Tammy Bruce: Political Correctness Archives

Political Correctness Archives

Signs of the Times

A (sign)post by Maynard

Which one of the four Adopt-A-Highway signs pictured above was removed because some people found it offensive?

Although the KKK sign troubled many people, the ACLU fought for the Klan's rights and won.

Tha Nazi Party signs, put up at a cost to taxpayers of $500, merely "draws ire".

The NAMBLA sign "is a matter of personal taste and has nothing to do with legality." (A subsequent report opens the possibility that NAMBLA did not itself apply to adopt the highway, but a prankster put the NAMBLA name on the application. So these signs apparently came down on a technicality.)

However, a group that advocates enforcement of immigration laws must be silenced.

Posted by Maynard · May 10, 2008 02:10 PM · Permalink · Comments (4)
Border Security | Freedom of Speech | Hypocrisy | Maynard Post | Political Correctness

Feds Want Kinder, Gentler Language About Islamist Terrorists

They're not Genocidal, Islamist Fascists, they're, uh, Angry Puppies! Yeah, that's so much less offensive.

This has go to be one of the most ridiculous constructions ever developed by the those brainwashed by political correctness. The Feds have decided that calling Islamist Fascists Islamist Fascists is too broad based, and could potentially offend "moderate" Muslims. It's this sort of news that makes this post even more apropos.

'Jihadist' booted from government lexicon

The Bush administration has launched a new front in the war on terrorism, this time targeting language.

Federal agencies, including the State Department, the Department of Homeland Security and the National Counter Terrorism Center, are telling their people not to describe Islamic extremists as "jihadists" or "mujahedeen," according to documents obtained by The Associated Press. Lingo like "Islamo-fascism" is out, too.

The reason: Such words may actually boost support for radicals among Arab and Muslim audiences by giving them a veneer of religious credibility or by causing offense to moderates.

For example, while Americans may understand "jihad" to mean "holy war," it is in fact a broader Islamic concept of the struggle to do good, says the guidance prepared for diplomats and other officials tasked with explaining the war on terror to the public. Similarly, "mujahedeen," which means those engaged in jihad, must be seen in its broader context.

U.S. officials may be "unintentionally portraying terrorists, who lack moral and religious legitimacy, as brave fighters, legitimate soldiers or spokesmen for ordinary Muslims," says a Homeland Security report. It's entitled "Terminology to Define the Terrorists: Recommendations from American Muslims."

Gee, and I wonder who those "American Muslims" are who seem more concerned with the truth than they do with the raping of Islam by other Muslims. It's not Vikings, or Quakers, or Scientologists out there marauding in the name of Islam. It's actual Muslims who follow the fundamental Whabbist interpretation of Islam. It is a legitimate, if not the richest, most powerful arm in Islam, based in Saudi Arabia. it is also the sect which has build and funs the majority of mosques in the United States. To ignore that fact means we will never address the core of the problem.

What are some of the suggested elements of the vague, non-offensive way to refer to our throat-cutting, head-slicing, child-murdering Islamist enemy?

"Never use the terms 'jihadist' or 'mujahedeen' in conversation to describe the terrorists. ... Calling our enemies 'jihadis' and their movement a global 'jihad' unintentionally legitimizes their actions." [...]

On the other hand, avoid ill-defined and offensive terminology: "We are communicating with, not confronting, our audiences. Don't insult or confuse them with pejorative terms such as 'Islamo-fascism,' which are considered offensive by many Muslims." [...]

"We must carefully avoid giving bin Laden and other al-Qaida leaders the legitimacy they crave, but do not possess, by characterizing them as religious figures, or in terms that may make them seem to be noble in the eyes of some," it said.

Just one note here--anyone who could remotely see the shooting of a child in the back and the murder of thousands of innocent civilians as 'noble' is already a lost, disturbed soul and a mentally ill person and is not affected by whatever words we might use. To think otherwise is the epitome of Narcissism, Groupthink and just plain old idiocy.

This is not some renegade band of Muslims. It is a movement of fundementalist Islamists who, along with Iran, Syria, Lybia, and Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, have a worldwide network with a goal of establishment a global caliphate. For our own government to deny this is deadly madness as they implement nothing less than a whitewashing of language in order to further ignore who our savage, genocidal enemy really is.

Bottom line, here's a newsflash for the DoD, The State Dept, Homeland Security and the White House: If a Muslim is moderate, they wouldn't be concerned with us using accurate terms to describe the enemy, and understand it's not what we say that's a danger, it's what Islamist are doing which is the threat. That is, if they were actually moderates 'advising' our government. Moderate would be more concerned with madmen using the name of their prophet to murder innocents; moderates are fervent supporters of the United States and appalled at the increasing violence done in the name of Islam; if they're moderate, they would be marching for and demanding an end to the obscene violence done by Islamists and encouraged by the Whabbist sect of Islam based in Saudi Arabia. Moderates understand it's not the lexicon the United States uses in fighting this rabid enemy that's the problem, it's a worldwide Islamic movement that is destroying whatever vestiges of actually "moderate" Islam that existed.

At this point, we all have to wonder what in the world the collective Fed is smoking. But after almost seven years, I suppose it is sort of fun for them to eliminate Islamic Fascism and jihadists with the stroke of a pen. Perhaps then they think we won't notice that bin Laden, Zawahiri, and so many other Islamic Fascist jihadists are out there planning to murder as many people as possible.

« Close It

Posted by Tammy · April 25, 2008 07:57 PM · Permalink · Comments (6)
Balls, Lack Of | Just Plain Stupid | Just Wrong | Moronic Convergence | Political Correctness

Got "Expelled"?

A post by Maynard

I don't know whether I'm going to like "Expelled", which opens in theaters this Friday. But Hollywood and the mainstream media have been doing their darndest to immerse us in a cauldron of political correctness. Being a disagreeable creature, I thirst for anything that promises to be contrary.

What is "Expelled" about? The press clips indicate it focuses on the conflict between evolutionists and creationists in the academy. I hope there's more to it than that, because that is a battle I would rather not linger on. We're here by the will of God, but is it unthinkable that He might have used an evolutionary process to do the job? Why must the pursuit of this question become prickly? In a nutshell, science tells us how and religion tells us why. These two outlooks should work together (like body and soul) to seek a uniform vision.

The clash of evolution versus intelligent design has become a proxy war as our culture wrestles with issues of atheism versus theism. Radical secularists attempt to misrepresent the Establishment Clause as a call for state-mandated atheism; an aggressively wrong-headed agenda that I vigorously oppose. I'm on board for the war, but the enemy is the repressive political ideology. Is it really necessary that we scrap with the evolutionists?

I view intelligent design ("ID") as a discipline that is more philosophical than scientific. And it's certainly appropriate that the hard sciences be cross-pollinated with philosophical questions; that's what we're doing when, for example, we expect a medical doctor to also learn medical ethics. ID, like ethics, raises hard questions and important challenges. But I can't see it as a science in the sense that biology is. (I know some people put forth a rigorous technical argument in favor of ID, and I'm not dismissing that position; however that's a long discussion in itself, which I'll skip for the sake of brevity.)

Of course, it must be remembered that evolution is also something of a theory. That's why they call is the theory of evolution. Duh!

Back in the bad old days, Galileo offended the dogma of the Church when he advanced his theory of heliocentrism. He was forced to recant this heresy, and spent his latter years under house arrest on orders of the Inquisition. We tell ourselves we've passed beyond the era of dogma into an enlightened age. But these days, the guardians of the One True Church of Political Correctness are equally aggressive in defending their canon. Recently Nobel laureate James Watson was forced into retirement when his observations gave offence to the Anointed Ones.

(As the song goes: "Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss." But let's move along.)

Anyway, with respect to the academic community, I lament to note that mine is apparently a minority opinion. This study indicates that only 7% of scientists believe in a personal God, as opposed to 72% that disbelieve — in sharp contrast to the general public, where a large majority accept God. Other studies suggest that the more educated an individual is, the more likely that person is to be an atheist.

For the record, I (Maynard) have a degree from Starfleet Academy, and in fact my faith was nurtured as it became clear that our most essential questions could not be answered by materialistic inquiry. I love science and I am grateful to the students of the material arts, to whom we all owe a great deal. But it's Man's vanity, rather than objective facts, that tempts us to think we can get by without God.

« Close It

Hollywood Station

Maynard's book-of-the-day

Do you need a brief respite from national cacophony of political talking points? Hollywood Station, the latest book by Los Angeles policeman-turned-novelist Joseph Wambaugh, is excellent escapist fare. It's a hugely entertaining page-turner that's also highly relevant to our times. The story is fictional, but it conveys an honest impression of modern Los Angeles officers, doing the best they can in an environment plagued by dysfunctional micromanagement and hostile oversight and political correctness gone mad.

In the aftermath of the Los Angeles riots and later the Rampart scandal, the LAPD fell under control of police-hating political forces. This is a long and troubling story in itself, and you'll understand it better (and you'll get angry) when you read "Hollywood Station". But that's not really what the book is about; it's just the historical background in this tale of officers and detectives working to solve a nasty robbery/homicide.

Wambaugh creates a cast of charismatic characters that won't let you go. The story meanders through numerous police incidents which range from the pathetic to the absurdly hilarious. You feel as if you're on the scene, riding along with the struggling officers. It's easy reading, but be warned that some of the language and situations are pretty raw; "sensitive" readers beware!

This is the new mass-market paperback edition; it's also available in audio and Kindle and hardback and telepathic uplink into your neural cortices. For additional reviews, click to Metacritic. Enjoy!

Posted by Maynard · January 21, 2008 10:09 PM · Permalink · Comments (1)
Books | Maynard Post | Political Correctness

The Sort of Apology We Can Like

With the slew of political apologies these days it seems like campaigning has turned into one big neutered intervention/group therapy excursion. Not for Fred Thompson's campaign, however. Here we have a bunch of apologies even I think are a long time coming. (HT Hot Air).

Fred Thompson Campaign Apologies

From Karen Hanretty, Deputy Communications Director:

In light of Mike Huckabee’s heartfelt apology to Mitt Romney for making reference to Romney’s religion in the New York Times Magazine, we at the Thompson Campaign would like to offer Huckabee our own heartfelt apologies for some references we’ve made about his record as Governor of Arkansas.

We apologize for pointing out that as Governor of Arkansas, Huckabee offered in-state tuition to illegal immigrants. That’s something he’d probably just as soon no one talk about.

A recent Washington Post-ABC News Iowa poll of Iowans likely to vote in the Republican caucus stated illegal immigration as their top issue of concern, tied with the war in Iraq.

We apologize for pointing out that in 2002 Huckabee wrote Pres. Bush a letter asking him to lift the Cuban embargo. It’s easy to see how Huckabee might have missed the finer points of a 40-year embargo. While he obviously knew enough about the embargo to ask that it be lifted, Huckabee clearly didn’t know enough to ask that it not be lifted. So for that, we’re sorry.

In 2002, Governor Huckabee strongly advocated lifting the embargo against Cuba saying it “harm[s] our own agricultural and business interests,” “has not helped the people of Cuba” and has “provided Castro with a convenient excuse for his own failed system of government.” (Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, 3/29/02)

We apologize for referencing that 47% tax increase Huckabee imposed on Arkansas taxpayers when he was governor. That must be really awkward for him, now that he’s running in a GOP primary election. We notice he never points it out to voters.

Average Arkansan’s tax burden increased by over 47% between 1997 and 2005 (or $933 per person). (Arkansas Democrat Gazette, 10/9/07)

We apologize for telling reporters that a BA in Biblical Studies from Ouachita Baptist University doesn’t, in fact, make Huckabee more qualified to fight the war on terror than say…Fred Thompson.

In an interview with CBNNews in November, Huckabee said “…I truly understand the nature of the war that we are in with Islamo fascism. These are people that want to kill us. … And I don’t know if anybody fully understands that. I’m the only guy on that stage with a theology degree.”

I'm impressed.

Posted by Tammy · December 13, 2007 03:25 PM · Permalink · Comments (13)
Political Correctness | Politics

Former Agent: Waterboarding Saves Lives But Should be Banned

So now other people should die so this man can feel morally superior. Lovely.

Ex-CIA agent: Waterboarding 'saved lives'

NEW YORK (CNN) -- A former CIA agent who participated in interrogations of terror suspects said Tuesday that the controversial interrogation technique of "waterboarding" has saved lives, but he considers the method torture and now opposes its use...

Waterboarding begins by placing a suspect on a table with the suspect's feet slightly elevated, said Kiriakou, who was waterboarded several years ago as part of his CIA training. He said he elected not to learn how to perform the technique, which is designed to emulate the sensation of drowning.

Once a suspect is secured on the table, interrogators wrap his or her face in a cellophane-like material, Kiriakou said. "There is a bladder, or a water source, above the head with water pouring down on the mouth, so no water is going into your mouth, but it induces a gag reflex and makes you feel like you're choking," Kiriakou said. Video Watch the ex-agent describe the procedure »

Kiriakou said he lasted only a few seconds during his training because his body felt like it was seizing up almost immediately.

"It's entirely unpleasant," Kiriakou said. "You are so full of tension that you tense up, your muscles tighten up. It's very uncomfortable."

Abu Zubayda lasted a little longer, said Kiriakou, but not much.

The former agent, who said he participated in the Abu Zubayda interrogation but not his waterboarding, said the CIA decided to waterboard the al Qaeda operative only after he was "wholly uncooperative" for weeks and refused to answer questions.

All that changed -- and Zubayda reportedly had a divine revelation -- after 30 to 35 seconds of waterboarding, Kiriakou said he learned from the CIA agents who performed the technique.

The terror suspect, who is being held at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, reportedly gave up information that indirectly led to the the 2003 raid in Pakistan yielding the arrest of Khalid Sheik Mohammed, an alleged planner of the September 11, 2001, attacks, Kiriakou said.

Let's see, what would make us Better, Morally Superior People? Hmmm....Allowing tens of thousands of innocent people to die horrible deaths at the hands of terrorists so we don't have to endure the 'shame' of 'torturing' bloodthirsty terrorists, or...Savings tens of thousands of innocent lives by making a bloodthirsty terrorist feel 'entirely unpleasant' and 'uncomfortable.'

Gee, I'm gonna have to meditate on that one.

Posted by Tammy · December 11, 2007 10:39 AM · Permalink · Comments (8)
Hypocrisy | Political Correctness | Politics | September 11 | War on Radical Islam

Attack on Christmas Alert: Sears and K-Mart Rename Christmas Trees

In a bid not to "offend" customers who don't celebrate Christmas, K-Mart and Sears have decided to rename Christmas Trees as the infamous "Holiday Tree" or just "Tree." Personally, I would find it odd to decorate a ficus but apparently the folks at Sears and K-Mart aren't that deep. (HT Hot Air)

The Liberty Counsel has all the details, including the astounding response from a Sears Corp. spokesman about why they banished "Christmas" from the Christmas season.

K-Mart and Sears have intentionally renamed “Christmas trees” to “holiday trees” or simply “trees” in its advertising. K-Mart is owned by Sears Holding Corporation. A Liberty Counsel supporter asked K-Mart for an explanation of the company’s disregard for Christmas. Vincent V., a representative from Sears Holding Corporation, responded:

The reason for our use of holiday tree is due to the [sic] Sears Holding is a very diverse company, we do not want to offend any of our associates, but also our valued customers. We decided to call them holiday trees because even if Christians are the only religion that uses a Christmas tree we still do not want complaints from other customers of different religions complaining about our use of Christmas.

What? Christmas is a federal holiday. Green, pointed, prickly trees we decorate in December are called “Christmas trees” all around the world. In the process of trying to be “diverse” and to allegedly not offend their associates or customers, Sears and K-Mart have offended their largest customer base – Christians and others who celebrate Christmas...

Let Sears Holdings know what it's like to offend Christians, the majority in this nation, and the majority of their shoppers. The Sears Holding Corporation telephone number is 847-286-2500. They're closed during the weekend, of course, but I'm sure they'd love to hear from you on Monday. :)

And let your local K-Mart and Sears know that you will not be shopping there until the Sears Corp. reverses itself.

Posted by Tammy · December 8, 2007 04:30 PM · Permalink · Comments (14)
Just Wrong | Political Correctness

Last Minute: On Fox by Phone at 9am PT re NOW's Abandonment of the British Teacher

That's in 4 minutes folks. They just called me about NOW's just released 'statement' about the British teacher in Sudan facing lashes and prison over her students naming a Teddy Bear "Muhammad." NOW's position? They're not taking one. That's right, they're not taking a stand. As you can imagine, I have plenty to say. It will be on the phone, and then I immediately start Tammy Radio.

Here is more coverage.

Sudan Charges British Teacher With Insulting Religion

KHARTOUM, Sudan — Sudan on Wednesday charged a British teacher with insulting religion and inciting hatred, a crime punishable by up to 40 lashes, six months in prison or a fine, after she named a class teddy bear "Muhammad."

The charges come a day after a 7-year-old Sudanese boy said Gilliam Gibbons, 54, asked him as part of a school assignment what he wanted to call the stuffed animal and he said, 'Muhammad,' after his name.

A spokeswoman for the National Organization for Women said the situation "is definintely on the radar, and N.O.W. is not ignoring it.

But she added that the U.S.-based organization is "not putting out a statement or taking a position."

Radio personality Tammy Bruce, former president of the Los Angles chapter of the National Organization for Women and past member of their board of directors, criticized the organization for not taking a stand.

“We have a duty to make a difference for women around the world,” Bruce told FOX News. “The supposed feminist establishment is refusing to take a position in this regard because they have no sensibility of what is right anymore. They're afraid of offending people. They are bound by political correctness.”

“The American feminist movement has not taken one stand to support the women of Iraq, the women of Afghanistan, the women of Iran,” she said. “It is the United States Marines who have been doing the feminist work by liberating women and children around the world.”

Posted by Tammy · November 28, 2007 08:56 AM · Permalink · Comments (23)
Authentic Feminism | Death of Right and Wrong | Moronic Convergence | Political Correctness | War on Radical Islam

NY DMV Bans "GetOsama" License Plates

Get Osama!

The plates the NY DMV deems too offensive and derogatory.I have a feeling a certain 3,000 people who dies on 9-11 and almost 4,000 troops who have died since, might disagree.

Another example of how at least the New York bureaucratic elite are in the grip of the Stockholm Syndrome. I first articulated this when NY decided to alight the Empire State building in green to pay tribute to Ramadan. Now, the DMV says "GETOSAMA" the plates violate their regulation that prohibits "obscene, lewd, lascivious, derogatory to a particular ethnic or other group or patently offensive."

New York DMV Bans 'GETOSAMA' License Plates

HAUPPAUGE, N.Y. — Retired New York City police officer Arno Herwerth hit a major roadblock this week when he tried to dress up his ride in patriotic style.

Arno, a 21- year veteran of the NYPD, wanted to add vanity license plates reading "GETOSAMA" to the 1993 Ford Aerostar he had already hand-painted red, white and blue. But New York's DMV red-lighted the anti-Usama bin Laden plates, banning them under an agency regulation that prohibits anything "obscene, lewd, lascivious, derogatory to a particular ethnic or other group or patently offensive."

Contemplating Racial IQ

A post by Maynard

**UPDATE: A Note from Tammy at the end of the post**

Wow, it seems that James Watson, the Nobel-Prize winning discoverer of DNA, really put his foot in it when he theorized that human intellectual capacity varies with race. His lectures were halted and there was even a suggestion that he be prosecuted:

Anti-racism campaigners called for Dr Watson's remarks to be looked at in the context of racial hatred laws. A spokesman for the 1990 Trust, a black human rights group, said: "It is astonishing that a man of such distinction should make comments that seem to perpetuate racism in this way. It amounts to fuelling bigotry and we would like it to be looked at for grounds of legal complaint."

Watson is now in full apology mode.

I'm going to mostly skip over the controversial topic itself and touch on our reactions. This flap says a lot about the state of the Western world and the political correctness that drives us.

From a Darwinist standpoint, Watson's comments are perfectly logical:

"There is no firm reason to anticipate that the intellectual capacities of peoples geographically separated in their evolution should prove to have evolved identically," he writes. "Our wanting to reserve equal powers of reason as some universal heritage of humanity will not be enough to make it so."

The concept of all men being created equal is fundamentally religious. It's not a notion we apply to the animal kingdom. We are not shunned for observing that tortoise-shell cats are willful, or suggesting a boy cat will make a better pet than a girl cat. If humans are just another animal, then why should we be any different?

It's obvious that the instantaneous crusade against Watson is dogmatic rather than reasoned. And it's ironic that the dogma of political correctness is often promoted by the same ideologues that mock the dogma of religion.

As far as intelligence itself goes...well, I'm not quite sure exactly what it is. Am I (Maynard) smart? I know I can be pretty smart in some ways and unbelievably stupid in others (trust me on this). There are many flavors of intelligence, and they only become meaningful in a greater context. A lot of my personal efforts go to putting myself in a place where my strengths are valuable and my weaknesses are irrelevant. I think we've all got a niche where we can be useful...if only we're willing to seek it.

The point is that intellect is not valuable in itself. "Smart" people can be ineffective or even evil. Adolf Hitler was a genius, and we know how he applied his intellect.

So raw intellect is just another tool, one of many, to be applied or mis-applied or discarded. To the extent that it's inherited (and that's the old "nature versus nurture" argument)...well, maybe inherited intellect is something like inherited wealth. Is it good to be born to wealth? You would think so, but we find no shortage of counterexamples. The pathetic antics of the rich and famous make it clear enough that wealth isn't all it's cracked up to be.

The backlash against Watson merely illuminates our modern cultural obsession with race. Am I supposed to be pleased with Watson's ideas because I'm a person of paleness, and thus presumed to be intellectually advantaged? Why can't I just think of myself as an individual? And I know there are individuals of all races who are a lot smarter than I am. I'm grateful to live in a world where smart people have figured out a lot of stuff, and their discoveries have been passed along, and now I benefit from them. I'm lucky! We're all lucky! Does the skin pigmentation of the people who have given me so much really matter? Do I get points based on the number of explorers and inventors who are "my people"?

To be fair, it's important to remember that the idea Watson expressed could be picked up by old-style racists. This is a very legitimate concern. But are we doomed to be caught between the today's racial obsessions and yesterday's racial obsessions? Does this crazy ideological battle justify silencing valid inquiry?

An analogous question was addressed a few years ago in the movie Gattaca. This postulated a future society in which the "clean gene" people were at the top of the heap. It tells the tale of an ordinary man who aspired to join the ranks of the genetically pure. It promotes the notion that the spirit can rise above the flesh. Maybe it's Hollywood silliness, but I applaud the concept. If we're going to get dogmatic, then this is the dogma I prefer.

A Note from Tammy:

Maynard is right about one thing this controversy has indeed brought to our attention: how political correctness keeps us from addressing, and therefore vanquishing, questions centered around complexion and intellect. It very well could be argued that it is the racism of the Western World (and the need for certain Victimologists of Color) who are invested in the 'question' never being excised. We can only do that by seriously contemplating, as an example, Watson's assertion.

We then have these issues to address: Are people with a pale complexion actually 'better and smarter' than those with darker ones, or did the empire building of ancient Greece and Rome, and their subsequent consuming of the Middle East and Africa, begin a pattern of events that kept certain people from reaching their full potential? Are Jews smarter than everyone else (as their contributions to society seem to indicate) or is it their millennia-old commitment to eduction the reason such a small minority of people have accomplished so much?

Does Africa indeed still struggle, not only because of ancient ravages, but the world's colonizing and oppression of its people for the past several hundred years? Educating the "natives" certainly was not part of the English or Spanish or Dutch Master Plan. And while under the boot of 'conquerers' indigenous people are going to be a bit more focused on survival than on an education in the arts and science, whatever its cultural foundation.

The same could be argued for the Middle East, where its own commitment to broader, more expansive education was overwhelmed by religious fervor, which allowed Muslim nations to compete militarily with the Western, Christian, world. A population (especially women) seriously educated always poses a threat to the existing power structure, undermining tyranny and despotism. Today's existing tyrants in the Middle East and Africa, while their complexions mostly match those oppressed, are also deeply invested in the maintaining the ignorant status quo which served European colonizers so well.

We are, though, not allowed to have this discussion because it is too politically incorrect. Why? because we must start with the premise that there are undeniable differences in the world.

And one last point--I find it fascinating the world seems just fine with embracing Holocaust-denying Jew-hater Ahmadinejad, with even American institutions of the mind that his 'ideas', which contradict known fact, are worth debating. Yet, when a world-renowned scientist simply brings up the obvious disparity on accomplishments via continents and the issue of race, it causes a worldwide uproar of shock and unqualified rejection. One more bit of evidence of how ignorance and the investment in the status quo by the the world's Elite (Jew-hating and maintaining the 'question' of African/black potential) still menacingly prevails.

« Close It

Posted by Maynard · October 19, 2007 12:25 AM · Permalink · Comments (15)
Cultural Commentary | Maynard Post | New Thought Police | Political Correctness | Race Relations

Disturbing the Dead to Placate Islam

Apparently it's not enough for the living to denigrate their lives by pandering to the Islamist Death Cult. Now the English want to destroy an historic graveyard, dig up 350,000 and re-open it as a graveyard for Muslims.

The higher irony with this story--considering the goals of the Islamist Death Cult and if the civilized world doesn't stop its inaction and pandering, it's Christians and Jews who are going to need more graveyard space.

Anger over plan to dig up 350,000 bodies in historic London cemetery for Muslim burial site

It is a peaceful resting place for 350,000 souls - an historic graveyard which now serves as a nature reserve. But plans are afoot to dig up the ancient graves at Tower Hamlets Cemetery - and reopen it as a 21st century burial site.

Officially it would be known as a "multi-faith" cemetery but it is likely that it would principally answer calls for a Muslim graveyard in the largely-Asian East London borough...

The local newspaper has been bombarded with letters from historians and nature lovers declaring: "There is no way we'll allow them to dig up our ancestors."

But the Labour-controlled council's environment spokesman Abdal Ullah appeared to be in no doubt about the feasibility of the plan when he said: "To preserve the respect and dignity for everyone, I think most of the graves would have to be cleared out and we'd start afresh."

God=1, Pelosi=0

After the congressional "Acting Architect" removed the word "God" from a flag certificate for an Eagle Scout, we all got mad and the situation is magically reversed. I have a feeling God will always prevail, but it sure can get irritating sometimes.

Capitol Architect Lets 'God' Fly On U.S. Flag Certificates

The Architect of the Capitol, responding to a public outcry, ruled Thursday that, from now on, the word "God" may be inscribed on certificates accompanying flags that have flown over the U.S. Capitol.

Acting Architect Stephen T Ayers said in a statement that the policy of disallowing political and religious statements on flag certificates has been inconsistently applied and does not fulfill the objectives of the office.

"It is inappropriate and beyond the scope of this agency’s responsibilities to censor messages from members," Ayers said.

"The Architect’s role is to certify that flags are appropriately flown over the U.S. Capitol, and any messages on the flag certificates are personal and between a Member of Congress and his or her constituents,” Ayers said.

Well, that's nice, but it sure isn't what he was saying a few days ago. It's amazing how much sense angry Americans can instill in the cowards in Washington.

A Tale of Two Editors

A post by Maynard

Here's another peek at the blatant self-hating double-standard that permeates the academic landscape.

FoxNews reports:

The student editor of the Colorado State University newspaper was admonished Thursday for the paper's use of an obscenity in an editorial about President Bush but David McSwane will be allowed to keep his job.

Okay, fair enough. Some university papers glory in their verbal vitriol and angry rhetoric. This may be tasteless or vulgar at times, but we give the media a lot of leeway in this country. We take our First Amendment rights seriously (and I wish we'd do the same for the Second Amendment — but that's another topic). Can you ever remember a case of anyone at a student paper losing his position for editorial excess?

Hmmm, now that I mention it, last year the editor of The Daily Illini at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign was summarily dismissed after publishing the notorious Mohammed cartoons. This was, you'll recall, the biggest news story in the world for a time, and the mainstream media displayed uncharacteristic sensitivity in omitting the essential details of what the story was really all about. The media, which is so brave when it comes to exposing anything negative about America (think about, for example, prison photos from Abu Ghraib, or classified details of covert anti-terrorism operations, or artistic ordure like "Piss Christ") suddenly started worrying about offending people.

The fired Illini editor, Acton Gordon, describes his experience here.

Like Stealing Donuts From Seniors

Big Government vs. Big Donut

You can consider the Nanny State out of control when they decide to take away donuts from a senior center because they're bad for the residents. The very same seniors, who in their 60s, 70s and 80s, one way or another fought and won World War II, and defended this nation during the Korean and Vietnam wars. They survived the Cold War, the Cuban Missile Crisis, the drug-haze of the 60s, the disasters of Nixon and Carter in the 70s, Carter's recession, malaise and Iranian hostage taking. The didn't kill themselves, die of alcoholism or drug abuse, die in a car wreck, or get killed by some freak. They survived the 20th century.

And what do we do to honor and celebrate our seniors? We treat them like babies and take away their donuts. Yet we're so obsessed with making sure potheads can get their dope we open up "medical marijhuana" stores. Un-Effing-Believeable.

Seniors Protest Doughnut Ban

MAHOPAC, N.Y (AP) — It was just another morning at the senior center: Women were sewing, men were playing pool — and seven demonstrators, average age 76, were picketing outside, demanding doughnuts.

They wore sandwich boards proclaiming, "Give Us Our Just Desserts" and "They're Carbs, Not Contraband."

At issue is a decision to refuse free doughnuts, pies and bread that were being donated to senior centers around Putnam County, north of New York City. Officials were concerned that the county was setting a bad nutritional precedent by providing mounds of doughnuts and other sweets to seniors. The picketers said they were objecting not to a lack of sweets but that they weren't consulted about the ban.

"Lack of respect is what it's all about," said Joe Hajkowski, 75, a former labor union official who organized the demonstration. He said officials had implied that seniors were gorging themselves on jelly doughnuts and were too senile to make the choice for themselves.

"I'm 86, not 8," added C. Michael Sibilia...

Caregivers there and elsewhere say the doughnut debate illustrates the difficulty of balancing nutrition and choice when providing meals to the elderly.

"Senior citizens can walk down to the store and buy doughnuts. Nobody's stopping them," said Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest in Washington.

That's respect for you.

Post-Mortem: The Duke Rape Case

A post by Maynard

We heard about the infamous Duke University rape case in bits and pieces over time, and most of this "news" was driven by political agendas. Now that the story has wound down, it's worthwhile to step back and contemplate the lessons to be learned. Here's a succinct summary from The Economist's Lexington column: "Presumed Guilty".

The most essential information is that the case was absolutely untenable from the beginning, and that the entire incident illustrates how political correctness has metastasized into unabashed and systematic racism. The sad, but unsurprising, conclusion is:

The only people who, it seems, have learned nothing from all this are Mr Nifong's enablers in the Duke faculty. Even after it was clear that the athletes were innocent, 87 faculty members published a letter categorically rejecting calls to recant their condemnation. And one professor, proving that some academics are as far beyond parody as they are beneath contempt, offered a course called "Hooking up at Duke" that purported to illustrate what the lacrosse scandals tell us about "power, difference and raced, classed, gendered and sexed normativity in the US."

I guess it's unreasonable to expect the elite educators to learn anything.

The article was prompted by the release of this book, Until Proven Innocent: Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustices of the Duke Lacrosse Rape Case. A Time Magazine columnist acknowledges the depth of the problem:

The analysis of the notorious Duke rape case in this book is hard to accept. According to Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson, this episode was not just a terrible injustice to three young men. It exposed a fever of political correctness that is more virulent than ever on American campuses and throughout society. . . . Unfortunately for doubts, the authors lay out the facts with scrupulous care. This is a thorough and absorbing history of a shameful episode.

The Washington Post Commits Hate Crimes Against Penguins and Christians

A (non-Washington) post by Maynard

Cartoonist Berkeley Breathed has been drawing satirical comics since 1978. Over the years I've enjoyed his comic strips and his books. He's got a good eye for absurdity wherever he finds it. His satire is sharp but not mean.

These days you'll find Mr. Breathed's weekly comic, "Opus", here. ("Opus" is the name of the penguin, pictured above.)

FoxNews is reporting that the Washington Post and other newspapers have yanked the latest "Opus" out of fear of offending Muslims. Take a look for yourself and see how offensive this strip is. To get a greater context of the situation, look at the previous week's strip, which takes a potshot at Jerry Falwell. Naturally, there was no reason to censor the earlier strip.

The gentleman you see above and in the strip is sexist ex-frat boy Steve Dallas, another Breathed regular character. The lady is moonbat Lola Granola.

Yet another example of the double-standard and the cowardice of our elite media.

Posted by Maynard · August 27, 2007 02:14 PM · Permalink · Comments (2)
Just Wrong | Maynard Post | Political Correctness | War on Radical Islam

Scandal at the New York Times?

A post by Maynard

The New York Post is reporting a horrendous scandal at the New York Times. The claim is that a NYT editor got drunk at an office party and was heard to mutter the f-word. No, not that f-word; that one is perfectly acceptable in enlightened society these days. This is the f-word that gets you incarcerated at a re-education camp, after which you deliver a tearful public apology and pledge to spend the remainder of your life making amends. The word Ann Coulter hurled at Mr. Silky Pony. Its use would represent an unthinkable infraction at an elite institution such as the Times. An investigation was launched, and fresh copies of the anti-harassment guidelines were distributed to all employees.

This reminds me of a friend who works in the Los Angeles Library system. She told me the employees were required initial the various clauses of the non-discrimination policies, thus acknowledging they had been informed of the many things they weren't allowed to talk about.

I don't want to defend or justify rude or boorish behavior, which is of course disgusting. But does the disease justify the cure? We seem to have reverted to the excesses of McCarthyism.

Do you remember when Joe McCarthy decided we should fight Communism by making people sign loyalty oaths? Soon everyone was busily investigating everyone else's past for hints of disloyal behavior. For example, maybe you wrote a book report on Tolstoy when you were in high school, in which case you were probably a Russian sympathizer. The atmosphere became something of a feeding frenzy, and for a while McCarthy was untouchable. But at the end of the day, he hadn't uncovered any Commies; all he had done was make a noble cause look mean and ridiculous. As a practical matter, McCarthy did more to aid and abet the traitors than he did to stymie them.

I hope I live long enough to see today's politically correct elites join Joe McCarthy in failure and disgrace. But I'm not holding my breath.

Posted by Maynard · July 25, 2007 12:13 AM · Permalink · Comments (12)
Maynard Post | New Thought Police | Political Correctness

Alleged Child Molester Freed Because No Translator Could Be Found

For get about the fact that the 'immigrant' from Liberia attended high school and a community college in Maryland, and spoke English to detectives. Instead, because of political correctness the court released this rapist of a 7-year-old because they couldn't find an interpreter for his native Liberian language. Oh, and let's not mention the fact that Liberia was founded by freed American slaves, or that the official language of Liberia is...English.

Interpreter Trouble Ends Sex-Abuse Case

Charges against a man accused of raping and repeatedly molesting a 7-year-old girl have been dropped because the court took too long to find an interpreter fluent in his native West African language.

Montgomery County Circuit Judge Katherine D. Savage dismissed the nearly three-year-old case against Mahamu Kanneh last week, saying the delays had violated the Liberian immigrant's right to a speedy trial...

Police arrested Kanneh, of Gaithersburg, in August 2004 after witnesses told police he assaulted the girl multiple times. He spent one night in jail and was released on a $10,000 bond with the restriction that he have no contact with minors.

Prosecutors at first maintained Kanneh could understand the proceedings without translation into his native Vai, a tribal language that linguists estimate is spoken by about 100,000 people mostly in Liberia and Sierra Leone.

Prosecutors pointed out that Kanneh attended high school and community college in Montgomery and spoke to detectives in English...The first interpreter stormed out of the courtroom in tears because she found the facts of the case disturbing. A second interpreter was rejected for faulty work. A third Vai interpreter was located, but at the last minute, that person had to tend to a family emergency.

In recent weeks court officials had found a suitable interpreter, but Savage ruled that too much time had already passed...Loretta E. Knight, the court clerk responsible for finding interpreters, said her office searched exhaustively for a speaker of Vai. She said court officials contacted the Liberian Embassy and courts in all but three states.

The Washington Post reported that it identified three Vai interpreters Thursday with help from the National Association of Judiciary Interpreters, including one in Gaithersburg.

One more highlight of the depravity of political correctness and the sort of system the left has worked for decades to bring about.

UPDATE:

Another "Grand Bargain", Another Massive Failure

Just as the Amnesty Bill was dubbed a "Grand Bargain," we have another example of what happens when you compromise to reach a consensus--you agree on the lowest common denominator. With the immigration issue, it was open borders, stomping on the Rule of Law and rewarding 20 million illegal squatters with amnesty.

Now, the issue is Iraq. And what will a depraved "Grand Bargain" get us this time? Not an agreement to finally face down the enemy. Not even an agreement simply to dispatch singular enemy leadership like Muqtada al-Sadr. Nope, true to form, the Iraq Grand Bargain is all about the legacy of the Left: surrender and retreat. This time as facilitated by the biggest frightened "Please Like Me" liberal of them all--George W. Bush.

Moment of Truth for the President

The New York Times leads today with David Sanger's story, "In White House, Debate Is Rising On Iraq Pullback; Political Considerations; Not Waiting For Sept. 15, Aides Seek to Forestall G.O.P. Defections." The piece is tendentious, as one would expect--but THE WEEKLY STANDARD has confirmed that there are real discussions going on at the White House, with advocates of what is being called "The Grand Bargain" pushing hard for the president to move soon to announce plans to pull back in Iraq. So this week will not only be a week of (mostly silly) debate on the Hill; it will also be an important moment of truth for the president, who will have to decide whether to give Gen. Petraeus and the soldiers a chance, or to accept the counsel of some of his advisers and begin to throw in the towel on Iraq.

Let me be clear: The president ordered the "surge," which only recently came to full strength and whose major operation has been going on for less than a month. If he were not to give it a chance to work, he would properly be viewed as a feckless, irresolute president, incapable of seeing his own strategy through a couple of months of controversy before abandoning it. He will have asked our soldiers to go on the offensive, assuming greater risk of casualties--and then, even though the offensive is working better than expected, will have pulled the plug on their efforts.

Indeed, the White House is living in a fool's paradise if they imagine that "compromising" now and in this way buys them anything...

By Category

By Month

Political Correctness Archives

Signs of the Times

Feds Want Kinder, Gentler Language About Islamist Terrorists

Got "Expelled"?

Hollywood Station

The Sort of Apology We Can Like

Former Agent: Waterboarding Saves Lives But Should be Banned

Attack on Christmas Alert: Sears and K-Mart Rename Christmas Trees

Last Minute: On Fox by Phone at 9am PT re NOW's Abandonment of the British Teacher

NY DMV Bans "GetOsama" License Plates

Contemplating Racial IQ

Disturbing the Dead to Placate Islam

God=1, Pelosi=0

A Tale of Two Editors

Like Stealing Donuts From Seniors

Post-Mortem: The Duke Rape Case

The Washington Post Commits Hate Crimes Against Penguins and Christians

Scandal at the New York Times?

Alleged Child Molester Freed Because No Translator Could Be Found

Another "Grand Bargain", Another Massive Failure