TUESDAY ROUNDUP
Once again I list what I think were the best posts on my various blogs in the preceding week.
On Dissecting Leftism I question whether Australia's immigration policy is selective enough
On Political Correctness Watch I note that homosexuality seems to trump Islam in political correctness
On Greenie Watch I note that the evidence is now in that Michael Mann committed scientific fraud in his famous "hockeystick" claims about global warming
On Education Watch I note that some Leftist teachers are so reluctant to administer any discipline that they are now calling the police to deal with 5-year-olds
On Socialized Medicine I note that lives are being put at risk as British public hospitals ignore medical alerts
On Gun Watch I note that a gun club is being sued for committing lead pollution!
On Leftists as Elitists I note that a left-leaning Australian High Court judge admitted that he was consumed by anger when he considered some cases
On Majority Rights I note opposition to black immigration in Australia
On Blogger News I note that Sweden has useful lessons for conservatives. (Post also below)
*************************************
ELSEWHERE
As the Plame/Wilson/Rove beatup continues: "As the seemingly endless spiderweb of lies spun by former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV unravels, the media has gone out of its way to question the credibility of.Karl Rove. Despite Rove's demonstrable non-leak of Valerie Plame's non-secret identity, the dogs continue to gather, hungry for a second term scandal, while the Wilsons' blatant self-promotion erodes whatever basis they had for a story in the first place. Perhaps Joe Wilson's two biggest whoppers were his claim to have spoken out because of his deep, non-partisan commitment to "truth," and his inconsolable remorse that his wife's closely guarded anonymity had become "collateral damage" in the Bush administration's war against him. What is at risk of being lost in the media hype of Karl Rove's "leak" is that Plame and Wilson had deep-seated ideological opposition to the Niger trip they set up, Plame apparently spiked that trip in advance, and she had long ago blown her status as a "secret" CIA agent."
PETA are just haters: They care neither for people nor animals: Here's what PETA didn't want you to see: two PETA employees attending a court hearing Tuesday in North Carolina on charges they killed and dumped 31 cats and dogs in a shopping center's trash bins. While the court case is pending, the controversy swirling around PETA and associated animal rights extremists, is again Page One news. Veterinarian clinics and animal shelters turned the pets over to PETA in hopes they could be adopted. Instead, they were killed by an organization dedicated to "ethical" treatment of animals. It's just another example of the misguided agenda, and hypocrisy, of the animal rights movement. It's a campaign that affects not only PETA and its supporters, but hurts each and every one of us.... These folks believe there can never be any justification for animal testing. If achieving their goal means humans must suffer, then inflicting needless pain, trauma, grief and death on people is merely a necessary means to a worthwhile end. And, a report by the Anti-Defamation League -- hardly a bastion of extreme conservatism -- says radical environmental and animal-rights groups have wreaked more than $100 million in damage over the past two decades... After bombing the offices of a California company in 2003, animal rights extremists sent an e-mail claiming responsibility. Among other things, it said, "You never know when your house, your car even, might go boom ... or maybe it will be a shot in the dark." Terroristic threats don't come any clearer".
Leftist twisting about "activist" judges: "Those who want to see judges who will apply the law instead of imposing their own policies face not only political obstruction to the appointment of such judges but also calculated confusion about the very words used in discussing what is at issue. Judges who impose their own preferences, instead of following the law as it is written, have long been known as "judicial activists" while those who carry out the law, instead of rewriting it to suit themselves, have been said to be following the "original intent" of the law. But now a massive effort to muddy the waters has been launched by those who want judges who will continue to impose the liberal agenda from the bench. Words like "activists" and "intent" are being twisted beyond recognition. Senator Patrick Leahy has redefined "activist" judges to make the least activist Justices on the Supreme Court -- Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas -- suddenly activists by his new definition. Senator Leahy has said: "The two most activist judges we have right now are Justice Thomas and Justice Scalia, who have struck down and thus written laws of their own in place of congressional laws more than anybody else on the current Supreme Court." One of the major functions of the Supreme Court for more than two centuries has been to strike down acts of Congress, the President, or the lower courts when any of these exceed the authority granted to them by the Constitution. Calling this "judicial activism" is playing games with words and befogging the real issues. When Justices Scalia and Thomas enforce the limits set by the Constitution, that is not writing "their own new laws," no matter what Senator Leahy claims"
A good bit of satire about the British Muslim journalist who supports jihad, posted by 'dreadpundit', a right-wing New Yorker using the name 'Bluto'. He wrote: "Okay, Dilpazier, I've decided to bow to your 'logic' - sauce for the goose and all that. That's why I'm issuing a secular fatwah and asking for some loyal Briton to saw off your head and ship it to me (use Fed-Ex, please, so I can get a morning delivery, and do remember the dry ice, also, a videotape of the 'execution')."
For more postings, see EDUCATION WATCH, GREENIE WATCH, POLITICAL CORRECTNESS WATCH, GUN WATCH, SOCIALIZED MEDICINE and LEFTISTS AS ELITISTS. Mirror sites here, here, here, here and here. And on Social Security see Dick McDonald
**************************
The anti-business policies and practically all economic policies advocated by the Left are impoverishing. They waste vast slabs of the country's labour-force on bureaucracy and paperwork and so make the country poorer. That is no accident. The Left love the poor. The Left need the poor so that can feel good by patronizing and "helping" them. So they do their best to create as many poor people as possible.
The Big Lie of the late 20th century was that Nazism was Rightist. It was in fact typical of the Leftism of its day. It was only to the Right of Stalin's Communism. The very word "Nazi" is a German abbreviation for "National Socialist" (Nationalsozialistisch)
Comments? Email me here (Hotmail address). If there are no recent posts here blame Blogger.com and visit my mirror site here or here. My Home Page is here or here.
********************************
Tuesday, July 26, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment