necessary. We did not choose this fight, but if death must be the end, let it be theirs.
(Source.)

The Clinton Legacy (video)

Check out the video for some good laughs and hard-hitting questions by Evan Coyne Maloney (www.brain-terminal.com). Maloney describes the video:
Bill Clinton's latest attempt to define his legacy is a 957-page book called My Life. Though panned by the New York Times as "sloppy, self-indulgent and often eye-crossingly dull," hard-core Clinton supporters still waited eight hours or more to have the former president sign their copies. As the line of autograph-seekers snaked around the corner of Broadway and Wall Street in lower Manhattan, I asked the Clintophiles for their thoughts on Bill, his book, and his legacy.
The saddest thing is that none of Clinton's avid supporters seeps able to muster any arguments in support of the reasons offered for admiring or supporting him. (Thanks to Christopher for the link.)

Kerry rules out opening records of 1988 divorce


PHOENIX, Ariz. (Reuters) -- Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry (Yahoo! News) on Tuesday rejected any suggestion that he release records of his 1988 divorce, calling it old history that had nothing to do with anyone else. It may be recalled that in a U.S. senate race in Illinois, Republican candidate Jack Ryan quit his campaign last week after the Chicago Tribune and other media sued to have his sealed divorce records made public. "The papers," stated Yahoo! News, "revealed that his ex-wife had accused him of asking her to have sex with him in front of strangers at a club."

More weapons of mass destruction in Iraq

A senior Russian official interviewed by World Tribune.com for an article that appeared today, expressed concerns that ties to Saddam loyalists could give Al Qaida access to weapons of mass destruction. "The United States has also expressed concern that Al Qaida, particularly Abu Mussib Al Zarqawi, could gain access to what officials said could be an arsenal of hundreds shells filled with sarin or mustard gas," stated the article. Then, the kicker:
Dozens of such shells have been found by U.S. troops over the last year.
Now, what was that again the Farenheit 911 was claiming? . . .

Tuesday, June 29, 2004

Farenheit 911: liberal credibility dumbed down, gone to seed, & just plain stupid


In the June 26th issue of The New York Times, in an editorial entitled "All Hail Moore," David Brooks offers a scathing indictment of the incomparable stupidity of the "muckumentary" Farenheit 911. "In years past," he writes, "American liberals have had to settle for intellectual and moral leadership from the likes of John Dewey, Reinhold Niebuhr and Martin Luther King Jr. But now, a grander beacon has appeared on the mountaintop, and from sea to shining sea, tens of thousands have joined in the adulation." Our new guru of American liberalism, which reflects our new generation of political and cultural liberals just as clearly as Bill Clinton and John Kerry, is Hollywood's new celebrity, Michael Moore. Christopher, commenting on "The Passion over Farenheit 911" (in Against the Grain), writes: The problem with Michael Moore is that he so effectively contributes to the dumbing down of the Left by his willing indulgence in radical conspiracy-theorizing and vulger anti-Americanism, as recently exposed by David Brooks ("All Hail Moore" New York Times June 26, 2004)." The lines of the culture wars are being drawn more sharply every day indeed.

Incidentally, my wife told me that this morening on NPR they were interviewing a very offended Ray Bradbury, who is outraged that Moore stole the title of his film from Bradbury's book, Farenheit 451. When Bradbury called Moore's agent to ask if he could speak with Moore about the matter, he was told that Moore would get back to him. He never did.

Also, be sure to check out Christopher Blosser's new blog: "Watching Michael Moore: Ractions to the Film 'Farenheit 911' and its director."

"My Life," by Bill Clinton: The PowerPoint Version



"MY LIFE," by Bill Clinton
The PowerPoint Version


This is right on target, a little off color, and really funny. Check it out. Thanks Daniel Radosh.

Thursday, June 24, 2004

Sun Myung Moon saves souls of Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin


Wednesday, June 23, 2004 WASHINGTON -- In one of the most bizarre incidents to take place on Capitol Hill in a long time, Sun Myung Moon was crowned in a ceremony honoring the controversial Korean who claims to be an incarnation of Jesus Christ. Although it took some time for the network media to catch wind of the event, the ceremony, which took place in the Dirksen Senate Office Building in the Capital, was attended by a bi-partisan crowd of senators and congressmen. The Reverend (I use the term loosely) Moon, according to Fox News, said that he would save the souls of everyone on Earth, just as he had done for the notorious Adolf Hitler and Josef Stalin-- whom the "reverend" said were born again as a result of his teachings. The "Reverend" Sun Myung
Moon is on record for being sentenced to 18 months in jail in the 1980s for tax fraud. That at least a dozen lawmakers were in attendance at the crowning event yesterday is also a matter of record. When one of them denied having been in attendance to reporters until a Capital Hill newspaper published photos of the person at the event. No one on the Hill is taking responsibility for approving Moon's appearance. The natural question that arises, then, is this: What on earth were our senators and congressmen doing at this event?

"Eucharistic hospitality" hypocritical


Speaking at a major conference of German Catholics in the city of Ulm on June 18, Cardinal Kasper said that "there are circumstances when a non-Catholic can receive Communion at a Catholic Mass." Such "Eucharistic hospitality," he said, is licit in some circumstances.

One might also be tempted to conclude that it is in many circumstances a hypocritical sham. Cardinals and bishops of Kasper's ilk seem willing to bend over backwards to extend "Eucharistic hospitality" to pro-abortion politicians, same-sex couples, and even non-Catholics. But would they extend the same "Eucharistic hospitality" to a traditional Catholic who approached the altar and-- gasp!-- kneeled to receive the Lord's Precious Body? What times! (Thanks to Catholic World News and Jamie Blosser at Ad Limina Apostolorum.)

Felons paid to support Kerry in Democrat registration drive

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) - A Democratic group crucial to John Kerry's presidential campaign has paid felons - some convicted of sex offenses, assault and burglary - to conduct door-to-door voter registration drives in at least three election swing states. (myway news). No kidding.

Universities a success story in Iraq

The Washington Times reported today that, despite the many challenges that remain, U.S. administrators have made great strides in rebuilding the Iraqi educational system. Highlights:
  • Iraq now has 20 functioning universities
  • Iraq now has 43 technical institutes and colleges
  • These have experienced a 50% increase in freshman enrolled last year
  • Institutional policies are determined by their own presidents rather than the central government
  • University students have access to the Internet
For the story by Stephanie Dornschneider click here.

Wednesday, June 23, 2004

To hell with inclusive language!


The other day I caught myself doing it. In retrospect I could hardly believe myself. Thanks to the politically correct programming that pervades our whole environment, the grammatical glitches just inadevertently slipped out as smoothly as if I had been speaking the Queen's English on BBC. I said:
"Any student who would like suggestions on how to improve their research paper may submit a rough draft of their paper for review anytime up to the last week before the due date."
Wow! That came out so smoothly that I bet there are some of you who didn't even catch the grammatical errors in it. What's worse, I'm aware that there are English departments where students are now commonly encouraged to make this sacrifice of good grammar ("ANY student who . . . THEIR research paper . . .") on the altar of inclusive language (avoiding the tacitly forbidden "HIS research paper . . .")!

Of course there is much more that is just as bad, if not worse-- the awkward "he-or-she's" and "his-or-hers"-- leading one wag to offer the Menken-esque suggestion that every time we're tempted to employ such God-forsaken convolutions, we form a contraction from "he-or-she-or-it" to form the term-- you got it: H'OR'SH'IT !!!

In any case, we now have a breath of fresh air from--of all places--California. AT LAST, a Californian has come out and said it. He (yes he) has spoken the dreaded words that none hitherto dared dream of saying: "I try never to use inclusive language." So breath-takingly simple. Yet how like a bucket of cold water over the head after a bad hangover. Wake up Neo . . . It's almost noon. You're not trapped in the Matrix. The sun is out and the illusions are melting. Here, at last, the words of our intrepid Californian, Karl Keating:
I try never to use inclusive language. (It really should be called "feminist language," since standard English already is inclusive when it uses "he" or "man" in the generic sense.)

Why should I? To please those to whom such usage is important? I don't see how pandering to them is doing them any favor.

Granted, when I use proper English, someone may notice and "take offense." I don't want to hurt anyone's feelings, but I am even more solicitous of other people's minds. Maybe, when I speak English As She Is Writ, a listener will start to think, "Uh, like, could my diction be wrong?"

As I see it, the problem isn't with those who use the generic "he" or "man." The problem is with those who, because of their ignorance of their own language, take offense where not only is no offense intended but where no offense is present.

Should we modify our language to mollify such people? I don't think so, since there always will be people who can't comprehend elements of their native tongue. The answer isn't to dumb down the language but to "smart up" the people. If for some reason that can't be done, the best thing is benign neglect.
Thanks Karl!

"Scrupulous Anonymous"

Karl Keating notes that there is a monthly newletter, "Scrupulous Anonymous" (Liguori, MO 63057-9999), published by Fr. Thomas R. Santa, C.Ss.R., for those suffering from a psychological malady apparently the opposite of that suffered by Bill Clinton (see earlier posts below). Fr. Santa is author of Understanding Scrupulosity.

A narcissist's outburst: light on Clinton's character

Eric Johnson (Catholic Light [not Catholic lite]) sheds light on Bill Clinton's recent angry
outburst during a BBC interview with David Dimbleby:
I watched the first half of the BBC interview with Bill Clinton, which you can see here. You may have heard that he grows angry with the interviewer, and so I'll save you some time if you want to see it: skip to 19:00, and you'll see the lead-up. The outburst starts building at 24:30, with a crescendo at 28:50.

I thought of so many things while watching it, but I am so tired of thinking about that man that I cannot summon the energy. A few thoughts, though:
. . . The outburst itself was classic Clinton. The childish sense of persecution, the peevish remarks to the interviewer such as "people like you always help the far right" (was he even familiar with the guy interviewing him?) His descriptions of how "the other side" operated was the mirror opposite of the truth. He says the evil Republicans thought that politics was about power, and he thought it was about how power ought to be used. But if there is a modern politician who believed in acquiring power for his own sake, it would be him.
In another takedown of the recent 60 Minutes interview with clinton by Dan Rather, Andrew Sullivan, who, as one of my sons says, can actually write something decent when he's not busy promoting homosexual marriage, offers a remarkably insightful analysis of the mind and reasoning and psychology of the pathological liar and womanizer whom we once honored with the Presidency of the United States. Check out his analysis in the New Republic Online here.

Tuesday, June 22, 2004

The world in 2050: watch the Chinese, Muslims, and Russians

Well before 9/11, the Hon. Frank Shakespeare, the former U.S. ambassador to the Vatican, gave an address in Washington, DC, in 1996, predicting the prominent role Islam would play in the world in the future. Addressing the question what the world would be like in 2050, he gave a fascinating and incisive analysis of recent history, observing the prescient role of the papacy in recent world history, and speculating that the key to the future of world history in the next half-century would lie in three wildcards: China, Islam, and Russia.

Just eight years after the ambassador's speech, we can already see some unfolding evends likely to confirm his predictions:

(1) The Chinese, who constitude nearly a quarter of the global population and are animated by an agressive work ethic, are taking over the world economically. Markets are flooded with Chinese products. Everything from watches to clothes to leather jackets to furniture and televisions are now being manufactured in China. I understand that a Chinese automobile is being prepared for export to the United States in the near future, which will surely undersell most other manufacturers. The whole scene reminds me of what occurred in Japan in the decades following the Second World War; only it's happening in half the time.

(2) Islam. All you need to do is study a map to see what is happening. As the former ambassador wrotes:
If you draw a line beginning at the westernmost point of China in the middle of Asia and you draw that line just north of the "Stan" countries, which were the republics in the belly of the [former] Soviet Union (Tazikhastan, Khazaktan, and such things, all of those countries are Muslim), and right on the border of the Russian nation and then you come down and go through the Black Sea north of Turkey and north of Iran, and then you swoop down and go north of the Mideast, of Iraq and of Syria, and then you go down the Mediterranean and you pass on one side Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco, and you come to the Atlantic, you have drawn a line all the way from China to the Atlantic Ocean. Everything south of that line is Islam. Every thing north of that line is Christendom.
And he didn't even mention the countries to the East: Malaysia, major parts of the Philippines, and the Indonesian archipelago, which juts far out into the Pacific in the East like a scimitar.

(3) Then there's Russia, which, although it appears now to be in the economic doldrums, still possesses the nuclear weapons that made it a military world power and enough natural resources in Siberia to provide an almost endless supply of power and wealth to Russia. Furthermore, despite it's years of Marxist repression of religion, Russia has a long and deep history of Orthodox Christianity. Who's to say what the future holds? It's a wildcard to be reackoned with.

The Hon. Frank Shakespeare's speech was published in Catholic Dossier (November-December, 1998).

Trust this man? ... Are you out of your mind?


Before half our nation settles down for its honeymoon with candidate John Kerry in the months and weeks ahead, and before all the "undecided" folks start their squinting at his skillfully-spun media images of the man to see if he "looks presidential," let them take a few moments to ask themselves: would they buy a used care from this man? Just who do they think this guy is?

Well . . . let me see . . .



  • a "decorated" veteran ... whom almost no vet trusts ...
  • a self-styled "Catholic" candidate ... who despises Catholic moral teaching and whom the Church considers excommunicated ...
  • a hardliner with a get tough policy toward Saudi Arabia ... with a get soft policy toward Iran ...
  • a one-time "staunch opponent" of abortion ... who now speaks at rallies in support of the abortion industry ...
  • a family man ... who stumps in support of same-sex marriages" ...
  • a fiscal conservative ... who wants to cut medical spending while liberally increasing medical coverage ...
  • a faithful husband ... who sees a young blonde on the side after hours ...
  • a good Democrat who wants to increase minimum wage to $7.00/hour ... while jump-starting the economy ...
  • an exemplary citizen of uncommon decency ... who flips the bird at protesters ...
Look: even Garrison Keillor had the sense on his show, Prairie Home Companion, to recently get it right:
  • What is John Kerry's favorite breakfast place?
  • The Waffle House.
  • What did he order?
  • Flip-flop jacks.
CAVEAT SUFFRAGATOR! ("Let the voter beware!")