People From Another Planet
I know that some of us feel that liberals have come to earth from outer space, which is why we sometimes refer to them as space cadets. But they are much more like those dumb kids back in grade school whom we insisted had been AWOL when the brains were passed out.
I know that some of us feel that liberals have come to earth from outer space, which is why we sometimes refer to them as space cadets. But they are much more like those dumb kids back in grade school whom we insisted had been AWOL when the brains were passed out.
The folks I have in mind are apologists for Islam. For years, I have wondered why those who would never think of beheading another, or destroying a statue or a painting simply because it was beautiful, or setting fire to a church would continue to belong to a faith that encourages that sort of thing, and why liberals would never call them out for it.
I know that American Muslims in particular claim that those who commit evil are making a mockery of their religion, but I submit that those are in fact the ones who are actually taking their marching orders from Mohammad and living by Sharia Law. It’s these others, the so-called good Muslims, who are diluting the faith of their fathers. But the question to me is why they don’t go all the way and convert to another religion. Any other religion!
I know that if I had been born into a Muslim family, I would have converted a long time ago. Anything would be better than having to go through life insisting that people shouldn’t lump me with the degenerates who shout “Allah Akbar!” every time they shoot, stab or torch human beings, whose only sin is that they prefer Jesus Christ or Abraham to an eighth century pedophile.
In writing about the so-called refugee crisis that has seen Muslims butcher and rape their way across Europe, Prof. Edward Erler has referred to the fact that commonsense has given way to the insistence of liberals that “diversity” trumps everything, including logic and even survival. Couple that with the argument that we in the West who espouse religious freedom shouldn’t be hypocrites when it comes to those who don’t happen to be Christians or Jews. Naturally, they ignore the fact that Buddhists, Hindus, Sikhs and even Satanists, all manage to fit in without feeling the necessity to murder in the name of their religion; or, in the case of Atheists, in the name of their anti-religion religion.
What the lunkheads ignore is that Islam is a religion only in the sense that Nazism or Fascism were. Islam is in fact a political movement disguised as a religion, much the same way that the Clinton money-laundering operation was cleverly disguised as a charitable foundation. Islam looks to conquer the world, leaving its enemies the option of submission or death, while taking advantage of the naivety of western leaders who have been raised on a politically correct diet of religious tolerance.
Liberals are so stupid and so convinced of their moral superiority that they’ve convinced themselves that those who wish to escape the inconvenient hazards of war in Syria, Iraq and Yemen, should automatically be granted all the protections bestowed on American citizens by the Constitution.
Like Barack Obama, Angela Merkel, who is almost certain to lose her bid to be re-elected in 2017 because of the filth she has welcomed into Germany, is a globalist. Like John Kerry, who has warned Americans that we must prepare for “a borderless world,” Merkel decided that it would be a crime against humanity not to throw open Germany’s doors to those who not only bite the hand that feeds, clothes and houses them, but rapes their women and murders their men.
The irony is that Mrs. Merkel was merely trying to make amends for the way Germany treated Jews 80 years ago. She couldn’t have dreamed up a worse way of doing so than by allowing those who most closely resemble Nazis to defile her nation.
I’m reminded that a recent PEW poll of Americans has shown that many of us have fallen for the malarkey that Muslims are the most discriminated-against group in the U.S. At least that’s what 82% believe. In descending order, the others on the list were Blacks, Gays-Lesbians, Hispanics, Women, Jews, Evangelical Christians and Whites.
Frankly, I’m not sure what to make of the poll. For one thing, those being polled weren’t asked if they thought any of these groups deserved to be discriminated against, or at least ridiculed or resented, based on their actions. I, personally, would have those annoying college students and millennials who are still whining about the election high on my list.
Actually, I’d call the entire poll into question because I don’t see “Republicans” or “Males” specifically mentioned, although I assume they’re disguised as “Whites” and “Evangelical Christians.”
You may have heard that the military is planning to make an example of former Green Beret Mathew Golsteyn by charging him with a war crime in Afghanistan. It seems that our policy in that Islamic cesspool is to catch and release prisoners, which is very similar to Obama’s policy when it comes to illegal aliens and drug dealers.
Well, it seems that one day, when a Taliban bombmaker, instead of being transported to Gitmo, was released from custody, Golsteyn decided to track him down and commit justifiable homicide before the schmuck had a second chance to kill or maim additional G.I.s.
I can only hope that once Trump and his military appointments take over in January, we allow the troops to do whatever needs to be done without having a bunch of lawyers and social workers second-guessing them.
For that matter, I fail to see why we insist on making such a fine distinction between those who are trying to kill us and those civilians, aka collateral damage, who merely want to see us killed. Which probably explains why I found myself musing the other day why it is we never hear about underground guerrillas in Mosul or Aleppo waging war against ISIS the way the French, Dutch and Norwegians, did against the Nazis during WWII.
Speaking of military matters, I find myself sometimes wishing that those who reach a certain rank in the military be allowed to continue wearing their uniforms after entering civilian life. This was brought home for me when I saw ex-Marine generals James Mattis and Robert Kelly being welcomed on board by President-elect Trump. Without their uniforms, they looked somehow deflated.
I would suggest that says something very good about the people who dress our warriors. They not only look better, they even march better than our enemies. For instance, have you ever seen the Iranian soldiers on parade? They actually do the goose-step, which makes them look like very unattractive chorus girls. Apparently, they’re unaware that the folks who popularized that robotic gait got their butts handed to them 70 years ago.
Then there are those military caps favored by the North Koreans. It’s bad enough that their leader looks like one of those little rocks you water until something looking vaguely like hair begins to sprout. But they’re also required to wear caps with 10-inch crowns. I assume that fashion accessory is intended to make the height-challenged cannon fodder appear to be taller than circus midgets. But it works no better than it did in the 40s when Paramount saw to it that Alan Ladd always wore his Stetson tipped way back on his head so that he didn’t always have to stand on a box when playing a scene opposite his leading lady.
When I recently presented my list of what I regarded as over-rated actors, writers, artists, and various works of art, I asked that nobody go to the bother of taking me to task because my sole intention was to assure those who agreed with me that they weren’t alone. One person, however, did remind me of an item I would have included if it had come to mind. So, thank you Ms. G. Gelman of New York for calling “The Great Gatsby” to my attention.
In my estimation, no list of over-hyped books would be complete without F. Scott Fitzgerald’s tale of Jay Gatsby. I certainly don’t need any reminding that I am once again out of step with the world. Gatsby, after all, is still being read more than 90 years after it was published, although generally at the insistence of tenured English professors. In addition, it has been filmed eight times, adapted five times for the stage, once as a musical, and even been turned into an opera.
I just wonder if the book would have had the same lasting power if it had borne any of the titles that Fitzgerald preferred, before finally caving in, kicking and screaming, to his editor, Maxwell Perkins.
Frankly, I suspect that if Fitzgerald had had his way and the book had been called “Among Ash-Heaps and Millionaires,” “Trimalchio in West Egg,” “Under the Red, White, and Blue,” “Gold-Hatted Gatsby” or “The High-Bouncing Lover,” nobody would have ever bought a copy and I wouldn’t be including it on my list.
