No Neutrality

It Was Only A Matter Of Time

I've been saying this for some time now and this Mark Steyn snippet from NRO just confirms it. Multiculturalism, among other things, is just a pause in the dominance of one outgoing culture and the emergence of the new. It leads not to a time when "all cultures are equal" but to a time when another culture will assume dominance. Its primary objective appears to have been to jettison the Christian heritage of the West.

In particular, as the dominant Judeo-Christian culture recedes, the incoming Islamic culture encroaches (which really isn't dominate; it just has a force and power among the powers-that-be WAY beyond its actual presence in the West):

The internal contradictions of multiculturalism   [Mark Steyn]

Expect more new stories like this:

Two primary schools have withdrawn storybooks about same-sex relationships after objections from Muslim parents.

Up to 90 gathered at the schools to complain about the books which are aimed at pupils as young as five.

One story, titled King & King, is a fairytale about a prince who turns down three princesses before marrying one of their brothers.

Another named And Tango Makes Three features two male penguins who fall in love at a New York zoo.

Bristol City Council said the two schools had been using the books to ensure they complied with gay rights laws which came into force last April.

I love this little nugget:

The decision was made to enable the schools to "operate safely" after parents voiced their concerns at meetings.

I wonder where the danger would come from? Just asking...

Make no mistake about it: Feminism, the Gay/Lesbian movement, minority claims are not on equal footing with Islam in the West. When the Muslim population says jump, the question will only be "How high?"

All You Need To Know

 This is it in a nutshell:

WASHINGTON - It's a Senate showdown that could pit the three presidential candidates against each other in a fight for dominance.

Sens. John McCain, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are all pushing for the perfect sound bite; for that singular moment that will define their campaigns' stance on the Iraq war.

And it happens on Tuesday. That's when General David Petraeus and U.S. Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker will report to Congress in two Senate hearings. They’ll give progress reports on the war and offer strategy going forward.

Does it strike you as the least bit odd or uncouth that the link to this article on the main MSN web site is "Candidates set to grill Petraeus on Iraq"? Call me crazy, but my understanding was that the good general was to give a report on the status of the war effort in Iraq, particularly since the "surge" has been implemented. Since when are war time military leaders "grilled" for their testimony, much less by presidential candidates? Is the assumption now that the general is a liar and must be cross-examined like a slippery witness on the stand?

It's nothing but pure madness to use the testimony of a man engaged in trying to fight a war as theater for your presidential campaign.

Things have come to a pretty pass indeed.

How Soon Things Change!

Umm, still watching that GOP "implosion" there "Blue Texan"? Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the country is watching the REAL implosion fireworks over in the Dem camp. After you pick up what's left from the Obama and HRC campaign slugfest, come give us conservatives tips on handling an "implosion."

Charles Krauthammer Latest Wingnut To Discover GOP’s Fundie Problem

How Does McCain Explain This?

Wow. Can you say "unwanted"? How does John McCain square his call for support from the base with bitter disparagement of members of that same base?

"I understand the frustrations a lot of Republicans feel," McCain says. "We're not representing their hopes and dreams and aspirations. We worry about Ms. Schiavo before we worry about balancing the budget. We're going to take up this Family Marriage Amendment again. Why? The Republicans will vote one way, and the Democrats will vote another, and everybody knows it! It's pointless. I've never seen Washington as polarized as it is today."

Which reminds him...

"I would never say this publicly, but some of these talk-show hosts -- and I'm not saying they should be taken off the air; they have the right to do what they want to do -- I don't think they're good for America."

Which brings him to...

"I urge my friends who complain about the influence of the religious Right, get out there and get busy. That's what they do! Now, if we believe in the Republican party of Abraham Lincoln and Theodore Roosevelt, the big-tent party, then we have to get out there and show that. The fact is, some of us have sat idly by while those very active people have basically set the agenda for our party. I get attacked every day because I'm working with Ted Kennedy. How can I work with Kennedy? Because I want to get something done!"

HT Free Republic

The Most Biased Article Of the Year Award Goes To...

Matt Spetalnick? Well the year is just begun so we'll have to wait and see, but the winner will have a tough time overcoming this doozy:

Seeking to reassert himself on the world stage in the twilight of his term [and how does the writer know what Bush is seeking?], Bush will press NATO for more troops in Afghanistan, try to keep up momentum in the alliance's eastward expansion and attempt to ease strains with Russia.

But with Bush even more unpopular overseas than at home, he could have a hard time swaying world leaders at this week's Bucharest summit as they look to whomever will succeed him in January 2009.

"Many of them are looking forward now to the next president in Washington and are already thinking about what the 2009 summit will bring," said Julianne Smith, a Europe analyst at Washington's Center for Strategic and International Studies. [Ahh, the old quote from ONE ANALYST at some think tank somewhere...]

Lame-duck status will not be Bush's only obstacle as he ventures abroad for the first in a series of international conferences marking his final year in office. [But wait, there's more!]

Overhanging his travels will be the 5-year-old Iraq war, which has damaged America's credibility with friends and foes alike. [Really?? As far as foes, why would we care about "credibility" if they are truly foes? And friends? Which ones? And in what way do we lack "credibility"]?The latest spike in fighting has increased doubts [Among whom? And exactly how? Many conflicts experience a "spike" in fighting just before the end as the enemy gives a last rousing attempt] of further drawdowns of U.S. forces before Bush leaves office.

He will also be trailed by a financial crisis at home that has roiled global markets and sharpened criticism of his economic record [Bush's economic record??? He wasn't the one that initiated the sub-prime debacle!!], once seen as a bright spot of his legacy [Really?? All I've EVER heard is constant gloom and doom since the day Bush darkened the door of the Oval office. Links, please!!].

I've highlighted where I think the writer leaves "straight news" and heads directly into undisguised bashing. This is a real piece of work. No wonder Conservatives tend to despise the so-called "mainstream media."

HT Free Republic

Through The Sneer, The Truth Comes Out

I was looking up something regarding Chuck Colson's efforts to pass the Prison Rape Elimination Act when I ran across a 2005 NY Times article that discussed Colson's conversion to Christianity and his subsequent work (for decades now) around prison reform. They mention Colson's work with respect to the Prison Rape Elimination Act,

There are signs that, at least on the issue of prisons, that could be changing. In the last few years, evangelical Protestants and their allies in Congress have become more interested in prison reform, and Mr. Colson deserves much of the credit. In 2003, by a unanimous vote, Congress passed the Prison Rape Elimination Act, mandating an extensive study of the problem of rape in state and federal prisons. It was not as good, certainly, as a well-financed program to stop prison rape, but it was still a dramatic recognition of a problem that has long been hidden from view.

But Mr. Cohen also also manages to get in a snarky crack on the motivation behind Colson's interest in prison reform (in fact, he calls into question the motivation of most Evangelicals),

It is tempting to attribute Mr. Colson's interest in prison reform to his own stint behind bars. If a conservative is a liberal who has been mugged, a prison reformer may just be a law-and-order conservative who has spent time in jail. Mr. Colson doesn't entirely disagree. "What I experienced in seven months in prison," he said, "was the total futility of that system." But he insists that his views about criminal justice are firmly rooted in his faith: "The biblical model says the way you deal with offenders is to redeem them." [emph mine]

As if to suggest that a "law-and-order conservative" only has his views about justice because he hasn't been on the receiving end--yet. I think it's quite possible to hold that the current prison system needs reform without ever having been a prisoner yourself. I do think it interesting that the columnist inadvertently credits Conservatives with being that end of the political spectrum more likely to be concerned with law and order, though.

Republic Unfazed

I figured this would be the outcome. The average American seems to have a forgetfulness about current events and so as long as Obama rides this one out, he should be OK. Most people will have forgotten by the 4th of July.

A new Wall Street Journal-NBC poll shows that Barack Obama has escaped serious damage as a result of his association with racist preacher Jeremiah Wright.

HT - American Thinker Blog

Do As I Say, Not As I Do

Oops!

WASHINGTON – While Sen. Barack Obama said he couldn't throw over his friend and pastor of 20 years for racially charged and divisive hate speech, he had no trouble calling for the head of Sen. Trent Lott, the Republican Senate majority leader, for embracing a colleague with a segregationist past on his 100th birthday.

On Dec. 12, 2002, Obama, then serving as an Illinois state senator and filling in as host of the Cliff Kelley radio show on WVON, challenged the Republican Party to demand Lott's resignation.

"It seems to be that we can forgive a 100-year-old senator for some of the indiscretion of his youth, but, what is more difficult to forgive is the current president of the U.S. Senate (Lott) suggesting we had been better off if we had followed a segregationist path in this country after all of the battles and fights for civil rights and all the work that we still have to do," said Obama.

He added: "The Republican Party itself has to drive out Trent Lott. If they have to stand for something, they have to stand up and say this is not the person we want representing our party."

World Net Daily

HT John Hawkins

Conyers Promises Civil Unrest

If they do this, I'd be willing to march on Washington. You talk about starting a revolution? They are playing with serious fire here.

(CNSNews.com) - At a gathering of liberal activists in Washington on Tuesday, Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) was asked if he would commit to holding the Bush administration accountable once a Democrat is in the White House and illegal acts have been pinned on President Bush.

My guess is that an Obama or Hillary will allow the impeachment to get their "tit-for-tat" re: Clinton, but then magnanimously "pardon" Bush for his "crimes."

CNS News

I Guess I Shouldn't Be Shocked

It truly is PATHOLOGICAL now. I said earlier today: "How long before the press starts finding other disgraced political figures--Republicans--to 'compare' with Spitzer? I give it 3 weeks before another scandal hits--a Republican, of course--but until then, look out for the 'Hmm. That's just like so-and-so...you know, the REPUBLICAN GUY that <insert dirty activity here>.'"

Well, I didn't even have to wait a day!

This AP story "helpfully" grabs some poli sci professor to talk about recent scandals and of course, it HAD to include a Republican. They can't just talk about the guy under question by himself--no, that would focus too much attention on him, so they have to take the heat off Spitzer by bringing in a GOP offender. But in the course of doing so (this is just amazing even though I expected it), they actually had the GALL to not mention the political affiliation of two of the three scandal-wracked people mentioned in the article, but managed to slip in the Republican's party affiliation! These people are just UN-BE-LIEV-ABLE.

Did you see any such treatment of Republican Congressman Larry Craig? Did they ever bring up Gary Studds as a helpful comparison? Gary Hart? BILL CLINTON? Pffft! Stop it already! This is the AP and the rest of the mainstream media we're talking about here...

Another tri-state governor in scandal - Yahoo! News