Wednesday, July 21, 2010

Hyphenated American interviewed by Jimmy Z Show - July 19th

Jimmy Z and I recorded another show this Sunday, and Jimmy Z posted it on his website. Direct link to the appearance is here. We discussed the subjects that I covered this week on my blog (if you click on the link, you will be directed to my articles): Bill Press claims Americans are spoiled because they reject ObamaFarrakhan's blames the Jews for everythingThe third-worlding of the West •  Intellectuals and Thomas Sowell

Moreover, the listener can enjoy the wild avenues that the show examined. For example Jimmy and I discussed Robert Seigel of NPR – the most pompous man alive. Last but not least, I was happy to talk about Venedikt Erofeev, one of the best Russian writers - and this writer came handy when I was discussing my wife and what she thinks about my blog.

All in all, it was a pretty successful show, please tune in and listen.

Monday, July 19, 2010

I think we are finally getting to them

As one of the wackiest politicians of the 20th century, Mahatma Gandhi said - “First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.” It appears that the American left are now down to the very last weapon left in their arsenal - racism. It seems like stage 3 is slowly but steadily coming to the end.

The whole last week was the celebration of liberals gone wild
Louis Farrakhan discovers that Obama is not the Messiah and blames Jews for all the problems in the Black community (Hyphenated-American responds with a well-deserved one-fingered salute to Louis). Way to go Louis - nice distraction from the failures of your protege.

It's been widely reported that Obama's department of justice dropped the case against the ultra-racist "New Black Panther" movement partly due to the lobbying efforts of the NAACP. In response, NAACP (the race hustling group masquerading as a civil rights organization) publicly called the patriotic Tea Party to stop being racist. Isn't it special?

Bill Press, a liberal operative reacted to the news of public dissatisfaction to Obama's mishandling of the US economy with a usual liberal modesty - he told American people to grow up and stop whining about deficits, debt, unemployment and two wars. After all, we got the top guy in charge of the country, and once he gets back from vacation and beats his addiction to playing golf - he will solve all of our issues. We need to be patient though - the top guy may take some time. After all, it took him years to quit smoking and snorting cocaine - and golf is much more addictive than either of the two.

And then we get the dog-bites-man stories.

Soros funded "Free Press" (what an Orwellian name) is asking Obama to take government control over media - particularly the talk-radio. This story is probably less unexpected than "dog-bites-man" - which is why the mainstream media is ignoring it.

Police in Oakland, California (8th largest city in California) declared that it will not be investigating any non-violent crimes. The police still wants the citizens to report all crimes - it's just there will be no follow up and no attempt made to capture the criminals. The most ironic things are reveled when the careful observer studies the details.

Wikipedia reports that:
"In 2009, Oakland's city council passed a resolution to create municipally-issued "Oakland identification cards" to help residents get easier access to city and business services, improve their civic participation and encourage them to report crimes to police. City officials are considering eventual multipurpose ID cards that would serve as debit cards, bus passes, library cards, and discount cards for Oakland businesses. In 2010, Oakland's city council resolved to divert new municipal economic investment from firms headquartered in Arizona in the wake of that state's attempt to regulate illegal immigration."
It comes as no surprise that Oakland is a sanctuary city for illegal immigrants. It also does not help that the top two contenders for the mayorship of Oakland are from the competing "protected minorities" - Latinos (AFL-CIO activist De La Fuente) and Blacks (professional politician Ron Dellums). It surely does NOT help that both of the top candidates are rabid liberals, as well as Oakland's representative Barbara Lee. All in all, Oakland is a typical all-liberal American city - a city burdened by the left-wing rule, political corruption and unusually high crime rate. And now this city refuses to prosecute non-violent crime - which is undoubtedly a boost to the local multi-cultural diverse community.

Obama vacations in Maine
This part of the article is probably least informative - every detail is well known in advance by anyone with half of the brain functioning. Obama tells the world that he will not rest until he fixes the oil spill (and gets jobs back, gives all rights to homosexuals, wins in Afghanistan, lowers the sea-levels, and kills Osama ben Laden with his bare hands) - and then he leaves on yet another vacation. I can only guess that playing golf was too burdensome for him. In short - our dear president is slacking in the morning, slacking in the afternoon, does some more slacking in the evening - and then he is exhausted and he goes on vacation to Maine. And mind you, Maine is a strange destination for the Obama family, given that She-Obama told the entire country that everyone should go and vacation in the Gulf.
The old "let them eat cake" is no longer operational because cake may cause obesity - and She-Obama is battling childhood obesity since 2009.

Sunday, July 18, 2010

What's new, pussycat? #12

Trestin Meacham posts an interview with Hyphenated-American
Trestin was kind enough to post an interview with me on his blog. Trestin asks me a series of questions - from how I found myself in the US to the reasons why Americans should be concerned about socialism. In short - a normal chat between a couple of guys in the bar sipping beer and eating burgers - except the interview was conducted on the Internet, and I simply typed my replies on the computer.

I doubt I've broken any new grounds in this interview - but I suggest you check out Trestin's site anyway, read the interview and leave a few comments. Trestin is a genuinely nice guy, and I like his blog a lot.

Intellectuals and Society
I am a huge fan of Thomas Sowell - he is undeniably the most talented economist and political commentator alive.

A few weeks ago I've purchased his latest book "Intellectuals and Society" and I was having fun reading it. One of the main topics of the book is the correlation between igornance and arrogance of intellectuals.
The ignorance of intellectuals on great many subjects rarely (if ever) stops them from commenting on any topic with an unbelievabke air of arrogance and complete lack of any self-doubt.  For example, it's common for a journalist with zero understanding of economics and business to speak with derision about businessmen and capitalists and describe them as people not only of low morality - but also as people of no discernible talent and special knowledge to run business. Everyone is used  to hearing journalists express their belief that businessmen could have achieved much more if only they were smart enough to listen to the ideas promoted by the media.

And lo and behold - right on cue, I found a recent NPR interview with Steven Pearlstein, a "Washington Post business columnist" - a man with no discernible experience with business - it's unlikely he ever ran a hot-dog stand. And this "columnist" has a lot to say about the captains of American industry - the men who raised themselves by the bootstraps, who proved their credentials by actually making profit for their respective companies.

To start with, he claims that business is not investing partly because businessmen are not terribly bright (I presume they pay too much attention to the Obama's new laws and regulations instead of reading Washington Post's editorials):

And some of it, to be quite frank, Robert, is an appalling lack of imagination and guts on the part of these same CEOs who are complaining and pointing the finger at every else. You know, these guys are very good at cutting. They're very good at blaming others. They're a little less good at coming up with creative new products and services, and they've got a little flabby in that regard in the last few years where the focus has been on surviving and cutting, as it should had been. But they're not the gutsiest group of people in the world.  
He then criticizes them for, well, not knowing what they were doing in business:
And by the way, they get into this group think which you - you know, the fact that they all say it, it's sort of like a notion that starts in the country club locker room, and everyone is nodding, and then the one passes it on to the other. And now, you know, this similarity of the comments betrays this sort of group think that is almost self-fulfilling at this point.
Among many things that could be said about this bizarre comments by a Washington Post columnist (and are said by Thomas Sowell in his book) - a few obvious questions stand out. Who is INSTITUTIONALLY more susceptible to a virus of group think, and who is less likely to be forced by reality to walk away from the group think? Who has a stronger incentive to find the truth - a columnist for a mainstream media outlet, or a CEO of a major corporation? If the CEO is wrong in his assumptions - that will be reflected in his company's profits. If the manager ignores the reality, his company goes out of business. In short, there is a very powerful feedback that corrects for the mistakes of a business manager. But how exactly can reality tell the columnist for Washington Post that his loud pronouncements about business are wrong? What is the mechanism to correct his mistakes - and get his fanny fired if he dares to ignore reality?

These are powerful questions - and we all know the answers to them. A society that respectfully listens to (and subsidizes) insane rants by a half-literate social studies graduate - let alone acts on them - is a society in a real danger of collapse. I can believe that Steve's rhetorical devices are far more trained than those of the captains of industry. On the other side, it is clear that Steve's actual knowledge of business is at the level of a clever kindergartner - and yet, it is he who is given the microphone by the government media outlet and it is he, who is lecturing the businessmen on how they should run their business. I wonder when Steve will start using radio time to instruct engineers and surgeons. The time is coming to know what Steve thinks about Electrical Engineering. I cannot wait to hear Steve giving his opinion about the Nyquist criteria of stability of a system with one right-half plane pole in the open loop. Let the Laplace Transformation begin!

Politically correct toilets are coming to Britain
This story is too insane to be untrue. A British shopping center is installing "Asian squat toilets" in order to pander to the barbarian hordes from Asia. The asses heads of the Greater Manchester town's Exchange mall have chosen to spent several thousand pounds on these medieval toilets after "attending a cultural awareness course run by a local Muslim community activist." It is only a matter of time before camels will be used in the city of London as means of transportation - all in the name of "political correctness", "diversity" and "multiculturism". This story is also making me wonder - why is every time West accommodates itself to Islamic traditions - it has to bring in outdated cultural and technical devices into our society - be it burqas, blasphemy laws, honor killing, Sharia law or squat toilets? Hasn't our president, Barack Obama famously told the world about the Moslem positive influence on science? If they are so advanced - why is everything coming from the Islamic world so obsolete?

This last question reminded me of an episode from venerable South Park. In one of the episodes, the boy's school is sent on a field trip to Costa Rica, led by an activist choir group, "Getting Gay with Kids." The purpose of the trip is to "raise awareness about the vanishing rain forests". When the boys get out of the bus in Costa Rica, the following hilarious dialogue between Eric Cartman (an 8 year boy) and the politically correct teacher (Jeniffer Aniston) ensures (listen to the dialogue here):

Cartman: [holding his nose] Oh my God, it smells like ass out here!
Choir teacher: All right, that does it! Eric Cartman, you respect other cultures this instant.
Cartman: I wasn't saying anything about their culture, I was just saying their city smells like ass.

And this is the message that I was trying to convey all these years. I am not saying anything about Moslem culture - I am just saying that their cities smell like ass.

Saturday, July 17, 2010

Freedom is slavery

Alhouse, a popular blogger posts another example of left-wing jihad against the evils of freedom of choice. According to liberals, when people have "too much choice", they make wrong decisions - at the very least they make choices not approved by liberals. According to Barry Schwartz, author of "The Paradox of Choice" - "When the choice set is larger, people tend to make worse choices. They choose on the basis of what's easiest to evaluate, rather than what's important to evaluate...the safe, highly marketed option usually comes out on top." Moreover, if people are allowed to choose - the ill-defined "diversity" also suffers. While some people may be amazed by a sudden change of mood in the "party of choice" - I must remind you that liberals and progressives thought this way since the beginning of times. As the French proverb goes - "plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose". In God's language, it means: "The more things change, the more they stay the same". This  latest example reminded me of "1984" - the book that aptly described the liberal thinking nearly a century ago. Note that this book describes not only the liberal attack on freedom of choice - but also a complete description of modern day metaphysics - "postmodernism", "post-structuralism" and the like - the philosophies which essentially maintain that reality is optional.

Without further ado - here is the passage that demonstrates the roots of liberal objections to choice:

'We are the priests of power,' he said. 'God is power. But at present power is only a word so far as you are concerned. It is time for you to gather some idea of what power means. The first thing you must realize is that power is collective. The individual only has power in so far as he ceases to be an individual. You know the Party slogan: "Freedom is Slavery". Has it ever occurred to you that it is reversible? Slavery is freedom. Alone -- free -- the human being is always defeated. It must be so, because every human being is doomed to die, which is the greatest of all failures. But if he can make complete, utter submission, if he can escape from his identity, if he can merge himself in the Party so that he is the Party, then he is all-powerful and immortal. The second thing for you to realize is that power is power over human beings. Over the body but, above all, over the mind. Power over matter -- external reality, as you would call it -- is not important. Already our control over matter is absolute.'

For a moment Winston ignored the dial. He made a violent effort to raise himself into a sitting position, and merely succeeded in wrenching his body painfully.

'But how can you control matter?' he burst out. 'You don't even control the climate or the law of gravity. And there are disease, pain, death-'

O'Brien silenced him by a movement of his hand. 'We control matter because we control the mind. Reality is inside the skull. You will learn by degrees, Winston. There is nothing that we could not do. Invisibility, levitation -- anything. I could float off this floor like a soap bubble if I wish to. I do not wish to, because the Party does not wish it. You must get rid of those nineteenth-century ideas about the laws of Nature. We make the laws of Nature.'

'But you do not! You are not even masters of this planet. What about Eurasia and Eastasia? You have not conquered them yet.'

'Unimportant. We shall conquer them when it suits us. And if we did not, what difference would it make? We can shut them out of existence. Oceania is the world.'

'But the world itself is only a speck of dust. And man is tiny helpless! How long has he been in existence? For millions of years the earth was uninhabited.'

'Nonsense. The earth is as old as we are, no older. How could it be older? Nothing exists except through human consciousness.'

'But the rocks are full of the bones of extinct animals -- mammoths and mastodons and enormous reptiles which lived here long before man was ever heard of.'

'Have you ever seen those bones, Winston? Of course not. Nineteenth-century biologists invented them. Before man there was nothing. After man, if he could come to an end, there would be nothing. Outside man there is nothing.'

'But the whole universe is outside us. Look at the stars! Some of them are a million light-years away. They are out of our reach for ever.'

'What are the stars?' said O'Brien indifferently. 'They are bits of fire a few kilometres away. We could reach them if we wanted to. Or we could blot them out. The earth is the centre of the universe. The sun and the stars go round it.'

Winston made another convulsive movement. This time he did not say anything. O'Brien continued as though answering a spoken objection:

'For certain purposes, of course, that is not true. When we navigate the ocean, or when we predict an eclipse, we often find it convenient to assume that the earth goes round the sun and that the stars are millions upon millions of kilometres away. But what of it? Do you suppose it is beyond us to produce a dual system of astronomy? The stars can be near or distant, according as we need them. Do you suppose our mathematicians are unequal to that? Have you forgotten doublethink?'

Winston shrank back upon the bed. Whatever he said, the swift answer crushed him like a bludgeon. And yet he knew, he knew, that he was in the right. The belief that nothing exists outside your own mind -- surely there must be some way of demonstrating that it was false? Had it not been exposed long ago as a fallacy? There was even a name for it, which he had forgotten. A faint smile twitched the corners of O'Brien's mouth as he looked down at him.

'I told you, Winston,' he said, 'that metaphysics is not your strong point. The word you are trying to think of is solipsism. But you are mistaken. This is not solipsism. Collective solipsism, if you like. But that is a different thing: in fact, the opposite thing. All this is a digression,' he added in a different tone. 'The real power, the power we have to fight for night and day, is not power over things, but over men.' He paused, and for a moment assumed again his air of a schoolmaster questioning a promising pupil: 'How does one man assert his power over another, Winston?'
Winston thought. 'By making him suffer,' he said.
'Exactly. By making him suffer. Obedience is not enough. Unless he is suffering, how can you be sure that he is obeying your will and not his own? Power is in inflicting pain and humiliation. Power is in tearing human minds to pieces and putting them together again in new shapes of your own choosing. Do you begin to see, then, what kind of world we are creating? It is the exact opposite of the stupid hedonistic Utopias that the old reformers imagined. A world of fear and treachery is torment, a world of trampling and being trampled upon, a world which will grow not less but more merciless as it refines itself. Progress in our world will be progress towards more pain. The old civilizations claimed that they were founded on love or justice. Ours is founded upon hatred. In our world there will be no emotions except fear, rage, triumph, and self-abasement. Everything else we shall destroy everything. Already we are breaking down the habits of thought which have survived from before the Revolution. We have cut the links between child and parent, and between man and man, and between man and woman. No one dares trust a wife or a child or a friend any longer. But in the future there will be no wives and no friends. Children will be taken from their mothers at birth, as one takes eggs from a hen. The sex instinct will be eradicated. Procreation will be an annual formality like the renewal of a ration card. We shall abolish the orgasm. Our neurologists are at work upon it now. There will be no loyalty, except loyalty towards the Party. There will be no love, except the love of Big Brother. There will be no laughter, except the laugh of triumph over a defeated enemy. There will be no art, no literature, no science. When we are omnipotent we shall have no more need of science. There will be no distinction between beauty and ugliness. There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always -- do not forget this, Winston -- always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless.

If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face -- for ever.'

BTW, who could have missed Obama's pronouncements that his administration keeps its boot on the throat of BP? Nothing is new under the sun.

Friday, July 16, 2010

Louis Farrakhan asks Jews for reparations. Hyphenated-American responds accordingly.

The well-known crackpot and worshiper of president Obama - Louis Farrakhan has sent a letter to American Jews asking them to pay reparations for their "sins" against black people.
Among other things, this idiot said the following:

We can now present to our people and the world a true, undeniable record of the relationship between Blacks and Jews from their own mouths and pens. These scholars, Rabbis and historians have given to us an undeniable record of Jewish anti-Black behavior, starting with the horror of the trans-Atlantic slave trade, plantation slavery, Jim Crow, sharecropping, the labor movement of the North and South, the unions and the misuse of our people that continues to this very moment.
On behalf of all Jews and gentiles, Hyphenated-American offers this heartfelt response:

In case Louis does not understand the meaning of this gesture - I would translate it as follows: "Louis, go and fuck yourself sideways."

If Louis believes he cannot fuck himself sideways due to advanced age, he should find a liberal Jew and suck his dick. Maybe - and I cannot guarantee this - the aforementioned liberal Jew will drop him a dime for the services rendered. I am not sure how many dicks Louis would have to suck to earn the full amount of reparations he has in mind - but in case he believes it is taking him too long to get to the desired sum which would be enough to pay for the Jewish sins, I suggest he asks Barack Obama and Elijah Mohammad to join him in this cock-sucking jihad.

In short - Louis - reparations are not handouts (or handjobs), you need to truly earn them. And sucking Jewish cocks for money is your only viable option. Remember - jihad is not only about violent struggle against the Jewish infidels - it is also about martyrdom cock-sucking. It's all in the Koran, just check it out.

Thursday, July 15, 2010

History repeats itself

As Karl Marx said – “History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.” A few days ago, Bill Press, a Democratic operative had this to say about the apparent dissatisfaction of American people with Barack Obama:
I think this says more about the American people than it does about President Obama. I think it just shows once again that the American people are spoiled. Basically, spoiled-- as a people, we are too critical. We are quick to rush to judgment, we are too negative, we are too impatient. Especially impatient. We want it all solved yesterday, and if you don't, I don't care who you are -- get out of the way. 
And again, basically spoiled. To the point where it makes me wonder if it's even possible to govern today. I gotta tell you, I don't think Abraham Lincoln -- who certainly didn't get everything right the first time -- could govern today. I'm not sure Franklin Roosevelt could govern today, the way we are again. Just about like spoiled children. And it's Americans, and it's the media, and if we don't get instant gratification, then screw you is basically our attitude.

This angry outburst reminded me of a similar reaction by the communists who ran GDR (for those with short memory, German Democratic Republic was Eastern Germany ruled by the socialist thugs from 1945 till 1990). Back in 1953, workers in Eastern Germany rose up against communist oppression. Initially, it was a protest against the wage cuts, but it soon grew into worker's revolt. On June 17, the protests occurred throughout the entire country, involving more than a million people striking in some 700 cities and towns. The government of GDR turned to their master in the USSR, and the Soviet occupation forces put down the revolt, killing 50 people and jailing more than 10,000. When the German communist government regained its composure, it appealed to the German population and demanded that East Germans understood the wrongness of their ways and stopped being so difficult. Famous German play writer Bertolt Brecht reacted to the communist call with a rather snappy remark:
After the uprising on June 17th The Secretary of the Writers Union Had flyers distributed in Stalin Way that said That the People had frivolously Thrown away the Government's Confidence And that they could only regain it Through Redoubled Work. But wouldn't it be Simpler if the Government Simply dissolved the People And elected another?

Bill Press' diatribe calls for the similar reaction - in lieu of American dissatisfaction with liberal policies, shouldn't Barack Obama simply dissolve American people and elect himself better and more reliable electorate?

Saturday, July 10, 2010

What's new, pussycat? #11

AFL-CIO at its worst
I'll start the article with a peculiar quote from a AFL-CIO Chief Economist Ron Blackwell. This fella proclaimed that Obama's stimulus package (about a trillion dollars worth of welfare program for the well-connected) is only 4% of the deficit. In other words, this "economist" believes that US deficit has been about 25 trillion in the last 2 years. On the other side, he may be taking same math classes as president Obama, who recently proclaimed that Obamacare would cut people's health insurance premiums by a whopping 3000%.

Amazingly, the "Chief Economist" also believes people who disagree with him are hysterical - but then it's his comments which are hysterical - hysterically funny that is. Surely everyone understands that AFL-CIO won't hire a good economist (even basic literacy test would be too taxing) - because what it needs is a goon, a thug and a demagogue. Knowledge of mathematics could be construed as hindrance.

Is this worse than Gaza blockade?
Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration are organizing a blockade of G-8 aid to the backwards countries. "On the agenda at the G8 summit in Canada is promoting maternal and infant health in the poorest parts of the globe. The high rates of maternal and infant mortality in many countries are an impediment to democracy and social development, to say nothing of a human tragedy for these communities. Commitments of resources from the G8 countries to address these problems should be welcomed and commended." And yet, Obama's State Department is vetoing the effort because the plan does not contain specific funding for abortion. According to Hillary Clinton, “You cannot have maternal health without reproductive health. And reproductive health includes contraception and family planning and access to legal, safe abortion.” In other words, Obama-Clinton are willing to see children die from starvation if the is no funding for abortions. How worse is Obama-Clinton position on aid to poor countries than Israel's blockade of Gaza? After all, Israelis don't demand Moslems to abort their babies - they simply want Hamas to stop bombing the state of Israel. And yet, the so-called humanitarian activists 100% support Obama's blockade of poor countries - while critisizing Israel for much milder (and deserving) measures against Hamas. Is this hypocrisy or basic anti-semitism?

The war in Afghanistan
I read articles like this and I distinctly remember how liberals proclaimed that America has no choice but to win in Afghanistan. As future president Obama said in 2007:
When I am President, we will wage the war that has to be won, with a comprehensive strategy with five elements: getting out of Iraq and on to the right battlefield in Afghanistan and Pakistan; developing the capabilities and partnerships we need to take out the terrorists and the world's most deadly weapons; engaging the world to dry up support for terror and extremism; restoring our values; and securing a more resilient homeland.
The most amazing part was that Obama's website proclaims that America needs to win the war in Afghanistan. But now Obama is in charge of defeating Islamo-fascism in Afghanistan, and his enthusiasm for defeating the terrorists who attacked our country on 911 has clearly diminished. Today, he is starting to treat the war in Afghanistan as a distraction from his attempt to wreck the US economy. All in all, he is starting to resemble the mix of Lyndon Johnson and Jimmy Carter - but without their apparent love for America. The next presidential elections will be quite interesting to watch.

On the positive side, we have plenty of excellent articles from Mark Steyn, a singularly gifted Canadian writer that now resides in America. For example, Mark Steyn explaining why liberal journalists need to pretend that they have no bias:
...the garb of “objectivity” is vital to the institutional left’s sense of itself. Because, if you accept the idea that your world view is merely that—a view—it implicitly acknowledges there are other views, against which yours should be tested. Far easier to pronounce your side of the table the objective truth, and any opposing line mere “bombast” and “propaganda.”

In the European front, the news are not exactly new. The united European currency, Euro, is not feeling too well - it becomes obvious that the idea to have a common currency for dozens of welfare-socialist states was a bad idea. Of course, anyone who studied economics would know that government monopoly is always a bad thing - and a singular currency for the whole continent of diverse countries was destined to fail. And now, some journalists even suggest that it's not a good idea for tourists to purchase Euros. Essentially, European financial system is now treated with as much respect as a financial system of a Third World Country.

And speaking of Third World countries - I am curious if the readers of my blog are familiar with the etymology of this term. This term was coined by a French intellectual Alfred Sauvy. According to wikipedia, it referred to "countries particularly in the Middle East, South Asia, Latin America, Africa, and Oceania, that were unaligned with either the Communist Soviet bloc or the Capitalist NATO bloc during the Cold War." Sauvy wrote, "Like the third estate, the Third World is nothing, and wants to be something." The First Prime Minister of India, Jawaharlal Nehru, proudly announced in 1995:

I have no doubt that an equally able disposition could be made on the part of the other bloc. I belong to neither [the First or Second World] and I propose to belong to neither whatever happens in the world. If we have to stand alone, we will stand by ourselves, whatever happens... We do not agree with the communist teachings, we do not agree with the anti-communist teachings, because they are both based on wrong principles.
In other words, back in the 50ies, the term "Third World" was used proudly by numerous progressive Western-educated left-wing groups. Alas, the ideas of those groups proved to be wrong, and today the term "Third World" is used to describe corrupt, poor, violent countries. Isn't it amazing? Another abject failure of liberal ideology.

Dog-bites-man news - Liberals may raise taxes on the middle class after all. Who could have doubted that?

Anyone reading this article about the sexual perversion of Western communists cannot miss the parallels with society described in Huxley's book "Brave New World". The similarities are amazing.

And finally - a few interesting quotes from PLO, one of the top palestinian terror groups, which is now running Judea and Samaria (commonly known as the West Bank of the river Jordan): "'Obama [is] harder on Israel than Arab states'. "This attitude is emboldening Hamas." In other words, Islamic terrorists believe that Obama is too appeasing of Islamic terrorism. Can it get any more pathetic?

Last but not least - the Libyan terrorist who was released by Scotland in August 2009 (it was proclaimed that the consensus of doctors decided he had less than 3 months left to live) may live for another 10 years! And I've been told that British government run medical care is top notch - when a Third World country like Libya can heal a man, who was pronounced dead by the top professionals at NHS.