When the sun set last night, I was dismayed to see that one of my neighbours down in the holler has his Christmas tree up in the front window already. So it begins, even though it's still only November. Got your shopping done yet?
Well wait a minute. Just what "rush" are you about to get into? The "Christmas rush" or the "winter holiday rush"? In the media- and government-approved drive to be politically correct and "celebrate diversity", we're in danger of losing sight of what...or Who...this season is all about.
Here, thanks to Agent 6, is a new Christmas song that you should listen to carefully.
Think about it! We are (or should be) celebrating the birthday of Jesus Christ, the only begotten Son of God and Saviour of those who believe in Him.
HE is what "Christmas" is all about, yet we forget and ignore Him. Not very nice on our part. If you don't think so, imagine how you would feel if your birthday was forgotten, and turned into a mad frenzy of spending and buying. Would you not feel even worse if your birthday was deliberately downplayed, and referred to as just another part of the great year-round multicultural celebration.
This song has a clear message for each and every one of us. Let's see if we can start to turn the tide and get it right this year. Don't forget Whose birthday is commemorated on December 25th. Walt and Ed. wish you a very Merry CHRISTMAS!
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Monday, November 26, 2012
The terrible dilemma of Bishop Fellay
Bishop Bernard Fellay, leader pro tem of the Society of St. Pius X, finds himself on the horns of an intellectual and theological dilemma. On November 1st, Bishop Fellay celebrated Holy Mass -- the Traditional Mass of All Time -- at the SSPX seminary in Ecône, Switzerland.
During his sermon, after recalling the spiritual meaning of the Feast of All Saints, he explained the status of the Society's relations with Rome. Unfortunately for him and for the SSPX, Bishop Fellay's discourse expressed more clearly than ever before why his position and that of his wing of the Society is untenable.
Let's examine the logic:
Premise 1. The magisterium is the authentic judge of Apostolic Tradition. It is the magisterium which tells people what belongs to Tradition and what doesn't.
Bishop Fellay accepts this premise. He accepts that "magisterium" means the pope. But that is not good Catholic teaching. "Magisterium" is a neuter noun. It is an objective thing, not a person. Objectively, Tradition is Tradition. Even the pope cannot change Tradition, as it comes from Christ's Apostles. In 1870 the first Vatican Council proclaimed that even the pope does not have the power to change Sacred Tradition. That is dogma!
Premise 2. The Pope claims that the teachings of the Vatican II Council are "Tradition". Benedict XVI goes on and on about the "hermeneutic of continuity" -- whatever that is -- and asserts over and over again that Vatican II is not a break with the past, but part of Catholic "Tradition".
Bishop Fellay accepts this premise too. Therefore, he and his followers in the SSPX -- there are dissenters, notably Bishop Richard Williamson -- must accept the teachings of the Vatican II Council concerning ecumenism, collegiality, religious liberty, and many other modernistic "doctrines" which are objectively not Catholic.
It follows too that Bishop Fellay and those who stand with him must accept the validity of the Protestant-Masonic-Pagan Novus Ordo worship service -- notice I didn't say "Mass" -- of 1969, as well as the status of those admitted to the priesthood under the New Ordinal.
But... in his sermon, the bishop claims that he can not follow these two conclusions. The problem is that -- logically -- if he accepts the two premises, he must accept their two conclusions. Thus, Bishop Fellay exposes himself as either unable to follow the logic or a hypocrite.
In his sermon, he confesses that he tried to have it both ways, to somehow reconcile the Vatican's position with his previous opposition to it. He penned certain changes denying the conclusions to the Pope's proposed "Doctrinal Preamble". But Benedict himself struck out Bishop Fellay's amendments and returned to him the original document, demanding that the bishop and the SSPX accept it unchanged.
According to the Traditio website, from which the foregoing is adapted, Bishop Fellay could redeem his hypocrisy by rejecting the two conclusions and accepting a different premise, i.e. the premise of the Catholic Fathers and Doctors of the Church that even a pope can be a personal heretic.
St. Paul denounced St. Peter for heresy (Galatians 2:11 et seq.), from which very important example we learn that the faithful must not follow a pope into heresy. But Bishop Fellay rejects that Catholic premise in favor of allowing the Modernists -- led by a thoroughly Modernist pope disguised as a "conservative" -- to occupy and possess the Holy See and the Chair of St. Peter.
Thus (says Traditio), Bishop Fellay has become the Great Hypocrite, and his followers in the Society of St. Pius X follows him into this hypocrisy. What will be the consequences for them of their hypocritical acceptance of heretical principles? St. Matthew 24:51 tells us: "The Lord ... shall separate him, and appoint his portion with the hypocrites. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
Click here to learn more about the limitations of papal authority to change Sacred Tradition, from the writings of Roman Catholic popes, councils, saints, and theologians. The second part of this rather lengthy piece is a list -- an astonishingly long list -- of popes who arguably fell into material (personal) heresy.
Finally, the article speaks of two anti-popes. Particularly à propos is the account of St. Bernard's rejection of the validity of a pope (Anacletus II) who was elected by the majority of cardinals, occupied the See of Rome, and was recognized by the whole world!
During his sermon, after recalling the spiritual meaning of the Feast of All Saints, he explained the status of the Society's relations with Rome. Unfortunately for him and for the SSPX, Bishop Fellay's discourse expressed more clearly than ever before why his position and that of his wing of the Society is untenable.
Let's examine the logic:
Premise 1. The magisterium is the authentic judge of Apostolic Tradition. It is the magisterium which tells people what belongs to Tradition and what doesn't.
Bishop Fellay accepts this premise. He accepts that "magisterium" means the pope. But that is not good Catholic teaching. "Magisterium" is a neuter noun. It is an objective thing, not a person. Objectively, Tradition is Tradition. Even the pope cannot change Tradition, as it comes from Christ's Apostles. In 1870 the first Vatican Council proclaimed that even the pope does not have the power to change Sacred Tradition. That is dogma!
Premise 2. The Pope claims that the teachings of the Vatican II Council are "Tradition". Benedict XVI goes on and on about the "hermeneutic of continuity" -- whatever that is -- and asserts over and over again that Vatican II is not a break with the past, but part of Catholic "Tradition".
Bishop Fellay accepts this premise too. Therefore, he and his followers in the SSPX -- there are dissenters, notably Bishop Richard Williamson -- must accept the teachings of the Vatican II Council concerning ecumenism, collegiality, religious liberty, and many other modernistic "doctrines" which are objectively not Catholic.
It follows too that Bishop Fellay and those who stand with him must accept the validity of the Protestant-Masonic-Pagan Novus Ordo worship service -- notice I didn't say "Mass" -- of 1969, as well as the status of those admitted to the priesthood under the New Ordinal.
But... in his sermon, the bishop claims that he can not follow these two conclusions. The problem is that -- logically -- if he accepts the two premises, he must accept their two conclusions. Thus, Bishop Fellay exposes himself as either unable to follow the logic or a hypocrite.
In his sermon, he confesses that he tried to have it both ways, to somehow reconcile the Vatican's position with his previous opposition to it. He penned certain changes denying the conclusions to the Pope's proposed "Doctrinal Preamble". But Benedict himself struck out Bishop Fellay's amendments and returned to him the original document, demanding that the bishop and the SSPX accept it unchanged.
According to the Traditio website, from which the foregoing is adapted, Bishop Fellay could redeem his hypocrisy by rejecting the two conclusions and accepting a different premise, i.e. the premise of the Catholic Fathers and Doctors of the Church that even a pope can be a personal heretic.
St. Paul denounced St. Peter for heresy (Galatians 2:11 et seq.), from which very important example we learn that the faithful must not follow a pope into heresy. But Bishop Fellay rejects that Catholic premise in favor of allowing the Modernists -- led by a thoroughly Modernist pope disguised as a "conservative" -- to occupy and possess the Holy See and the Chair of St. Peter.
Thus (says Traditio), Bishop Fellay has become the Great Hypocrite, and his followers in the Society of St. Pius X follows him into this hypocrisy. What will be the consequences for them of their hypocritical acceptance of heretical principles? St. Matthew 24:51 tells us: "The Lord ... shall separate him, and appoint his portion with the hypocrites. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
Click here to learn more about the limitations of papal authority to change Sacred Tradition, from the writings of Roman Catholic popes, councils, saints, and theologians. The second part of this rather lengthy piece is a list -- an astonishingly long list -- of popes who arguably fell into material (personal) heresy.
Finally, the article speaks of two anti-popes. Particularly à propos is the account of St. Bernard's rejection of the validity of a pope (Anacletus II) who was elected by the majority of cardinals, occupied the See of Rome, and was recognized by the whole world!
Sunday, November 25, 2012
Overheard at the bar of the Willard Hotel
Eyes now wide with interest, he responds, "No kidding! I got elected on November 8th too. What district are you from?"
Te salutamus, Agentus Sextus. Ed.
Canada to send out for Chinks?
Walt has it on good authority [the so-called National Post, actually. Ed.] that Canada's quasi-Conservative government is actually getting serious about finding an alternative to the sorely troubled F-35 fighter jet by asking rival manufacturers for information about the cost and availability of their planes.
Rona Ambrose, currently being rehabilitated as minister responsible for defence procurement -- could we call her the chief procuress? -- is going to ask Boeing, makers of something called the Superhornet, and the consortium that makes the Eurofighter Typhoon, what their prices are and how soon they can have something painted with maple leafs... Errr, maple leaves. Whichever is red, not blue.
Just looking, you understand. The pricing and availability information request falls short of a formal tender but government sources said the "market analysis" will send a signal to voters and industry that it is taking seriously the Auditor-General's spring report that was heavily critical of the F-35 procurement process.
Today Walt can reveal that real anger seethes inside the icy exterior of Canadian Prime Minister Harpoon. In the middle of the night, a Canuck agent -- we won't even give his number -- has slipped under Walt's cabin door a brown envelope marked "Top Secret Restricted & Confidential". Here's what was inside.
Rona Ambrose, currently being rehabilitated as minister responsible for defence procurement -- could we call her the chief procuress? -- is going to ask Boeing, makers of something called the Superhornet, and the consortium that makes the Eurofighter Typhoon, what their prices are and how soon they can have something painted with maple leafs... Errr, maple leaves. Whichever is red, not blue.
Just looking, you understand. The pricing and availability information request falls short of a formal tender but government sources said the "market analysis" will send a signal to voters and industry that it is taking seriously the Auditor-General's spring report that was heavily critical of the F-35 procurement process.
Today Walt can reveal that real anger seethes inside the icy exterior of Canadian Prime Minister Harpoon. In the middle of the night, a Canuck agent -- we won't even give his number -- has slipped under Walt's cabin door a brown envelope marked "Top Secret Restricted & Confidential". Here's what was inside.
Friday, November 23, 2012
Ontario court jails HIV+ man for unprotected sex
In May of 2011 Walt told you about "You doesn't have to call me Johnson" Aziga, who was convicted of murder by the courts of Ontario for having knowingly infected several women with the HIV/AIDS virus. Two of them died, hence the convictions.
In spite of playing the race card [no surprises there. Ed.] Mr. Aziga was declared a dangerous sexual offender, and is now languishing in a Canadian jail somewhere, at Her Majesty's pleasure, as they say.
Ian Williams is a bit more fortunate. He knows when he's getting out! The 50-year-old Williams was convicted yesterday of having unprotected sex with two women without disclosing his HIV+ status. He was sentenced to six years in the hoosegow -- 3 years for each victim. That's not unreasonable because, see, they didn't die. Yet.
But get this. This week's convictions are not the first for the loathesome Lothario. Williams was previously convicted in 2006 and served a year in jail after two other women reported they were never informed of his HIV positive status when he had unprotected sex with them.
And there's more. A year earlier, his wife died from AIDS. Although his stepdaughter complained to police that her mom had been infected by Williams, he was never charged. This was before the Azinga case set a precedent.
So, as the guys at the track say, Mr. Williams has form. If you were a betting man [unlike Walt. Ed.] you would be tempted to bet on him to repeat, just as soon as he gets out of the gate. After credit for 15 months of pretrial custody, that would be in four years and nine months.
Unless of course the Canadian immigration people are alert enough to deport Mr. William to his native Trinidad. Oh. Didn't I mention that? I knew you'd guess.
In spite of playing the race card [no surprises there. Ed.] Mr. Aziga was declared a dangerous sexual offender, and is now languishing in a Canadian jail somewhere, at Her Majesty's pleasure, as they say.
Ian Williams is a bit more fortunate. He knows when he's getting out! The 50-year-old Williams was convicted yesterday of having unprotected sex with two women without disclosing his HIV+ status. He was sentenced to six years in the hoosegow -- 3 years for each victim. That's not unreasonable because, see, they didn't die. Yet.
But get this. This week's convictions are not the first for the loathesome Lothario. Williams was previously convicted in 2006 and served a year in jail after two other women reported they were never informed of his HIV positive status when he had unprotected sex with them.
And there's more. A year earlier, his wife died from AIDS. Although his stepdaughter complained to police that her mom had been infected by Williams, he was never charged. This was before the Azinga case set a precedent.
So, as the guys at the track say, Mr. Williams has form. If you were a betting man [unlike Walt. Ed.] you would be tempted to bet on him to repeat, just as soon as he gets out of the gate. After credit for 15 months of pretrial custody, that would be in four years and nine months.
Unless of course the Canadian immigration people are alert enough to deport Mr. William to his native Trinidad. Oh. Didn't I mention that? I knew you'd guess.
Thursday, November 22, 2012
Where to find P.J. O'Rourke's best stuff
When I became a man, I put away the things of a child. St. Paul: I Corinthians 13:11
Me too. And one of the childish things I put away -- in a hermetically sealed container under the front porch -- was a complete collection of National Lampoon, right from Number 1 until it went bi-monthly and stopped being funny.
At that time (latter part of the 1970s) the editor of NatLamp was P.J. O'Rourke, possibly the funniest reactionary and humorist of the entire 20th century. (He stopped being funny about the 1st of January 2001, but I've said that before.)
A conservative with a sense of humour is rare but not unique. Walt always admired William F. Buckley Jr. and chuckled at his wry comments, albeit understanding them with the help of Funk and Wagnall. Ron Paul often seems to me to have his tongue stuck firmly in his cheek, although there's always the possibility that he's 100% serious 100% of the time. It's hard to tell.
But the quality O'Rourke stirs into the mix -- a quality seemingly lacking in Buckley and Paul -- is a healthy dose of depravity. In that, P.J. more closely resembles the late great (but not conservative) Hunter S. Thompson, Doctor of Gonzo Journalism.
The resemblance is best seen in what Walt considers O'Rourke's piece: "How to Drive Fast on Drugs While Getting Your Wing-Wang Squeezed and Not Spill Your Drink". Reading it -- even for the umpteenth time -- puts me in mind of my misspent youth. [Last year? Ed.]
So do HST's descriptions, in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, of driving across the desert in the shark, but Thompson's narrative discloses a certain unhealthy depravity, compared with P.J.'s behaviour, which seems to me pretty much normal for a young man of our generation. A judge might disagree with me -- at least one judge has taken serious issue with my views on what's "normal" -- but whether you agree or not, you can't help but LOL at O'Rourke's recipe for a cocktail of hedonistic, reckless fun. A small sample:
Even more important than being drunk, however, is having the right car. You have to get a car that handles really well. This is extremely important, and there's a lot of debate on this subject -- about what kind of car handles best. Some say a front-engined car; some say a rear-engined car. I say a rented car.
Yeah, sure. I can hear all the progressive thinkers say that's totally irresponsible, no social conscience, yada yada yada. But my experience -- and I have had some -- is that you have to go through that verging-on-the-insane phase before you can truly understand the meaning of sanity or even normality. Show me someone who's "normal", and I'll ask him (or her) if he (or she) has always been that way. Chances are the answer will be "Oh no. Back in the day I used to..." Etc.
Hold that thought. What I really wanted to tell you was where -- outside of my complete set of National Lampoons -- to find a selection of P.J. O'Rourke's better articles and essays. Walt recommends Republican Party Reptile (Atlantic Monthly Press, 1987), which contains half a dozen from NatLamp plus a number of pieces which previously appeared in Rolling Stone, House and Garden [Really?! Ed.] and Car and Driver.
One of the C&D items is "High-Speed Performance Characteristics of Pickup Trucks", which all those who have never deviated from "normal" can skip, because you won't understand it. No. Read it so you'll understand those of us who have on occasion broken the confines of conformity.
Footnote: Walt's collection of National Lampoons is for sale. Condition is fine to very fine. If you pay enough I'll throw in the Harvard Lampoon parodies of Time and Life, and the famous High School Yearbook. Exchange of cash and a treasury of humour to be made under the UN flag at the border. E-mail your offer to the usual address.
Me too. And one of the childish things I put away -- in a hermetically sealed container under the front porch -- was a complete collection of National Lampoon, right from Number 1 until it went bi-monthly and stopped being funny.
At that time (latter part of the 1970s) the editor of NatLamp was P.J. O'Rourke, possibly the funniest reactionary and humorist of the entire 20th century. (He stopped being funny about the 1st of January 2001, but I've said that before.)
A conservative with a sense of humour is rare but not unique. Walt always admired William F. Buckley Jr. and chuckled at his wry comments, albeit understanding them with the help of Funk and Wagnall. Ron Paul often seems to me to have his tongue stuck firmly in his cheek, although there's always the possibility that he's 100% serious 100% of the time. It's hard to tell.
But the quality O'Rourke stirs into the mix -- a quality seemingly lacking in Buckley and Paul -- is a healthy dose of depravity. In that, P.J. more closely resembles the late great (but not conservative) Hunter S. Thompson, Doctor of Gonzo Journalism.
The resemblance is best seen in what Walt considers O'Rourke's piece: "How to Drive Fast on Drugs While Getting Your Wing-Wang Squeezed and Not Spill Your Drink". Reading it -- even for the umpteenth time -- puts me in mind of my misspent youth. [Last year? Ed.]
So do HST's descriptions, in Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, of driving across the desert in the shark, but Thompson's narrative discloses a certain unhealthy depravity, compared with P.J.'s behaviour, which seems to me pretty much normal for a young man of our generation. A judge might disagree with me -- at least one judge has taken serious issue with my views on what's "normal" -- but whether you agree or not, you can't help but LOL at O'Rourke's recipe for a cocktail of hedonistic, reckless fun. A small sample:
Even more important than being drunk, however, is having the right car. You have to get a car that handles really well. This is extremely important, and there's a lot of debate on this subject -- about what kind of car handles best. Some say a front-engined car; some say a rear-engined car. I say a rented car.
Yeah, sure. I can hear all the progressive thinkers say that's totally irresponsible, no social conscience, yada yada yada. But my experience -- and I have had some -- is that you have to go through that verging-on-the-insane phase before you can truly understand the meaning of sanity or even normality. Show me someone who's "normal", and I'll ask him (or her) if he (or she) has always been that way. Chances are the answer will be "Oh no. Back in the day I used to..." Etc.
One of the C&D items is "High-Speed Performance Characteristics of Pickup Trucks", which all those who have never deviated from "normal" can skip, because you won't understand it. No. Read it so you'll understand those of us who have on occasion broken the confines of conformity.
Footnote: Walt's collection of National Lampoons is for sale. Condition is fine to very fine. If you pay enough I'll throw in the Harvard Lampoon parodies of Time and Life, and the famous High School Yearbook. Exchange of cash and a treasury of humour to be made under the UN flag at the border. E-mail your offer to the usual address.
Sunday, November 18, 2012
Saturday, November 17, 2012
What if the Mayans were out by a month?
Walt has repaired the rabbit ears so as to be able to watch TV reports from Gaza. Yesterday, in a briefing to Israeli soldiers and reservists, Chief of Staff Lt.-Gen. Benny Gantz said, "We are here tonight on the eve of a possible ground operation. This is not our first time in Gaza."
Indeed. Walt wouldn't be surprised if just after sunset tonight -- when the Sabbath ends -- 1000s of Israeli troops will storm across the border of the Gaza Strip, in search of the Hamas terrorists. If they can't find any terrorists, well, any old (or young) Palestinians or other Arabs will do. Yes folks, we're talking about a real, boots-on-the-ground, shooting war in the Holy Land. Again.
Christians who have read their Bible, and believe in the End Times and the prophecies contained in the Third Secret of Fatima -- still suppressed by the Vatican -- understand that the final battle betweeen Good and Evil will happen at Armageddon: Apocalypse (Revelation) 16:16.
The modern name for the place St. John the Divine was referring to is Megiddo -- a town approximately 25 miles (40 km) west-southwest of the southern tip of the Sea of Galilee in the Kishon River area of Israel.
Which leads Walt to wonder... The Mayan calendar is supposed to end -- meaning the world will end -- on 21/12/12. Right? But suppose the calendar has been misinterpreted. Suppose the actual date is 21/11/12? That would have a nice symmetry to it!
Kind of makes you think, eh. If 21/11/12 is the real date, you'd better head for church this (Saturday) morning, because there's going to be a looooong line at the confessional. Don't say Walt didn't warn you!
Indeed. Walt wouldn't be surprised if just after sunset tonight -- when the Sabbath ends -- 1000s of Israeli troops will storm across the border of the Gaza Strip, in search of the Hamas terrorists. If they can't find any terrorists, well, any old (or young) Palestinians or other Arabs will do. Yes folks, we're talking about a real, boots-on-the-ground, shooting war in the Holy Land. Again.
The modern name for the place St. John the Divine was referring to is Megiddo -- a town approximately 25 miles (40 km) west-southwest of the southern tip of the Sea of Galilee in the Kishon River area of Israel.
Which leads Walt to wonder... The Mayan calendar is supposed to end -- meaning the world will end -- on 21/12/12. Right? But suppose the calendar has been misinterpreted. Suppose the actual date is 21/11/12? That would have a nice symmetry to it!
Kind of makes you think, eh. If 21/11/12 is the real date, you'd better head for church this (Saturday) morning, because there's going to be a looooong line at the confessional. Don't say Walt didn't warn you!
Thursday, November 15, 2012
How a priest got a hair dryer through customs
In Catholic schools, students were taught that lying is a sin. At least that's the way it used to be. Nowadays, who knows? But I digress... Instruction was also given that to avoid the sin of lying, one could be -- shall we say -- a bit creative with the truth. Here's an example of how a priest might have done so.
An attractive young woman on a flight from Ireland asked the Priest beside her, "Father, may I ask a favour?'"
"Of course child, said Father O'Malley. "What may I do for you?"
"Well," said the girl, "I bought my mother an expensive hair dryer for her birthday. It is unopened but well over the Customs limits and I'm afraid they'll confiscate it. Is there any way you could carry it through customs for me? Hide it under your cassock perhaps?"
"I would love to help you," said the priest, "but I must warn you, I will not lie."
"With your honest face, Father, no one will question you," replied the damsel.
When they got to Customs, she let the priest go first. The officer asked, "Father, do you have anything to declare?"
Answered the priest, "From the top of my head down to my waist, I have nothing to declare."
The customs inspector thought this answer strange, so asked, "And what do you have to declare from your waist down to the floor?"
"I have a marvellous instrument designed to be used on a woman, but which is, to date, unused."
Roaring with laughter, the officer said, "Go ahead, Father. Next!"
Thanks and a tip o' me hat to Agent 6.
An attractive young woman on a flight from Ireland asked the Priest beside her, "Father, may I ask a favour?'"
"Of course child, said Father O'Malley. "What may I do for you?"
"Well," said the girl, "I bought my mother an expensive hair dryer for her birthday. It is unopened but well over the Customs limits and I'm afraid they'll confiscate it. Is there any way you could carry it through customs for me? Hide it under your cassock perhaps?"
"I would love to help you," said the priest, "but I must warn you, I will not lie."
"With your honest face, Father, no one will question you," replied the damsel.
When they got to Customs, she let the priest go first. The officer asked, "Father, do you have anything to declare?"
Answered the priest, "From the top of my head down to my waist, I have nothing to declare."
The customs inspector thought this answer strange, so asked, "And what do you have to declare from your waist down to the floor?"
"I have a marvellous instrument designed to be used on a woman, but which is, to date, unused."
Roaring with laughter, the officer said, "Go ahead, Father. Next!"
Thanks and a tip o' me hat to Agent 6.
What happens if 50 states secede?
On Monday Walt asked, "Will petitions for secession succeed?" That post has drawn a higher-than-usual number of hits, and it appears some of you have followed through by signing one (or more) of the petitions open at the White House website We The People.
Not that we're taking all the credit [certainly not! Ed.] but the number of states for which petitions have been lodged has increased from 21, as of Monday, to... Wait for it... 50. Yep, the big 5-0.
The secession petition push began on November 7th, when a disgruntled voter from Slidell LA [That would be Louisiana, not Los Angeles. Ed.] filed a petition requesting that his state be allowed to secede from the Disunited States. Peacefully, of course, as provided for in the Constitution.
Residents of other states were quick to jump onto the bandwagon, or the last train out of Union Station, if you like. So what happens next? Well, to require a response from the White House (or its current occupant), the signatures of 25,000 people are required.
As of 24 hours ago, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas had reached the threshold. (Texas leads the pack with over 110,000 signatures as I write.) Since all those states voted for the Not-so-inevitable Mitt, that's about what you'd expect. But the petition for Florida has also accumulated the necessary number.
A petition for a recount of the entire election has over has nearly 60,000 signatures, and a petition to impeach the Prez is closing on 30,000. Just noticed, too, petitions that El Paso and Austin be allowed to secede from Texas! Presumably if TX withdraws from the USA, and El Paso and Austin withdraw from TX, those cities would remain part of the USA? This could get confusing!
Before you break out your state flags [or Confederate flags! Ed.] And get your Confederate money or gold coins out from under the mattress, let's bear in mind that these petitions are nothing new. Similar petitions were started in 2004 and 2008, and what came of it. All that's required of Hussesin Obama is a response, and that response could well be "Nyah nyah na nyah nah!"
Not that we're taking all the credit [certainly not! Ed.] but the number of states for which petitions have been lodged has increased from 21, as of Monday, to... Wait for it... 50. Yep, the big 5-0.
The secession petition push began on November 7th, when a disgruntled voter from Slidell LA [That would be Louisiana, not Los Angeles. Ed.] filed a petition requesting that his state be allowed to secede from the Disunited States. Peacefully, of course, as provided for in the Constitution.
Residents of other states were quick to jump onto the bandwagon, or the last train out of Union Station, if you like. So what happens next? Well, to require a response from the White House (or its current occupant), the signatures of 25,000 people are required.
As of 24 hours ago, Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, North Carolina, Tennessee and Texas had reached the threshold. (Texas leads the pack with over 110,000 signatures as I write.) Since all those states voted for the Not-so-inevitable Mitt, that's about what you'd expect. But the petition for Florida has also accumulated the necessary number.
A petition for a recount of the entire election has over has nearly 60,000 signatures, and a petition to impeach the Prez is closing on 30,000. Just noticed, too, petitions that El Paso and Austin be allowed to secede from Texas! Presumably if TX withdraws from the USA, and El Paso and Austin withdraw from TX, those cities would remain part of the USA? This could get confusing!
Before you break out your state flags [or Confederate flags! Ed.] And get your Confederate money or gold coins out from under the mattress, let's bear in mind that these petitions are nothing new. Similar petitions were started in 2004 and 2008, and what came of it. All that's required of Hussesin Obama is a response, and that response could well be "Nyah nyah na nyah nah!"
Wednesday, November 14, 2012
US Catholics worshipping Mother Nature or Mother of God?
As if the USCCB (United States Congress of Catholic Bishops) didn't have enough to do -- defending the Faith against the godless Democrats and their (possibly) Muslim leader -- they took a break last week to hold a conference on "the moral and religious implications of global climate change and environmental justice". I'm not making this up.
The anonymous writer of the Traditio website comments: When your New Order sect is drowning in the worst immorality, when your New Order doctrine has become worse than Protestant, when your New Order Sunday service has become some kind of irreligious and invalid "rave," what do you do?... Solution: give up religion and go into politics!
Walt agrees. Nothing deterred by nearly empty seminaries, mere scores of worshippers attending dumbed-down masses, and the phenomenon of Catholics voting to elect a president hell-bent -- literally! -- on destroying Christianity, the Church's "leaders" are embracing the "New Age" religion of environmentalism and its goddess, Mother Earth.
Traditio suggests, with tongue (or pen) planted firmly in cheek, that the Catholic bishops propose to rewrite Our Lord's Sermon on the Mount, as follows:
Blessed are the environmentalists, for they shall save your soul.
Blessed are the carbon credits, for they shall save the world.
Blessed are the those who drive the Volt, for they shall be electrified.
Blessed are those who carpool, for they shall speed to salvation.
Blessed are they who ride the bus, for they shall inhale spiritual diesel.
Blessed are they who freeze in winter, because they shall become one with the icebergs.
Blessed are they who phony up scientific data, because they shall receive a Nobel Prize.
Blessed are they who worship the Environmental Protection Agency, for they shall have the hand of justice imposed upon them.
And Walt can add a new motto for the mainstream American Catholic Church. The motto has to be in English, of course, because even one of the most powerful bishops in the USA -- Cardinal Timmy Dolan -- stated publicly that he can't understand Latin [God's language. Ed.]. Anyway, here's the motto: Never mind your souls; save the whales!
The anonymous writer of the Traditio website comments: When your New Order sect is drowning in the worst immorality, when your New Order doctrine has become worse than Protestant, when your New Order Sunday service has become some kind of irreligious and invalid "rave," what do you do?... Solution: give up religion and go into politics!
Walt agrees. Nothing deterred by nearly empty seminaries, mere scores of worshippers attending dumbed-down masses, and the phenomenon of Catholics voting to elect a president hell-bent -- literally! -- on destroying Christianity, the Church's "leaders" are embracing the "New Age" religion of environmentalism and its goddess, Mother Earth.
Traditio suggests, with tongue (or pen) planted firmly in cheek, that the Catholic bishops propose to rewrite Our Lord's Sermon on the Mount, as follows:
Blessed are the environmentalists, for they shall save your soul.
Blessed are the carbon credits, for they shall save the world.
Blessed are the those who drive the Volt, for they shall be electrified.
Blessed are those who carpool, for they shall speed to salvation.
Blessed are they who ride the bus, for they shall inhale spiritual diesel.
Blessed are they who freeze in winter, because they shall become one with the icebergs.
Blessed are they who phony up scientific data, because they shall receive a Nobel Prize.
Blessed are they who worship the Environmental Protection Agency, for they shall have the hand of justice imposed upon them.
And Walt can add a new motto for the mainstream American Catholic Church. The motto has to be in English, of course, because even one of the most powerful bishops in the USA -- Cardinal Timmy Dolan -- stated publicly that he can't understand Latin [God's language. Ed.]. Anyway, here's the motto: Never mind your souls; save the whales!
Americans still nibbling on the cheese in the mousetrap
"You only find free cheese in a mousetrap" is one translation of what is said to be an old Russian proverb (although Walt has seen it described as Portuguese too). It means if someone offers you some cheese or other bait, free, you're likely in for a painful snap if you bite. The American version is "There ain't no free lunch."The point is made in "Free cheese can only be found in a mousetrap", which appeared in the Collision of Church and State blog on November 2nd. It was picked up on the same day by The People's Cube, a decidedly right-wing and decidedly funny blog -- decided worth a look.
The blog post purports to be "a letter to the local paper from a woman in my town. Even though she made this a public letter that was published by our newspaper, I am not posting her name. We live in a very small town and to respect her privacy I will just post her warning to the American people."
The woman whose name the writer declines to reveal -- even though her letter was supposedly published, presumably with name attached -- says she grew up in the old Soviet Union, where she ate the "free cheese" -- free food, free housing, free education, free health care. And, she says, there was "no need to sweat for it".
"You did not lack food," the letter continues. "You had bed and roof, you had books and entertainments. You actually could do many things on your own. Except that you didn't have choices or freedoms. Also, if you said something bad about...the administration, you would be punished. You had to live according the...rules to be safe.... Actually, we were even happy. We didn't know different.
"We did not know that we were not free, because we didn't know what freedom really was; we were raised brainwashed by school and mass media. We presumed that we were free because we were told so."
The "letter" was published, the bloggers say, as a warning to the American people not to take the bait -- the free cheese -- offered by Hussein Obama, lest they feel the snap of enslavement to an all-powerful state. Seems as if 50% [not just 47%. Ed.] like mousetrap cheese. Will it still taste good after another four years?
Footnote from Ed.: I've searched all over the Internet for the original letter as described by the Blogger, but came up with nothing. On the other hand, Snopes doesn't have anything to suggest it's a hoax. I suspect it's an updated version of an anti-Communist diatribe from the Cold War era. The point is valid though. Thanks to Agent 6 for passing this along.
Monday, November 12, 2012
Will petitions for secession succeed?
About this time 150 years ago, tens of thousands of Americans were fighting to get their states out of the Union. In part this was because they resented having the central government in Washington impose on them its policies of social engineering. Many thought President Lincoln's plans would lead inevitably to the mongrelization and decline of American society.
Well, the Federals prevailed, the slaves were emancipated, everyone became "equal" -- somewhat later, you understand -- and American society became the best on earth. Or not, depending on your point of view.
It took 143 years for Americans to elect a (somewhat) black president, the one who just got re-elected with the support of just a hair above half of those who voted. The rest -- a hair under half of those who voted -- don't seem to be taking it to well.
Should the disaffected minority take up arms to leave the Disunited States? Certainly lot. It wouldn't go any more good now than it did in 1861. Besides, the Supreme Court ruled unilateral secession unconstitutional.
So all you good ole boys can put your muskets away. However, America being the democracy that it is, you can still exercise your democratic right to petition for rederess. In fact, the Formerly White House has set up a website to accommodate your online petitions, including, if you so wish, petitions to secede from the union.
Well, guess what? Within a week of Al O'Bama's re-election, citizens from no fewer than twenty-one -- count `em, 21 -- states have filed petitions asking to secede from the United States.
The rule is that if you get 25,000 signatures or more, the White House has to respond to your petition. [Does "Chuck you, Farley!" count as a response? Ed.] Louisiana was first, posting its request on November 7th. It was joined by Texas on November 9th. There are 14,879 signatures on the LA petition as I write, and 22,375 on that of Texas.
Similar petitions from Alabama, Tennessee, and Oregon [Oregon? Really? Ed.] are also gaining traction, with each receiving thousands of supporters over the weekend alone. Other states trying to secede include Florida, Arkansas, South Carolina, Missouri, Kentucky, Colorado, New Jersey, Montana, North Dakota, Indiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Alabama, Michigan, Georgia and New Jersey [Shome mishtake, shurely! Ed.].
All the petitions quote a passage from the Declaration of Independence, which says: "Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and institute new Government."
To sign one of the petitions, or post your own, go to "We the People". Let's see what happens.
Well, the Federals prevailed, the slaves were emancipated, everyone became "equal" -- somewhat later, you understand -- and American society became the best on earth. Or not, depending on your point of view.
It took 143 years for Americans to elect a (somewhat) black president, the one who just got re-elected with the support of just a hair above half of those who voted. The rest -- a hair under half of those who voted -- don't seem to be taking it to well.
Should the disaffected minority take up arms to leave the Disunited States? Certainly lot. It wouldn't go any more good now than it did in 1861. Besides, the Supreme Court ruled unilateral secession unconstitutional.
So all you good ole boys can put your muskets away. However, America being the democracy that it is, you can still exercise your democratic right to petition for rederess. In fact, the Formerly White House has set up a website to accommodate your online petitions, including, if you so wish, petitions to secede from the union.
Well, guess what? Within a week of Al O'Bama's re-election, citizens from no fewer than twenty-one -- count `em, 21 -- states have filed petitions asking to secede from the United States.
The rule is that if you get 25,000 signatures or more, the White House has to respond to your petition. [Does "Chuck you, Farley!" count as a response? Ed.] Louisiana was first, posting its request on November 7th. It was joined by Texas on November 9th. There are 14,879 signatures on the LA petition as I write, and 22,375 on that of Texas.
Similar petitions from Alabama, Tennessee, and Oregon [Oregon? Really? Ed.] are also gaining traction, with each receiving thousands of supporters over the weekend alone. Other states trying to secede include Florida, Arkansas, South Carolina, Missouri, Kentucky, Colorado, New Jersey, Montana, North Dakota, Indiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Alabama, Michigan, Georgia and New Jersey [Shome mishtake, shurely! Ed.].
All the petitions quote a passage from the Declaration of Independence, which says: "Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and institute new Government."
To sign one of the petitions, or post your own, go to "We the People". Let's see what happens.
Sunday, November 11, 2012
Muslim wife-killer convicted
It took them the better part of the weekend, but the jury in the Toronto murder trial of Peer Khairi has come back with a verdict. They have found the Afghan Muslim immigrant guilty of second-degree murder in the near beheading and repeated stabbing of his wife. Apparently the defence of "resettlement stress" -- not making that up -- didn't wash with the jury of Peer's peers. [Couldn't resist it, could you. Ed.]
Khairi returns to the Ontario Superior Court on Tuesday for sentencing. He will automatically get life. The only question is how long he must serve before being eligible to apply for parole. The waiting time could be anywhere from 10 to 25 years.
Is deportation an option? Of course not. Canadians are famously tolerant of immigrants and their foreign cultures and religions, no matter how barbaric. So Khairi will continue to be a Canadian resident -- at taxpayers' continuing expense, of course -- for another decade, and likely longer.
Khairi returns to the Ontario Superior Court on Tuesday for sentencing. He will automatically get life. The only question is how long he must serve before being eligible to apply for parole. The waiting time could be anywhere from 10 to 25 years.
Is deportation an option? Of course not. Canadians are famously tolerant of immigrants and their foreign cultures and religions, no matter how barbaric. So Khairi will continue to be a Canadian resident -- at taxpayers' continuing expense, of course -- for another decade, and likely longer.
Saturday, November 10, 2012
November 11th - a day to remember
Some call it by its old name: Armistice Day. Others call it Remembrance Day. Still others know it only as November 11th. No matter what you call it, November 11th is, or should be more than just a date. It's a day to remember those who gave their lives for our countries in a number of wars.
The exact number of wars is debatable. Depends which country you're talking about, and who's counting. But they were all "good wars"... "just wars"... right? They all needed to be fought, right? To preserve freedom and democracy and equality and all those other Good Things. Right? Maybe it's all debatable.
The "Armistice" in Armistice Day refers to the truce proclaimed on the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month of 1918 -- the armistice that ended the Great War, the war that would end all wars. But, as "The Ballad of Willie McBride" says, it all happened again... And again... And again.
It all happened before, too. Remembrance Day 2012 is close enough to being the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Queenston Heights, fought on the west side of the Niagara River near the beginning of the War of 1812. One side was fighting for freedom and democracy. The other side was fighting for, errr, freedom and democracy.
Remembrance Day 2012 is also about seven weeks past the 150th anniversary of the Battle of Antietam, in which more Americans died than in any other single engagement in any other war... ever. 12,000 Union troops died that day, as did 10,500 Confederate soldiers. They were all fighting for freedom and democracy. They just had different ideas of what those words meant.
The Battle of Antietam preceded by not quite three months the Battle of Fredericksburg, which was just about as bloody. As they surveyed the carnage, General Robert E. Lee said to General James Longstreet, "It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we should grow too fond of it."
But it seems we have grown too fond of it. Perhaps it's because advances in technology have reduced the body counts. On "our side", at least. Or maybe it's the advances in medicine and hygiene which means that, nowadays, more soldiers and sailors and airmen die of wounds than of disease and starvation.
Whatever it is, we seem to scarcely finish one war before starting another. Sometimes we don't even wait for the first war to end, so we can fight two or three or four wars all at the same time. All for freedom, democracy, equality, human rights, and generally to make the world a better place. For "our side", at least.
Not all of the thousands upon thousands who died fighting our "good wars" did so for the sake of freedom and all that. Some of them did, sure, but some of them died because they obeyed orders and went unflinchingly to the death to which they were sent. It is those men and women -- the ones who didn't want to be there and shouldn't have been there in the first place -- whom Walt wishes to remember today.
Footnote: If you've never heard "The Ballad of Willie McBride", also known as "No Man's Land" or "The Green Fields of France", click here. This version, by John McDermott, is the best.
The exact number of wars is debatable. Depends which country you're talking about, and who's counting. But they were all "good wars"... "just wars"... right? They all needed to be fought, right? To preserve freedom and democracy and equality and all those other Good Things. Right? Maybe it's all debatable.
The "Armistice" in Armistice Day refers to the truce proclaimed on the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month of 1918 -- the armistice that ended the Great War, the war that would end all wars. But, as "The Ballad of Willie McBride" says, it all happened again... And again... And again.
It all happened before, too. Remembrance Day 2012 is close enough to being the 200th anniversary of the Battle of Queenston Heights, fought on the west side of the Niagara River near the beginning of the War of 1812. One side was fighting for freedom and democracy. The other side was fighting for, errr, freedom and democracy.
Remembrance Day 2012 is also about seven weeks past the 150th anniversary of the Battle of Antietam, in which more Americans died than in any other single engagement in any other war... ever. 12,000 Union troops died that day, as did 10,500 Confederate soldiers. They were all fighting for freedom and democracy. They just had different ideas of what those words meant.
The Battle of Antietam preceded by not quite three months the Battle of Fredericksburg, which was just about as bloody. As they surveyed the carnage, General Robert E. Lee said to General James Longstreet, "It is well that war is so terrible, otherwise we should grow too fond of it."
But it seems we have grown too fond of it. Perhaps it's because advances in technology have reduced the body counts. On "our side", at least. Or maybe it's the advances in medicine and hygiene which means that, nowadays, more soldiers and sailors and airmen die of wounds than of disease and starvation.
Whatever it is, we seem to scarcely finish one war before starting another. Sometimes we don't even wait for the first war to end, so we can fight two or three or four wars all at the same time. All for freedom, democracy, equality, human rights, and generally to make the world a better place. For "our side", at least.
Not all of the thousands upon thousands who died fighting our "good wars" did so for the sake of freedom and all that. Some of them did, sure, but some of them died because they obeyed orders and went unflinchingly to the death to which they were sent. It is those men and women -- the ones who didn't want to be there and shouldn't have been there in the first place -- whom Walt wishes to remember today.
Footnote: If you've never heard "The Ballad of Willie McBride", also known as "No Man's Land" or "The Green Fields of France", click here. This version, by John McDermott, is the best.
Friday, November 9, 2012
How judicial inquiries work
In the UK and Canada, the accepted way to "deal with" a scandal which is having unpleasant political repercussions is to hold a judicial inquiry or a royal commission. Here's how it works. You find an "unbiased" (but compliant) judge -- a retired judge verging on senility perhaps -- and give him terms of reference that effectively take away his fishing pole. That is, you restrict him from poking too deeply into the dirt at the heart of the matter.
A paradigm of futility would be Canada's famous White Oliphant commission, a topic Walt harped on [wrote on, surely. Ed.] back in 2010. The real scandal was the money that former Prime Minister Lyin' Brian Mullarkey received from Airbus Industries for his part in getting Air Canada (then a crown corporation) to buy a substantial number of its A320 aircraft.
However, the commissioner, Mr Justice Oliphant (retd), was told he was to enquire only into whether Baloney had had any business dealings while he was still prime minister with Karlheinz Schreiber, an oleaginous German-Canadian dealer in armored cars, spaghetti machines and what have you. It was Schreiber who gave the Jaw That Walks Like A Man brown envelopes full of 1000-dollar bills, which the Jaw stashed away and, errr, forgot about until the Mounties started investigating, errr, Schreiber.
The other thing you do, to make sure an inquiry or commission does no harm to anyone, is to deny it the power to punish anyone. It can make findings, and even recommendations, but don't let it initiate criminal proceedings or actually punish anyone or order anyone to do anything. Walt finds that this is ridiculous and recommends that future commissions actually be provided with a few teeth.
Fast forward three years and change location to London, where the British government and its broadcasting arm, the British Broadcorping Castration [British Broadcasting Corporation! Ed.] are up to their nether regions in shit over hundreds of sex crimes which (an independent broadcaster has revealed) were committed by the famous comedian and notorious paedophile, Sir Jimmy Savile.
"Sir Jimmy" got his knighthood from Her Britannic Majesty, by the way, and a similar honour from the late Unblessed Pope John Paul II. Embarrassingly for the Queen and the Vatican, the honours cannot somehow be taken back, since the old bugger mercifully died some months before his delicts came to light.
This week, Brits have been shocked [Shocked, I tell you! Ed.] by more claims of sexual abuse, this time by a senior politician of the Thatcher era. On the BBC's Newsnight programme, a young man said he had been abused by an unnamed politician -- not Lord McAlpine -- at the Bryn Estyn children's home in Wales.
The response of the British government to the latest wave of sex abuse allegations has been altogether predictable. On Tuesday, Home Secretary Theresa May announced a new police inquiry is to investigate fresh allegations into the way police handled child abuse accusations in care homes during the 1970s and 80s.
And -- get this! -- there will also be a judicial inquiry into the failings of previous judicial inquiries. Amazing, isn't it?
Further lurid details: Wales child abuse: PM orders sex abuse inquiry probe
Footnote: The legal beagle who drew the terms of reference for the useless Oliphant commission duly received his reward from a grateful Conservative government. He is now the Governor-General of Canada.
Forgotten the Oliphant commission already? See "The Oliphant labours, and brings forth...nothing" and "The Oliphant hath laboured...". [Some lack of originality in the second headline. But that was back in 2010. We're doing better now...aren't we? Ed.]
A paradigm of futility would be Canada's famous White Oliphant commission, a topic Walt harped on [wrote on, surely. Ed.] back in 2010. The real scandal was the money that former Prime Minister Lyin' Brian Mullarkey received from Airbus Industries for his part in getting Air Canada (then a crown corporation) to buy a substantial number of its A320 aircraft.
However, the commissioner, Mr Justice Oliphant (retd), was told he was to enquire only into whether Baloney had had any business dealings while he was still prime minister with Karlheinz Schreiber, an oleaginous German-Canadian dealer in armored cars, spaghetti machines and what have you. It was Schreiber who gave the Jaw That Walks Like A Man brown envelopes full of 1000-dollar bills, which the Jaw stashed away and, errr, forgot about until the Mounties started investigating, errr, Schreiber.
The other thing you do, to make sure an inquiry or commission does no harm to anyone, is to deny it the power to punish anyone. It can make findings, and even recommendations, but don't let it initiate criminal proceedings or actually punish anyone or order anyone to do anything. Walt finds that this is ridiculous and recommends that future commissions actually be provided with a few teeth.
Fast forward three years and change location to London, where the British government and its broadcasting arm, the British Broadcorping Castration [British Broadcasting Corporation! Ed.] are up to their nether regions in shit over hundreds of sex crimes which (an independent broadcaster has revealed) were committed by the famous comedian and notorious paedophile, Sir Jimmy Savile.
"Sir Jimmy" got his knighthood from Her Britannic Majesty, by the way, and a similar honour from the late Unblessed Pope John Paul II. Embarrassingly for the Queen and the Vatican, the honours cannot somehow be taken back, since the old bugger mercifully died some months before his delicts came to light.
This week, Brits have been shocked [Shocked, I tell you! Ed.] by more claims of sexual abuse, this time by a senior politician of the Thatcher era. On the BBC's Newsnight programme, a young man said he had been abused by an unnamed politician -- not Lord McAlpine -- at the Bryn Estyn children's home in Wales.
The response of the British government to the latest wave of sex abuse allegations has been altogether predictable. On Tuesday, Home Secretary Theresa May announced a new police inquiry is to investigate fresh allegations into the way police handled child abuse accusations in care homes during the 1970s and 80s.
And -- get this! -- there will also be a judicial inquiry into the failings of previous judicial inquiries. Amazing, isn't it?
Further lurid details: Wales child abuse: PM orders sex abuse inquiry probe
Footnote: The legal beagle who drew the terms of reference for the useless Oliphant commission duly received his reward from a grateful Conservative government. He is now the Governor-General of Canada.
Forgotten the Oliphant commission already? See "The Oliphant labours, and brings forth...nothing" and "The Oliphant hath laboured...". [Some lack of originality in the second headline. But that was back in 2010. We're doing better now...aren't we? Ed.]
Thursday, November 8, 2012
What the hell happened to hockey?! (Reprise)
Walt gets angrier by the day at the elfin Gary Bettman, American head of the "National" Hockey League, the one who has presided over -- and been largely responsible for -- the decline and near demise of the world's greatest sport.
Attention was first called to Bettman's follies in The Death of Hockey, by Jeff Z. Klein and Karl-Eric Reif (Macmillan Canada 1998). [It should be noted that in spite of the Canadian publishing imprint, Messrs Klein and Reif are Buffalonians or Buffaloites or whatever denizens of Buffalo are called. Ed.]
Their book followed on the NHL lockout of 1994-5, which resulted in a shortened season. But it preceded the lockout of 2004-5, which caused the loss of an entire season. 2005 marked the first time the Stanley Cup was not competed for since the great flu epidemic of 1919. Here's Canuck comedian Rick Mercer's analysis.
But that's history, eh. Why bring it up now? Because with Bitchman, as in all of life, history repeats itself. Apparently not satisfied with having failed to destroy the NHL in two attempts, (to the benefit of the NBA from whence he came), the mighty midget has caused yet another lockout this year -- the third on his watch. The comments of Messrs Klein, Reif and Mercer are as trenchant today as they were when first published.
Want another opionion? Try this one: NHL Lockout: Work Stoppage Makes Gary Bettman Worst Commissioner in US [sic] Sports
And don't forget Walt's post of a few days ago: Hockey lovers should throw pucks at Bettman until he goes to hell or the NBA. So it has been written. Now let it be done!
Attention was first called to Bettman's follies in The Death of Hockey, by Jeff Z. Klein and Karl-Eric Reif (Macmillan Canada 1998). [It should be noted that in spite of the Canadian publishing imprint, Messrs Klein and Reif are Buffalonians or Buffaloites or whatever denizens of Buffalo are called. Ed.]
Their book followed on the NHL lockout of 1994-5, which resulted in a shortened season. But it preceded the lockout of 2004-5, which caused the loss of an entire season. 2005 marked the first time the Stanley Cup was not competed for since the great flu epidemic of 1919. Here's Canuck comedian Rick Mercer's analysis.
But that's history, eh. Why bring it up now? Because with Bitchman, as in all of life, history repeats itself. Apparently not satisfied with having failed to destroy the NHL in two attempts, (to the benefit of the NBA from whence he came), the mighty midget has caused yet another lockout this year -- the third on his watch. The comments of Messrs Klein, Reif and Mercer are as trenchant today as they were when first published.
Want another opionion? Try this one: NHL Lockout: Work Stoppage Makes Gary Bettman Worst Commissioner in US [sic] Sports
And don't forget Walt's post of a few days ago: Hockey lovers should throw pucks at Bettman until he goes to hell or the NBA. So it has been written. Now let it be done!
"Culture clash" an excuse for murder? Maybe in Canada
Walt expressed puzzlement, a couple of days ago, about what had happened in the Toronto murder trial of Peer Khairi, the Afghan-by-way-of-India immigrant who admittedly slashed his wife's throat so deeply that he just about cut through her spine. Agent 3, our "honour crime" reporter [as distinct from "honoured crime reporter" Ed.] has come through with an update.
Turns out that although the evidence was in, and closing submissions made by the crown and defence attorneys last week, the jury got a couple of days off, following which one member was excused for "persistent illness". Perhaps the horrific details of the crime made him sick. Anyway, they are starting deliberations this morning.
Their choice is between premeditated murder and manslaughter, so the key issue is not whether Khairi killed his wife -- that's admitted -- but what was in his mind [if anything. Ed.] when he did it.
In his closing address to the jury, Khairi's defender called for a manslaughter conviction, arguing that his client's mind was "clouded by mental illness" and "incapable of forming murderous intent".
The Crown, however, puts the whole ugly case down to culture clash, beginning when the family, originally from Afghanistan, were allowed to enter Canada in 2003, despite having been settled in India for more than a decade in India. Once a refugee, always a refugee?
Whether he was a refugee or an immigrant, Mr. Khairi was certainly one angry Muslim. The picture painted at the trial was of a man enraged at his wife's newfound desire for equal rights and her support for their children's increasingly Westernized behaviour, including late-night dates and non-Muslim dress.
"What Peer Khairi intended to do that day was crystal clear," said the Crown attorney. "He intended to kill the wife who had defied him, to kill the wife who was responsible for his children turning against his wishes, to kill the woman who had decided to leave him."
The defence takes a markedly different view. Khairi just lost control for a moment, his lawyer said. (Long enough, though, to pick up not one but two knives, says Agent 3.)
The defence attorney says if jurors can only remain "rational and dispassionate," they will see Mr. Khairi as a pathetic old man: "Not a dominating figure seeking to impose his will and values on his wife and six children, but in reality, a sad, even pathetic figure — an elderly man, an immigrant, alone and friendless, completely illiterate, of low-to-moderate intelligence at best; isolated by a total inability to master the English language and with few marketable skills, unable to obtain employment and to support his family as he had always done in the past."
In other words, your typical (if not ideal) refugee. And let not other prospective refugees ["immigrants", surely! Ed.] worry. Canadians believe in multiculturalism, tolerance and celebrating diversity. You are welcome to cling to your religious beliefs and cultural traditions, no matter how irrational and barbaric they may be. As for clashing with Canadian culture... What culture would that be?!
Turns out that although the evidence was in, and closing submissions made by the crown and defence attorneys last week, the jury got a couple of days off, following which one member was excused for "persistent illness". Perhaps the horrific details of the crime made him sick. Anyway, they are starting deliberations this morning.
Their choice is between premeditated murder and manslaughter, so the key issue is not whether Khairi killed his wife -- that's admitted -- but what was in his mind [if anything. Ed.] when he did it.
In his closing address to the jury, Khairi's defender called for a manslaughter conviction, arguing that his client's mind was "clouded by mental illness" and "incapable of forming murderous intent".
The Crown, however, puts the whole ugly case down to culture clash, beginning when the family, originally from Afghanistan, were allowed to enter Canada in 2003, despite having been settled in India for more than a decade in India. Once a refugee, always a refugee?
Whether he was a refugee or an immigrant, Mr. Khairi was certainly one angry Muslim. The picture painted at the trial was of a man enraged at his wife's newfound desire for equal rights and her support for their children's increasingly Westernized behaviour, including late-night dates and non-Muslim dress.
"What Peer Khairi intended to do that day was crystal clear," said the Crown attorney. "He intended to kill the wife who had defied him, to kill the wife who was responsible for his children turning against his wishes, to kill the woman who had decided to leave him."
The defence takes a markedly different view. Khairi just lost control for a moment, his lawyer said. (Long enough, though, to pick up not one but two knives, says Agent 3.)
The defence attorney says if jurors can only remain "rational and dispassionate," they will see Mr. Khairi as a pathetic old man: "Not a dominating figure seeking to impose his will and values on his wife and six children, but in reality, a sad, even pathetic figure — an elderly man, an immigrant, alone and friendless, completely illiterate, of low-to-moderate intelligence at best; isolated by a total inability to master the English language and with few marketable skills, unable to obtain employment and to support his family as he had always done in the past."
In other words, your typical (if not ideal) refugee. And let not other prospective refugees ["immigrants", surely! Ed.] worry. Canadians believe in multiculturalism, tolerance and celebrating diversity. You are welcome to cling to your religious beliefs and cultural traditions, no matter how irrational and barbaric they may be. As for clashing with Canadian culture... What culture would that be?!
Wednesday, November 7, 2012
For the record
Walt called Obama to win in the electoral college but lose the popular vote in a close one. One right, one wrong...only just... Lifetime pct .988.
If anyone knows why Florida has such trouble with "the democracy thing", could they please let me know?
If anyone knows why Florida has such trouble with "the democracy thing", could they please let me know?
Aux E-U, plus ça change...
Ed again. Here's what I can read of the scribblings on the scraps of foolscap littering Walt's floor. I've made no attempt to put them in order or otherwise make them coherent.
Four more years, four more years... Exactly! $6 billion later and we're in for four more years of the same! Dysfunctional Congress + drifting "leadership" = gridlock.
What policies will Obama follow? He didn't say. What about Mitt's 5-pt plan? During the "debates" Mrs Walt kept asking "How? How? How?" But she's not an Indian!
"Triumph of moderation" one of the liberal nitwit pundits is saying. Bullshit. Triumph of multiculturalism is more like it. White, straight, (practising) Christian males now a minority. Triumph of mongrelization, of which the Prez is the living image! Hm, mongrelization? Didn't someone predict that about 50 years ago? Look up "White Citizens Council". And lo, it has come to pass.
Could Ron Paul have won? Two chances, see above!
Last 3 presidents have all been re-elected. Why not just have one 8-year term and be done with it? $6 billion weak bucks down the drain and for what...
God rot the pandering politicians, the lot of them. God save the United States of America and this honourable court...
Here the script becomes illegible. If I can decipher more of it, I'll be back. Ed.
Four more years, four more years... Exactly! $6 billion later and we're in for four more years of the same! Dysfunctional Congress + drifting "leadership" = gridlock.
What policies will Obama follow? He didn't say. What about Mitt's 5-pt plan? During the "debates" Mrs Walt kept asking "How? How? How?" But she's not an Indian!
"Triumph of moderation" one of the liberal nitwit pundits is saying. Bullshit. Triumph of multiculturalism is more like it. White, straight, (practising) Christian males now a minority. Triumph of mongrelization, of which the Prez is the living image! Hm, mongrelization? Didn't someone predict that about 50 years ago? Look up "White Citizens Council". And lo, it has come to pass.
Could Ron Paul have won? Two chances, see above!
Last 3 presidents have all been re-elected. Why not just have one 8-year term and be done with it? $6 billion weak bucks down the drain and for what...
God rot the pandering politicians, the lot of them. God save the United States of America and this honourable court...
Here the script becomes illegible. If I can decipher more of it, I'll be back. Ed.
Walt MIA
Ed. here. A note tacked to the door of his cabin says Walt was taken violently ill at 8:18 p.m. PST yesterday.
I have cleaned up a lot of the mess and have found some scribbled notes which I will post as soon as I can decode them.
I have cleaned up a lot of the mess and have found some scribbled notes which I will post as soon as I can decode them.
Tuesday, November 6, 2012
Walt's call
Walt doesn't want to be accused of wimping out by failing to predict the winner of today's presidential election. At the same time, I don't want to put my near-perfect lifetime average (.990) on the line without careful thought, due consideration, and all that. And I don't want to bet from the heart either. Betting on emotion is for losers.
I have duly consulted with Vince the barber. He's giving 4-5 on Obama. At least I think that's what "quattro cinco" means. The donut shop "hole poll" has Romney ahead -- donuts with red sprinkles outselling those with blue by about, errr, 5 to 4. However, over at Starbucks, the chattering crowd has the Prez as the prohibitive favourite. "Romney is such a savage," I hear them lisping.
Around the stroke of midnight, Walt heard a rumour that a tsunami was going to inundate the southeast corner of Pennsylvania, leaving Philthydelphia underwater and the rest of the state for Romney, but an award-winning sports cameraman in the vicinity tells me otherwise.
Ohio, then... the inevitable Ohio. Will the state that's round at the ends and high in the middle go for the Inevitable Mitt? `Fraid not.
Obama over Romney, just barely... and (allowing for challenges in Florida) only when the votes are actually cast in the electoral college. The popular vote, however, will be for Romney, just barely. Two predictions for the price of one. Walt would be happy to be wrong about the first one.
I have duly consulted with Vince the barber. He's giving 4-5 on Obama. At least I think that's what "quattro cinco" means. The donut shop "hole poll" has Romney ahead -- donuts with red sprinkles outselling those with blue by about, errr, 5 to 4. However, over at Starbucks, the chattering crowd has the Prez as the prohibitive favourite. "Romney is such a savage," I hear them lisping.
Around the stroke of midnight, Walt heard a rumour that a tsunami was going to inundate the southeast corner of Pennsylvania, leaving Philthydelphia underwater and the rest of the state for Romney, but an award-winning sports cameraman in the vicinity tells me otherwise.
Ohio, then... the inevitable Ohio. Will the state that's round at the ends and high in the middle go for the Inevitable Mitt? `Fraid not.
Obama over Romney, just barely... and (allowing for challenges in Florida) only when the votes are actually cast in the electoral college. The popular vote, however, will be for Romney, just barely. Two predictions for the price of one. Walt would be happy to be wrong about the first one.
Monday, November 5, 2012
Muslim couple doused daughter with acid because "it was her fate"
Agent 3 seems to have been mesmerized by this weekend's electoral antics, so has failed to report to us on the Toronto trial of Peer Khairi, accused of severing his wife's head from her torso (or just about) to preserve his honour. The alleged murderer is an immigrant from Afghanistan, and apparently was not told by Canadian authorities to check his barbaric customs at the door of the welfare office.
While we wait to find out if the Khairi trial has gone to the jury, and what they decide, we can consider another honour crime horror story, this one coming from Pakistan courtesy of the BBC.
Behold -- in their his 'n' hers jail cells -- Zaheen and Mohammad Zafar, a Muslim couple accused of killing their 15-year-old daughter by giving her a bath -- an acid bath. Why? Because she sullied the Zafar family's honour by looking at a boy. Find it hard to believe? Click here to see a clip from the BBC's interview with the couple.
Hear the girl's parents give their version of the events of 29 October. The father said the girl had turned to look at a boy who drove by on a motorcycle, and he told her it was wrong.
In case you didn't hear the voice-over properly, the interviewer interprets the mother as explaining, "She said 'I didn't do it on purpose. I won't look again.' By then I had already thrown the acid. It was her destiny to die this way."
The father said the family had already come under public censure because of their older daughter's behaviour, but he did not detail what exactly he meant.
According to Pakistan's Human Rights Commission, at least 943 women were killed in 2011 in the name of "honour" last year. Only 20 of them were given medical care before they died, the report said. The real toll is believed to be higher because many of the crimes go unreported.
"Throughout the year," the same report continues, "women were callously killed in the name of honour when they went against family wishes in any way, or even on the basis of suspicion that they did so. Women were sometimes killed in the name of honour over property disputes and inheritance rights."
Some people from Pakistan and other countries where Islam and Muslim culture prevail are allowed to immigrate to the so-called Christian (or should we say "secular") societies of the West, where such enormities are not tolerated.
At least, that's the way it used to be. Today, in the name of tolerance and "celebrating diversity", Muslim men -- sometimes aided by their wives, brothers or sons -- kill their (other) wives, sisters and daughters with little or no regard to the laws of civilized society. All for the sake of "honour", of course. Isn't multiculturalism great?
Footnote: Honour killings are not unknown in the Sikh and Hindu communities of North America and Europe. But we mustn't judge other religions and cultures. We all pray to the same God, don't we? Hm?
While we wait to find out if the Khairi trial has gone to the jury, and what they decide, we can consider another honour crime horror story, this one coming from Pakistan courtesy of the BBC.
Behold -- in their his 'n' hers jail cells -- Zaheen and Mohammad Zafar, a Muslim couple accused of killing their 15-year-old daughter by giving her a bath -- an acid bath. Why? Because she sullied the Zafar family's honour by looking at a boy. Find it hard to believe? Click here to see a clip from the BBC's interview with the couple.
In case you didn't hear the voice-over properly, the interviewer interprets the mother as explaining, "She said 'I didn't do it on purpose. I won't look again.' By then I had already thrown the acid. It was her destiny to die this way."
The father said the family had already come under public censure because of their older daughter's behaviour, but he did not detail what exactly he meant.
According to Pakistan's Human Rights Commission, at least 943 women were killed in 2011 in the name of "honour" last year. Only 20 of them were given medical care before they died, the report said. The real toll is believed to be higher because many of the crimes go unreported.
"Throughout the year," the same report continues, "women were callously killed in the name of honour when they went against family wishes in any way, or even on the basis of suspicion that they did so. Women were sometimes killed in the name of honour over property disputes and inheritance rights."
Some people from Pakistan and other countries where Islam and Muslim culture prevail are allowed to immigrate to the so-called Christian (or should we say "secular") societies of the West, where such enormities are not tolerated.
At least, that's the way it used to be. Today, in the name of tolerance and "celebrating diversity", Muslim men -- sometimes aided by their wives, brothers or sons -- kill their (other) wives, sisters and daughters with little or no regard to the laws of civilized society. All for the sake of "honour", of course. Isn't multiculturalism great?
Footnote: Honour killings are not unknown in the Sikh and Hindu communities of North America and Europe. But we mustn't judge other religions and cultures. We all pray to the same God, don't we? Hm?
Western/Judeo-Christian values at stake: Paul Ryan
Reuters reports today on a telephone conversation between Republican veep candidate Paul Ryan and American evangelical voters last night, in which Mr. Ryan said President Barack Hussein Obama’s path for the future of the United States compromises Judeo-Christian values.
Speaking to the Faith and Freedom Coalition, a leading group of Christian conservatives, Ryan attacked Obama’s vision in stark terms.
He called Obama's "plan" [Is hope a plan? Ed.] for the USA "a dangerous path... It’s a path that grows government, restricts freedom and liberty, and compromises those values, those Judeo-Christian, Western civilization values that made us such a great and exceptional nation in the first place."
“He was talking about issues like religious liberty and ‘Obamacare’ – topics he has mentioned frequently during the campaign,” said Romney campaign spokesman Michael Steel. During the campaign, Mr. Ryan has said repeatedly that the President's policies, particularly his healthcare restructuring "plan", violate the religious freedoms for which Americans have fought and died for more than two centuries.
In last night's phone call, Mr. Ryan spoke as well of the importance in his life of his Roman Catholic faith. Today he concludes the campaign in his home state of Wisconsin. A rally will be held in Milwaukee late tonight.
Speaking to the Faith and Freedom Coalition, a leading group of Christian conservatives, Ryan attacked Obama’s vision in stark terms.
He called Obama's "plan" [Is hope a plan? Ed.] for the USA "a dangerous path... It’s a path that grows government, restricts freedom and liberty, and compromises those values, those Judeo-Christian, Western civilization values that made us such a great and exceptional nation in the first place."
“He was talking about issues like religious liberty and ‘Obamacare’ – topics he has mentioned frequently during the campaign,” said Romney campaign spokesman Michael Steel. During the campaign, Mr. Ryan has said repeatedly that the President's policies, particularly his healthcare restructuring "plan", violate the religious freedoms for which Americans have fought and died for more than two centuries.
In last night's phone call, Mr. Ryan spoke as well of the importance in his life of his Roman Catholic faith. Today he concludes the campaign in his home state of Wisconsin. A rally will be held in Milwaukee late tonight.
Americans! What choice have you got?
Here's the way Walt sees it...
Way back in 2008, Barack Hussein Obama promised Americans "hope and change". Turned out (a) hope is not a plan and (b) "change" can mean change for the worse as well as for the better.
Can the United States of America really stand another four years of Obama's divisive but indecisive maladministration? Is it really worth enduring another four years to prove that America doesn't disciminate against Muslims and people of colour?
Do YOU really want four more years of this? Then go ahead and vote for Obama.
Mitt Romney promises "real change". The only real change Walt has seen, so far, is the change in Mitt's policy positions, from one day to the next.
What Walt would like to see is real choice! But I can't advocate writing in the name of the one politician who offered clear policy alternatives -- Ron Paul. Casting your ballot for Congressman Paul or any fringe candidate will harm the chances of getting rid of the most feckless president America has seen since James Buchanan.
In at least nine key swing states, every vote counts... REALLY! For the sake of America's future, vote for Romney.
Way back in 2008, Barack Hussein Obama promised Americans "hope and change". Turned out (a) hope is not a plan and (b) "change" can mean change for the worse as well as for the better.
Can the United States of America really stand another four years of Obama's divisive but indecisive maladministration? Is it really worth enduring another four years to prove that America doesn't disciminate against Muslims and people of colour?
Do YOU really want four more years of this? Then go ahead and vote for Obama.
Mitt Romney promises "real change". The only real change Walt has seen, so far, is the change in Mitt's policy positions, from one day to the next.
What Walt would like to see is real choice! But I can't advocate writing in the name of the one politician who offered clear policy alternatives -- Ron Paul. Casting your ballot for Congressman Paul or any fringe candidate will harm the chances of getting rid of the most feckless president America has seen since James Buchanan.
In at least nine key swing states, every vote counts... REALLY! For the sake of America's future, vote for Romney.
Sunday, November 4, 2012
Can Romney do it? Walt's state-by-state analysis and predictions
The pressure is building! Walt's acolytes, followers and casual readers are waiting for guidance on how to bet. The barbershop is closed today so it's a good time to sit quietly and do the numbers, state by state.
There are 538 votes to be cast in the Electoral College. The magic number is 270. From his vantage point near Fort Mudge, Walt can see nine states with a total of 110 electoral votes that are "in play" -- too close to call.
Not included in the remaining 41 states (and DC) is Utah. I'm giving that one to Romney because [They already know that! Ed.] ...and Idaho for the same reason. [Get on with it!! Ed.]
OK. Also not included are New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. There's been a lot of pissing and moaning in the lamestream media about federal aid not getting through to the victims of Sandy quickly enough. Obama's presidential photo ops amidst the devastation looked fine, they say, but a lot of voters will be disaffected by this demonstration that the Prez doesn't have all that much control over the federal administration, and will get revenge by voting for the Inevitable Mitt. Rubbish. Anyone who thinks there was ever any chance of NY, NJ and CT going Republican is seriously deluded.
Which brings us to Pennsylvania and Michigan, the bottom of the rust bucket. Gentle reader, please don't be misled by the lamestream media hype. Those states aren't in doubt. Obama will sweet Philthydelphia and the rest of PA doesn't matter. 20 electoral votes for Obama.
As for MI, the name "Romney" is remembered there, and not fondly. When they think "Romney" Michiganders [and Michigeese. Ed.] think cars. When they think cars they think American Motors, and, more recently, the younger Romney's statements about letting the US auto industry die, if that were the will of the free market. Obama's got him on that one. Another 16 votes for Hussein.
So, with nine states left to call, Walt's abacus shows totals of 237 for the incumbent and only 191 for the wannabe. Romney has to find 79 electoral votes somewhere to win, Obama only 33.
Look south, folks. And keep in mind that race is still a deciding factor. Frankly, Walt was surprised, in 2008, when American voters handed the keys to the car to a black (or half-black) man. Well, OK, the point was made and America is now a "post-racist" society, right?
Wrong! A study by researchers at Stanford University and the Universities of Chicago and Michigan, released last week by AP, shows that although "racist" views are quieter today, they're still echoing in the minds of voters.
"Anti-black sentiment seems to have increased slightly in America over the course of Mr. Obama's term," the report says, "and this sentiment may be shaping evaluations of (his) presidency as well as the likelihood that individuals will vote for him in 2012."
Leaving aside Dade County, Florida is still pretty much a southern state, in its attitudes, and North Carolina decidedly so. Walt predicts they'll both go Republican, although FL may be very close, once again. 44 electoral votes for Mitt.
I will now contradict myself by awarding Iowa (6 votes) and New Hampshire (4) to Obama. I'd have thought the Iowans, in particular, would know which end of the straw to stick in their mouths, but polls in one of the whitest of all states show the Prez with a pretty solid lead. NH seems to be affected by its proximity to Massachusetts, where Romney is oddly unloved in spite of a government-mandated health plan that looked not unlike Obamacare.
On to Wisconsin, with its substantial Catholic population. Can a native son carry his state for the Republicans? Walt thinks so, but not because Paul Ryan is as close as you can get to being a real practising Catholic. Rather, it's because Ryan and Romney are not Muslim.
A recent Pew poll found that less than half of voters surveyed believe that Obama is Christian, and 17% believe he's actually a Muslim. The poll also showed that the number of Republicans who believe Obama is Muslim has doubled to 30% since the last election. His bitterest foes keep calling him "Hussein", because that is his (middle) name.
The underlying meaning is that Obama is an outsider, a foreigner in his attitudes and outlook, if not by birth. He is seen in much of the USA as basically un-American, even anti-American. That's why his tepid, even grovelling response to the Benghazi terrorist attack won't go away. 10 more votes in the Republican column.
If you're keeping score, it's now 247 to 245, favour Obama, with just four states -- Colorado, Nevada, Virginia and Ohio -- left.
You'd think Nevada would be a lock for Romney, what with its substantial Mormon population and wild west, free enterprise character. But you'd be ignoring Las Vegas and its large number of Latino voters, who don't much like the Republican stance on immigration and related issues. Latest polls put NV in the Democrat column, and who am I to argue. 6 for Obama.
Giving Colorado (9 votes) also to Obama -- just because -- raises the Democrat total to 262. So it all comes down to Virginia (13 votes) and Ohio (18). Walt thinks VA is likely to go Republican, since it, too, is at heart a southern state. But Romney still has to win Ohio before he can start measuring the drapes in the Oval Office.
It has been pointed out dozens of times within the last 24 hours alone that no Republican has ever been elected president without winning Ohio. Which is not to say that no Republican has ever been elected president. Walt says... ... ... ... still too early to make the call.
There are 538 votes to be cast in the Electoral College. The magic number is 270. From his vantage point near Fort Mudge, Walt can see nine states with a total of 110 electoral votes that are "in play" -- too close to call.
Not included in the remaining 41 states (and DC) is Utah. I'm giving that one to Romney because [They already know that! Ed.] ...and Idaho for the same reason. [Get on with it!! Ed.]
OK. Also not included are New York, New Jersey and Connecticut. There's been a lot of pissing and moaning in the lamestream media about federal aid not getting through to the victims of Sandy quickly enough. Obama's presidential photo ops amidst the devastation looked fine, they say, but a lot of voters will be disaffected by this demonstration that the Prez doesn't have all that much control over the federal administration, and will get revenge by voting for the Inevitable Mitt. Rubbish. Anyone who thinks there was ever any chance of NY, NJ and CT going Republican is seriously deluded.
Which brings us to Pennsylvania and Michigan, the bottom of the rust bucket. Gentle reader, please don't be misled by the lamestream media hype. Those states aren't in doubt. Obama will sweet Philthydelphia and the rest of PA doesn't matter. 20 electoral votes for Obama.
As for MI, the name "Romney" is remembered there, and not fondly. When they think "Romney" Michiganders [and Michigeese. Ed.] think cars. When they think cars they think American Motors, and, more recently, the younger Romney's statements about letting the US auto industry die, if that were the will of the free market. Obama's got him on that one. Another 16 votes for Hussein.
So, with nine states left to call, Walt's abacus shows totals of 237 for the incumbent and only 191 for the wannabe. Romney has to find 79 electoral votes somewhere to win, Obama only 33.
Look south, folks. And keep in mind that race is still a deciding factor. Frankly, Walt was surprised, in 2008, when American voters handed the keys to the car to a black (or half-black) man. Well, OK, the point was made and America is now a "post-racist" society, right?
Wrong! A study by researchers at Stanford University and the Universities of Chicago and Michigan, released last week by AP, shows that although "racist" views are quieter today, they're still echoing in the minds of voters.
"Anti-black sentiment seems to have increased slightly in America over the course of Mr. Obama's term," the report says, "and this sentiment may be shaping evaluations of (his) presidency as well as the likelihood that individuals will vote for him in 2012."
Leaving aside Dade County, Florida is still pretty much a southern state, in its attitudes, and North Carolina decidedly so. Walt predicts they'll both go Republican, although FL may be very close, once again. 44 electoral votes for Mitt.
I will now contradict myself by awarding Iowa (6 votes) and New Hampshire (4) to Obama. I'd have thought the Iowans, in particular, would know which end of the straw to stick in their mouths, but polls in one of the whitest of all states show the Prez with a pretty solid lead. NH seems to be affected by its proximity to Massachusetts, where Romney is oddly unloved in spite of a government-mandated health plan that looked not unlike Obamacare.
On to Wisconsin, with its substantial Catholic population. Can a native son carry his state for the Republicans? Walt thinks so, but not because Paul Ryan is as close as you can get to being a real practising Catholic. Rather, it's because Ryan and Romney are not Muslim.
A recent Pew poll found that less than half of voters surveyed believe that Obama is Christian, and 17% believe he's actually a Muslim. The poll also showed that the number of Republicans who believe Obama is Muslim has doubled to 30% since the last election. His bitterest foes keep calling him "Hussein", because that is his (middle) name.
The underlying meaning is that Obama is an outsider, a foreigner in his attitudes and outlook, if not by birth. He is seen in much of the USA as basically un-American, even anti-American. That's why his tepid, even grovelling response to the Benghazi terrorist attack won't go away. 10 more votes in the Republican column.
If you're keeping score, it's now 247 to 245, favour Obama, with just four states -- Colorado, Nevada, Virginia and Ohio -- left.
You'd think Nevada would be a lock for Romney, what with its substantial Mormon population and wild west, free enterprise character. But you'd be ignoring Las Vegas and its large number of Latino voters, who don't much like the Republican stance on immigration and related issues. Latest polls put NV in the Democrat column, and who am I to argue. 6 for Obama.
Giving Colorado (9 votes) also to Obama -- just because -- raises the Democrat total to 262. So it all comes down to Virginia (13 votes) and Ohio (18). Walt thinks VA is likely to go Republican, since it, too, is at heart a southern state. But Romney still has to win Ohio before he can start measuring the drapes in the Oval Office.
It has been pointed out dozens of times within the last 24 hours alone that no Republican has ever been elected president without winning Ohio. Which is not to say that no Republican has ever been elected president. Walt says... ... ... ... still too early to make the call.
Friday, November 2, 2012
Will the Big Blow win it for Obama?
There's an old joke [Here it comes. Ed.] About two Jewish clothiers lying in the sun at Miami Beach talking about how they got the money to have a vacation during the busiest season of the year. The first says his trip is paid for out of the proceeds of an insurance claim for a fire. The second says he got insurance money too, but for a flood. The first asks, "How to you start a flood?!"
I was thinking about that as I watched the TV coverage of the "October Surprise" -- that would be Sandy -- and the lamestream pundits' comments (echoed by the Donald) that the hurricane would tip the electoral balance in favour of Obama. That, they say, is because it gave him the chance to "look presidential", show that he was in charge of things and appear strong and decisive. Rather the opposite, then, of the image he projected during what I call the "September Surprise", meaning the Benghazi bumble.
In the aftermath of the Big Blow, two other big blows -- NJ governor Christie and NYC mayor Bloomberg -- announced their support for the Prez. Why? Because, Hizzoner said, he'll be better than Mitt at dealing with "global warming". Walt says, hold on a minute... Or several minutes!
There's something besides the weather and the streets of New York and Newark that needs clearing up. PuhLEEZE, gentle readers... "Global warming" (if there is such a thing) did not cause Hurricane Sandy!
According to Scott Sutherland, writing in Geekquinox, a Yahoo! news blog, global warming may have been a minor contributing factor, but "to corner weather and climate experts every time some weather event happens, and force them to answer the question 'did climate change cause this?' is, at best, naive, and at worst, manipulative."
Here, Sutherland says, is what we know for sure. The Gulf Stream was warmer this year than last. And sea surface temperatures have increased along the coast of the US Northeast, by about half a degree Celsius on average over the longer trend, and by a degree or more on the shorter trend. These higher sea surface temperatures would have provided more energy to Sandy, allowing the storm to maintain its strength further north than normal and possibly contributing to its overall size and extent.
Also, the sea level around New York City has risen by roughly 30 cm in the past 100 years. Sea level rise is linked to climate change, as ocean temperatures rise (causing the water to expand) and more polar ice melts (adding more water to the oceans). This rise in sea level would have contributed to the storm surge from Sandy.
And guess what, folks! No matter what the politicians say, the sea level is going to continue to rise, by about 3 mm per year, no matter who is president! Anyone who thinks that Al O'Bama is going to be able to hold back the waves, like a latter-day King Canute, is crazy!
Now then, about the terrorist attack on Benghazi... The "unfortunate incident" on 9/11 was not a misguided popular demonstration against a small and amateurish video which was perceived to be anti-Muslim. It was a terrorist attack, planned in advance, of which the Obama administration had prior warning.
In all the fuss about who scored the better debating points, the President's evasiveness on this point has not received due attention and examination. Senior Republicans are rightly accusing the President and the White House of covering up their wilful ignorance or at least incompetence in dealing with anti-American terrorism. And that's a fact.
Senator John McCain and other top Republicans have repeatedly accused the White House of evasion for refusing to answer questions about events at the US consulate in Benghazi that led to the deaths of four Americans. That's a fact too.
Here's what Mr. McCain told CBS recently. "This tragedy turned into a debacle and massive cover-up or massive incompetence in Libya is having an impact on the voters because of their view of the commander-in-chief.... It is now the worst cover-up or incompetence I have ever observed in my life. Somebody the other day said to me, 'Well, this is as bad as Watergate.' [But] nobody died in Watergate."
So, the big question this weekend is, will the average voter's ignorance of the facts, and the distortion of the facts by the Democrats and the lamestream media, save Obama's bacon on Tuesday?
Faithful readers of WWW are doubtless waiting for Walt to hazard a guess. (Lifetime pct .990.) I'm afraid you'll have to wait until Monday. Who knows? There could be a "November surprise" in the offing.
I was thinking about that as I watched the TV coverage of the "October Surprise" -- that would be Sandy -- and the lamestream pundits' comments (echoed by the Donald) that the hurricane would tip the electoral balance in favour of Obama. That, they say, is because it gave him the chance to "look presidential", show that he was in charge of things and appear strong and decisive. Rather the opposite, then, of the image he projected during what I call the "September Surprise", meaning the Benghazi bumble.
In the aftermath of the Big Blow, two other big blows -- NJ governor Christie and NYC mayor Bloomberg -- announced their support for the Prez. Why? Because, Hizzoner said, he'll be better than Mitt at dealing with "global warming". Walt says, hold on a minute... Or several minutes!
There's something besides the weather and the streets of New York and Newark that needs clearing up. PuhLEEZE, gentle readers... "Global warming" (if there is such a thing) did not cause Hurricane Sandy!
According to Scott Sutherland, writing in Geekquinox, a Yahoo! news blog, global warming may have been a minor contributing factor, but "to corner weather and climate experts every time some weather event happens, and force them to answer the question 'did climate change cause this?' is, at best, naive, and at worst, manipulative."
Here, Sutherland says, is what we know for sure. The Gulf Stream was warmer this year than last. And sea surface temperatures have increased along the coast of the US Northeast, by about half a degree Celsius on average over the longer trend, and by a degree or more on the shorter trend. These higher sea surface temperatures would have provided more energy to Sandy, allowing the storm to maintain its strength further north than normal and possibly contributing to its overall size and extent.
Also, the sea level around New York City has risen by roughly 30 cm in the past 100 years. Sea level rise is linked to climate change, as ocean temperatures rise (causing the water to expand) and more polar ice melts (adding more water to the oceans). This rise in sea level would have contributed to the storm surge from Sandy.
And guess what, folks! No matter what the politicians say, the sea level is going to continue to rise, by about 3 mm per year, no matter who is president! Anyone who thinks that Al O'Bama is going to be able to hold back the waves, like a latter-day King Canute, is crazy!
Now then, about the terrorist attack on Benghazi... The "unfortunate incident" on 9/11 was not a misguided popular demonstration against a small and amateurish video which was perceived to be anti-Muslim. It was a terrorist attack, planned in advance, of which the Obama administration had prior warning.
In all the fuss about who scored the better debating points, the President's evasiveness on this point has not received due attention and examination. Senior Republicans are rightly accusing the President and the White House of covering up their wilful ignorance or at least incompetence in dealing with anti-American terrorism. And that's a fact.
Senator John McCain and other top Republicans have repeatedly accused the White House of evasion for refusing to answer questions about events at the US consulate in Benghazi that led to the deaths of four Americans. That's a fact too.
Here's what Mr. McCain told CBS recently. "This tragedy turned into a debacle and massive cover-up or massive incompetence in Libya is having an impact on the voters because of their view of the commander-in-chief.... It is now the worst cover-up or incompetence I have ever observed in my life. Somebody the other day said to me, 'Well, this is as bad as Watergate.' [But] nobody died in Watergate."
So, the big question this weekend is, will the average voter's ignorance of the facts, and the distortion of the facts by the Democrats and the lamestream media, save Obama's bacon on Tuesday?
Faithful readers of WWW are doubtless waiting for Walt to hazard a guess. (Lifetime pct .990.) I'm afraid you'll have to wait until Monday. Who knows? There could be a "November surprise" in the offing.
Thursday, November 1, 2012
Spaghetti
For several years, a man had been having an affair with an Italian woman. One night, she confided to him that she was pregnant.
Not wanting to ruin his reputation or his marriage, he paid her a large sum of money if she would go back to Italy to secretly have the child. Also, if she stayed in Italy to raise the child, he would provide child support until the child turned 18.
She agreed, but asked how he would know when the baby was born. To keep it discrete, he told her to simply mail him a postcard, and write “Spaghetti” on the back when the child was born. He would then arrange for the child support payments to begin.
One day, about eight months later, he came home to his confused wife.
“Honey,” she said, “You received a very strange postcard today.”
“Oh, just give it to me and I’ll explain it later,” he replied.
The wife obeyed and watched as her husband read the card, turned white, and fainted.
On the card was written:
Spaghetti, Spaghetti, Spaghetti, Spaghetti, Spaghetti.
Three with meatballs, two without.
Send extra sauce.
Thanks to the elusive (and non-Italian) Agent 1.
Not wanting to ruin his reputation or his marriage, he paid her a large sum of money if she would go back to Italy to secretly have the child. Also, if she stayed in Italy to raise the child, he would provide child support until the child turned 18.
She agreed, but asked how he would know when the baby was born. To keep it discrete, he told her to simply mail him a postcard, and write “Spaghetti” on the back when the child was born. He would then arrange for the child support payments to begin.
One day, about eight months later, he came home to his confused wife.
“Honey,” she said, “You received a very strange postcard today.”
“Oh, just give it to me and I’ll explain it later,” he replied.
The wife obeyed and watched as her husband read the card, turned white, and fainted.
On the card was written:
Spaghetti, Spaghetti, Spaghetti, Spaghetti, Spaghetti.
Three with meatballs, two without.
Send extra sauce.
Thanks to the elusive (and non-Italian) Agent 1.
Muslim wife-killer pleads self-defence
With all the commotion about Sandy and the presidential election, it's not easy to remember that there are other events unfolding. Like the trials of third world immigrants accused of murdering their wives or sisters or daughters or all of the above to "preserve their honour".
One such is Peer Khairi, an Afghan Muslim who immigrated to Canada by way of India, and allegedly cut off his wife's head -- or nearly so, as he couldn't sever the spinal column -- a few years back. He's on trial, at last, in Toronto this week, and yesterday took the stand in his own defence.
Why would a man attempt to decapitate his wife? (The decapitation didn't quite work, by the way, but he did succeed in killing her.) Khairi's first problem with Randjida was that she called him names -- "honourless" and a "cuckold" -- and he couldn't tolerate such insults any longer.
But on the occasion in question, Khairi told the court, it was worse than that. On that fateful day, she lunged at him with a knife -- for no reason, of course -- leaving him no choice but to slit her throat, stab her repeatedly, and let her bleed to death on their Toronto apartment floor while he called 911.
"I totally lost my control. I was not able to control myself," Khairi said, through a Dari interpreter (in spite of having been in Canada for close to a decade). He testified that "I was thinking about killing myself, not killing her." Why he didn't then start hacking away at himself went unexplained.
The trial continues today. Agent 3 is following the story and will let us know if Khairi comes up with a further or better excuse. Stay tuned.
One such is Peer Khairi, an Afghan Muslim who immigrated to Canada by way of India, and allegedly cut off his wife's head -- or nearly so, as he couldn't sever the spinal column -- a few years back. He's on trial, at last, in Toronto this week, and yesterday took the stand in his own defence.
Why would a man attempt to decapitate his wife? (The decapitation didn't quite work, by the way, but he did succeed in killing her.) Khairi's first problem with Randjida was that she called him names -- "honourless" and a "cuckold" -- and he couldn't tolerate such insults any longer.
But on the occasion in question, Khairi told the court, it was worse than that. On that fateful day, she lunged at him with a knife -- for no reason, of course -- leaving him no choice but to slit her throat, stab her repeatedly, and let her bleed to death on their Toronto apartment floor while he called 911.
"I totally lost my control. I was not able to control myself," Khairi said, through a Dari interpreter (in spite of having been in Canada for close to a decade). He testified that "I was thinking about killing myself, not killing her." Why he didn't then start hacking away at himself went unexplained.
The trial continues today. Agent 3 is following the story and will let us know if Khairi comes up with a further or better excuse. Stay tuned.
Swazi girls slip to third place in WWW hit parade
Ed. here. I've just finished reviewing the WWW readership stats for October. We know who's reading Walt... and why! And we know some of you just look at the pictures, especially the National Geographic-style picture accompanying "Where next? Swaziland next?", an article about misrule in Swaziland that appeared way back in April of 2011.
But here's a surprise. The article -- and accompanying photo of the nubile Swazi girls doing the reed dance -- has been at the top of the WWW hit list almost every week since it appeared... until now. Two days ago it slipped to second, and today finds it in third place!
I can't understand it. Are men no longer interested in T&A? Or is it possible that every horny teenager on the planet has looked at it and finished doing whatever it is they do?
Walt and I will take the high road and not post the picture again. Well, not this week, anyway.
But here's a surprise. The article -- and accompanying photo of the nubile Swazi girls doing the reed dance -- has been at the top of the WWW hit list almost every week since it appeared... until now. Two days ago it slipped to second, and today finds it in third place!
I can't understand it. Are men no longer interested in T&A? Or is it possible that every horny teenager on the planet has looked at it and finished doing whatever it is they do?
Walt and I will take the high road and not post the picture again. Well, not this week, anyway.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)