Now we are less than a week from the unholy bloodbath at Fort Hood in Texas. The "suspect," Major Hasan, is being assured of his full rights in the military court system. That's the right thing to do. This guy isn't worth compromising our principles for. Plus he's obviously guilty, so he'll get the chair.
But there is now some major bullshit floating around this event related to political correctness.
Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s saying that what we most have to fear now is a possible wave of anti-Muslim sentiment. Bullshit - what we have to fear most now is a copycat.
Journalist Michael Tomansky (an American working for The Guardian) says that Hasan's cry of "Allahu akbar" during the shootings should not be taken that Hasan is a religious extremist. His claim is that "it's something Arab people often shout before doing something or other." Bullshit again. First off, this killer isn't Arab, he's from Virginia. Second off, he had to know what he was saying and doing. He specifically chose to make this cry. I doubt he calls on the name of his god in such a way when pulling onto a busy freeway.
Let's look at Hasan as a person, not as a group member. He's a native-born U.S. citizen who chose to re-define himself as a Palestinian. A guy who prayed with a Jihadist cleric. A guy who complained and preached to co-workers, patients, and acquaintances. That sounds like a lot of warning signs to me. But nobody raised the red flag, none of his co-workers reported him.
Why? Because political correctness is more important to our press and our leadership than security. You can't report a Muslim for suspicious activity or you are "profiling" him. It wasn't Hasan's religion that made him suspect, it was his views and his change in self-identity. A person who thinks of himself as an American who worships Allah is no problem. An extremist Muslim who self-identifies as a Palestinian and prays with a Jihadist cleric is a problem, and needs to be reported. But thanks to policial correctness, Hasan avoided detection. Any soldier who reported him would probably have been disciplined for discrimination.
This shows why political correctness is a crock. Any society must discriminate -- to "recognize or identify a difference" -- between nut jobs and normal folks, even if it offends. Political correctness assumes a right to be free of offense, and there is no right to be free of offense. I see crap all the time that offends me. I can't stand people who cannot properly use an apostrophe. The commonplace use of "Oh my God" offends me, as it should every Christian, Muslim, and Jew. Male-bashing offends me. Immigrants who think I should learn their language offend me. Gay-bashing offends me. Parents who dress their nine-year-old girls like little sluts offend me. But we live in a free society. Running the risk of offense is part of the deal, and something we put up with for the sake of freedom.
Political correctness is based on the premise that your group membership is more defining than your individuality. This idea is fundamentally un-American, and is both dangerous and insulting. It's dangerous because of cases like Hasan's, where membership in a privileged group prevented proper diligence. It's insulting because you assume that my identity is determined by my measurable and visible qualities rather than my choices. You disregard my individuality and say I'm just a group member, not a person. I can hardly think of any idea more un-American than that.
Like I said, we live in a pluralistic society. Running the risk of being offended is a necessary compromise. If you don't want to be offended, move to a place with no freedom. You'll possibly be offended less in a police state, but you may be harassed, tortured, imprisoned, and killed, without the benefit of due process, trial by jury, or any of those other protections that secure liberty and offend dictators and jihadists.
Political correctness needs to die. I want my government to be more concerned with protecting my life and liberty than with protecting my personal sensibilities. I can live with an insult; I can't live without liberty.
Tuesday, November 10, 2009
The Republican Party Strangles Itself Thanks to Senator McCain
I am a registered Republican, have been for most of my life. I vote in every election I can. I'm proud to say I voted for Reagan. But right now I am not proud to say I am a Republican.
The party of Reagan and Lincoln is eating itself, and it is John McCain's fault. When McCain chose Sarah Palin as his running mate, I thought it was a disaster. In my opinion a Vice President should be at least marginally qualified to be President. Palin is interesting and fun, and I respect her independence and her accomplishments. But she has shown some poor judgment, and there was no way she was qualified to be Vice President. She had no significant foreign policy experience. She'd never dealt with defense issues, or immigration issues, or social spending issues. While Alaska is our largest state by land mass, it's our smallest by population (663,661 as of 2005). That's slightly larger than Milwaukee, and I don't consider being the mayor of Wisconsin's largest city to be adequate qualifications for the highest office in the land.
The real problem with Palin is that she was a reach towards the right when the country was obviously moving from center-right to center-left. The way to win that election was to propose new ideas. To moderates, Palin looked like an inexperienced G.W. Bush in a skirt. A centrist governor with experience, such as Charlie Crist, Haley Barbour, Bobby Jindal, or Tim Pawlenty would have made a much better choice.
I suppose the thinking was to energize the base and to attract women to the ticket. But the base was already energized thanks to their revulsion of Barak Obama, and moderate women were not going to be attracted by Palin because of her staunch anti-abortion views. Plus, let's face it, how many American women can identify with a hunter who kills and field-dresses a moose? The closest most Americans get to that experience is boning a chicken breast after removing the plastic wrap. So was Palin fun and interesting? Sure. Did she energize the base? Sure. Was she a winning choice? Nope.
The unfortunate consequence of McCain's choice and subsequent loss is that, perplexingly, the losing vice-presidential candidate has set the flavor for the Republican Party. Usually after a loss, the party re-examinies itself, picks some new leadership, and charts a new course. But there is a moniroity of vocal but wrong voices - blowhards like Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck and third-party groups like Club for Growth -- that are twisting this natural process to their own purposes.
Want an example? Check out the case of Dede Scozzafava. She was chosen as a popular candidate by her local Republican leadership and was doing well in the polls. But national GOP leadership and pundits -- Palin, Beck, and the Club for Growth among others -- felt she was not conservative enough. So rather than support a moderate Republican, they threw the election to a Democrat.
What the hell kind of strategy is that?
If this keeps up, the Republican party will cease to be a force in US politics. The national GOP eviscerated the power of the local leaders, who know their voters best. A moderate candidate, who could have born the banner for an inclusive Republican party, is now disgruntled and will probably join the Democratic party. The GOP gave up a seat it could have easily held. And the too-right agenda of rabble-rousers like Beck gets a boost.
How, in what universe, is this a win?
The party of Reagan and Lincoln is eating itself, and it is John McCain's fault. When McCain chose Sarah Palin as his running mate, I thought it was a disaster. In my opinion a Vice President should be at least marginally qualified to be President. Palin is interesting and fun, and I respect her independence and her accomplishments. But she has shown some poor judgment, and there was no way she was qualified to be Vice President. She had no significant foreign policy experience. She'd never dealt with defense issues, or immigration issues, or social spending issues. While Alaska is our largest state by land mass, it's our smallest by population (663,661 as of 2005). That's slightly larger than Milwaukee, and I don't consider being the mayor of Wisconsin's largest city to be adequate qualifications for the highest office in the land.
The real problem with Palin is that she was a reach towards the right when the country was obviously moving from center-right to center-left. The way to win that election was to propose new ideas. To moderates, Palin looked like an inexperienced G.W. Bush in a skirt. A centrist governor with experience, such as Charlie Crist, Haley Barbour, Bobby Jindal, or Tim Pawlenty would have made a much better choice.
I suppose the thinking was to energize the base and to attract women to the ticket. But the base was already energized thanks to their revulsion of Barak Obama, and moderate women were not going to be attracted by Palin because of her staunch anti-abortion views. Plus, let's face it, how many American women can identify with a hunter who kills and field-dresses a moose? The closest most Americans get to that experience is boning a chicken breast after removing the plastic wrap. So was Palin fun and interesting? Sure. Did she energize the base? Sure. Was she a winning choice? Nope.
The unfortunate consequence of McCain's choice and subsequent loss is that, perplexingly, the losing vice-presidential candidate has set the flavor for the Republican Party. Usually after a loss, the party re-examinies itself, picks some new leadership, and charts a new course. But there is a moniroity of vocal but wrong voices - blowhards like Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck and third-party groups like Club for Growth -- that are twisting this natural process to their own purposes.
Want an example? Check out the case of Dede Scozzafava. She was chosen as a popular candidate by her local Republican leadership and was doing well in the polls. But national GOP leadership and pundits -- Palin, Beck, and the Club for Growth among others -- felt she was not conservative enough. So rather than support a moderate Republican, they threw the election to a Democrat.
What the hell kind of strategy is that?
If this keeps up, the Republican party will cease to be a force in US politics. The national GOP eviscerated the power of the local leaders, who know their voters best. A moderate candidate, who could have born the banner for an inclusive Republican party, is now disgruntled and will probably join the Democratic party. The GOP gave up a seat it could have easily held. And the too-right agenda of rabble-rousers like Beck gets a boost.
How, in what universe, is this a win?
Welcome
Welcome to Pointed Comments.
This is my anonymous blog. I've had several blogs before but have either had to shut them down or curtail my comments thanks to the consequences of blogging. Employers, spouses, relatives, friends, co-workers, church members, political figures, the press, they all care what you say. And the Internet, thanks to fuckin' Google, is forever.
So here is where I get to say what I want to say, free, uncensored, without a filter or a PR slant or political correctness. In order to maintain my anonymity, I will be really light on the personal details. Don;t ask for more because I won't give it. TFB for you.
About me - I'm a guy, in my 40's. Lived in the southeast US all my life. I'm a professional with a master's degree and am on my third career. I'm married with a family. I'm well-educated, moderately conservative, religiously active, and am interested in politics, health care, movies, religion, finance, comics, and cars.
So let the pointed comments begin.
This is my anonymous blog. I've had several blogs before but have either had to shut them down or curtail my comments thanks to the consequences of blogging. Employers, spouses, relatives, friends, co-workers, church members, political figures, the press, they all care what you say. And the Internet, thanks to fuckin' Google, is forever.
So here is where I get to say what I want to say, free, uncensored, without a filter or a PR slant or political correctness. In order to maintain my anonymity, I will be really light on the personal details. Don;t ask for more because I won't give it. TFB for you.
About me - I'm a guy, in my 40's. Lived in the southeast US all my life. I'm a professional with a master's degree and am on my third career. I'm married with a family. I'm well-educated, moderately conservative, religiously active, and am interested in politics, health care, movies, religion, finance, comics, and cars.
So let the pointed comments begin.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)