On This Day in History…

National Archives
An exclusion order posted at First and Front Streets in San Francisco directing removal of persons of Japanese ancestry.



On Feb. 19, 1942, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed Executive Order 9066. There was no mention of relocation centers in the EO, because initially none were envisioned. The purpose was for those of Japanese ancestry to relocate voluntarily, anywhere within the interior, away from the West Coast and areas of strategic military importance.

On April 25, 1992, as a UCLA student, I went by bus from campus on a pilgrimage to Manzanar, 230 miles northeast of Los Angeles on the 50th Anniversary of the internment of 110,000 Japanese-Americans into relocation camps during WWII.

As sympathetic as I am to the Japanese-American experience (my mom being Japanese, I identify more with ...Japanese-American culture than Thai/Thai-American), I'm going to go ahead and anger a lot of people and extol some of the non-PC merits of Michelle Malkin's book, In Defense of Internment: the case for 'racial profiling' in World War II.



Baby Ogata's Grave
The imposing beauty of the Sierra Nevada mountains, marred by having to see them through barbed wire fences.
Photo taken by Wordsmith


Whether you agree or disagree with Malkin's points in the end, I see nothing at all that is "racist" about her book, unless one knee-jerks into PC-induced sensitivities as substitution for thinking.

It is revisionist dishonesty (or unfortunate ignorance) for anyone to claim there were no instances of Japanese issei or nisei who displayed commitment to the ultra-nationalistic tradition of "doho" (unbending loyalty to the Emperor regardless of residence or citizenship status). Malkin provides a number of examples of where there was evidence of Japanese-American disloyalty.

Even moreso than racism and prejudice, the possibility of fifth column saboteurs and the dangers of further attacks on the West Coast were very real, and supported by the best military and civilian intelligence analysis at the time. This included the MAGIC messages which were intercepted diplomatic communications that revealed Japan's espionage activities in regards to the West Coast, Hawaii, and the southern border.

Throughout Europe and the South Pacific, there were instances of Japanese immigrants who consorted with their ancestral homeland, revealing where their loyalties lay. Same held true with Germans who no longer lived in Germany (which brings up the point that it wasn't just those of Japanese ancestry who were interned by the Department of Justice- of the 31 thousand enemy aliens from Axis nations, nearly half were European).

The conventional perspective, of course, is exemplified by the following passage from "Yankee Samurai", by Joseph D. Harrington- a perspective that rings heroic for me, with selfless patriotism, bitter sorrow, honor and conflicted loyalty, and unconditional love and service to country:

"Before leaving New Guinea, Walter Tanaka had faced up to a major crisis in his life. He had done everything he could to dissuade his angry and disappointed father from renouncing the U.S. and returning to Japan. This was not easy to do while soaking wet in a foxhole with the enemy shooting at you. The moisture on Walt's face was more than rain when he read what he feared was his father's last letter on a painful subject.

America had disappointed him. Tunejiro Tanaka told his son, as he recounted the family troubles. He intended to go back to Japan as soon as he could. But, he had other ideas concerning Walter. 'When a tiger dies, he leaves his skin,' Tunejiro wrote, quoting an old Japanese adage, 'but when a man dies he leaves only his name. America has rejected me, and I am going back to my native country, Japan. You, however, are to stay in America. It is your country. Defend it. I charge you not to do anything that will dishonor my name."
-Ch. 12, pg 258

And we are all proud of the selfless patriotism and heroism of Nisei who found themselves in the unfortunate circumstance of having to prove their loyalty, fighting for a country that uprooted and held their families in internment camps.

To my knowledge, the all-Japanese 442nd Regimental Combat Team remains the most highly decorated unit in American military history. And those Japanese-Americans who acted as translators for military intelligence played a large role in saving lives by winning/shortening the war.

Today, civil rights activists want to draw parallels between the Japanese-American experience of then to that of Muslim-Americans, today.

Vigilance against prejudice is ok; but we shouldn't be crammed with so much political correctness as to throw common sense out the window.

Profiling is not the worst evil in the world. It is a logical process of identification. You do this naturally in your everyday activity. If I see someone wearing a Grateful Dead t-shirt concert, the natural conclusion for me to reach is that, chances are, the guy's a fan of their music. I could be wrong, sure. But percentage-wise, I'm probably correct in my initial assessment, without yet verifying and confirming.

There are all kinds of profiling: Racial/ethnic, national, religious, behavioral...

The act of profiling doesn't mean you automatically are thinking "guilty before proven innocent".

If a certain terror cult had a strange fixation with wearing Casio F91W wrist-watches, it only follows that one should scrutinize those wearing the favored watch more closely than those without; it does not mean that ALL and even MOST people who choose to wear that watch are terrorists. It's just one clue on a list of potential traits to be on the lookout for.

The fear of racial/ethnic/religious/national profiling- of being labeled "racist"- failed to protect us against 9/11 terrorists. Ronald Kessler's The Terrorist Watch, pg 30-31, pg 33:

When he wrote the Phoenix memo, Williams was investigating an individual who was a member of the al-Muahjiroun, an Islamic extremist group whose spiritual leader was a supporter of bin Laden. The man was taking aviation-related security courses at Embry Riddle Aeronautical University. Why was he interested in aviation security? Perhaps so he could hijack a plane, Williams thought. Others taking flight training could have the same nefarious purpose.

Headquarters passed the memo off to low-level analysts, who wondered whether interviewing Middle Eastern men taking flight lessons or aviation security courses would raise issues of racial profiling.

~~~

the FBI operated in a politically correct atmosphere that Congress, the Clinton Administration, and the media fostered. Focusing on Arab men was a no-no.

In Defense of Internment, pg XXVIII-XXIX:

Williams recommendation to canvas flight schools was rejected, FBI director Robert Mueller later admitted, partly because at least one agency offical raised concerns that the plan could be viewed as discriminatory racial profiling. "If we went out and started canvassing, we'd get in trouble for targeting Arab Americans," one FBI official told the Los Angeles Times.

To be sure, the Phoenix memo was not enough to warn of the 9/11 plot (Williams himself only marked the memo for "routine" attention and never dreamt of the possibility of hijackers flying planes into buildings); but what is revealed is the aversion to conduct the kind of profiling that would raise the hackles of civil rights groups.

And today, we are still hamstrung by our political correctness sensitivities and fear to offend, as demonstrated by the Ft. Hood shooting (and what have we here....5 U.S. soldiers plotting together?!). That one should have been preventable.

So long as this remains the case, we will treat grandmothers and young, Middle-Eastern men in their 20's with equal levels of scrutiny, taking off belts and shoes, and being prevented to bring aboard a simple gift like a snow globe. Because discrimination is such a naughty word and profiling an act of great evil and injustice.

When civil liberty activists hyperventilate about "That's profiling!"

My answer, in classic Cheney-fashion, is...

"So?"

Cross-posted at Flopping Aces

Silly Request

Photo by Ringo the Gringo

YouTube is the most vile and worthless place for debate. A real time-waster.

Nevertheless, due to a friend posting a video on FB, and me taking issue with it, I somehow also ended up engaging debate on the YouTube site.

My request is this: If you see my comments (username: Fightflipnfold) and have a YouTube account, please "positive" them, as a vaccine against the haters who don't like what I say. I already received a few thumbs down rankings. After 6 negatives, no one can see what I wrote.

It's crazy to give me negative ratings simply because I'm saying things disagreeable to them. I don't give negatives to the challenges to my opinion.

So I expect even my lefty visitors here, who champion debate and free speech, will also give me thumbs up ratings.

Here's more background on Prysner, for anyone curious or unfamiliar with him and the video.

Haunted Houses in Los Angeles

Halloween is a fun time. Not only do people love to dress up, but they love to decorate their houses as well, with the macabre and the shocking. Full of scary laughs and frightening decorations.

I thought I'd share with my readers, some of the clever and imaginative if not bone-chilling haunted house decorations out there in the Los Angeles area....







These are near UCLA....







On my way to work, houses in Palms and Culver City...

This one is just awesome:

Scariest houses of all, though.....








Brace yourselves.......














Now those are simply terrifying. Tricks-or-treaters should be wary that if they go to these houses with a bag already full of candy, beware the owner of these houses doesn't reach into your bag to distribute your hard-earned candy to other tricks-or-treaters, just making their rounds. Play safe, and be safe!


Happy Halloween!

My Excursion into West Hollywood

Yesterday, before work, I took a detour to check out all the hoopla for myself. Read about it at Flopping Aces.

If California is on another planet, then West Hollywood is in another galaxy.

The Return to Reagan Country

3 days ago, I bumped into Norma at Bob's Market. I hadn't seen her since last March. As soon as I pulled in, and saw her car (I didn't even have to see the Reagan bumpersticker to recognize it) parked in the same spot, I knew I'd see her inside. I grabbed an origami gift from my car, went in, and tracked her down. She said she was just thinking about me, as the origami horse I gave her last time is a constant reminder.

She fears Senator Obama will probably win, but isn't giving up hope. She always looks around her when talking politics, for fear of some obnoxious Obama supporter butting in. Funny, but last weekend, I was there while two young boys were going up behind strangers, would chant "Obama" to see the person's reaction...they had on Obama t-shirts, so I'm not sure if they were pumped up from attending a rally or what.

I told Norma how I've seen a few McCain yard signs go up. She mentioned that there was one that was up last week Tuesday, but then was gone over last weekend. She expressed fear of putting up a McCain bumpersticker on her car, although she rides around with an '84 Reagan bumpersticker.

Anyway, we were happy to see a fellow conservative Republican in blue, blue, Santa Monica.

Saturday Morning Break from Politics

My head's spinning from trying to keep up with all the poliblog reading, following all the latest political twists and turns. So enough of that! This morning, I need a little space to take a breath.

Here's a video I made recently, after listening to that darn Apple ipod nano-chromatic commercial song.

Have a happy handstand, everyone!

Wordsmith in his college days

The Los Angeles School of Gymnastics Showing Support for the Troops

Robyn, the camp director at LASG, managed to get some of our summer camp kids to write up cards to be sent to soldiers serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.

My favorite card, from a very sweet girl I met during the last week of camp:




Thank you kids, for thanking those who serve to defend our country!

Consumer Rant Wednesday

What is it with rewards/savings cards? I swung by the nearby drugstore, CVS, needing to pick up detergent, and couldn't find the last of 3 savings cards I used to have in my posession. I think I gave out work numbers or fake numbers, so nothing came up in their system. I ended up filling out a new form for new savings cards (the detergent was $4.95 with the card; almost $9 without). I put down the address of my old work building, because I get tons of junk mail in my mailbox, as it is. I don't need more. I end up sifting through snail mail spam, to make sure legitimate, important mail doesn't get lost amidst the newspaper type ads.

So, anyway, what is it with all these grocery stores that seem to basically extort you into signing up for one of their stupid rewards cards, just so you can get (what I think) is the actual normal price? I really don't know how the system works, so if anyone can clue me in, I'd be grateful. Am I wrong to be so irked? When did stores start doing this? It wasn't always so.

My feelings are reflected by this shopper in Ohio:

I do not like these "savings cards," mainly for one reason. I've noticed that the stores that use them raised their prices so that the "sale" price with the card is what the regular prices used to be before they started using the cards. So in reality, you are getting the regular price instead of a high price (i.e. some thing that used to cost $5.00 with out the card now cost as much with it and $7.00 with out). Where are the savings at? So what's the point of stores using these cards other than as an excuse to make more money by raising thier prices? -Anonymous in Ohio 5/7/01

Is Anon and myself out of line for feeling so jaded, gypped, and extorted? I don't mind giving out a certain amount of personal information, so that they can better serve their customers; but no on giving out my phone number and address!

How I Spent 4th of July Weekend

Internet Access at the Airport Terminal. 25 cents a minute, while waiting to leave LAX. (Click photo if you can't tell what I'm viewing)

My parents had been living overseas for about the last 20 years. They moved back into our Colorado Springs home last year. It was very nostalgic to see familiar furnishings that have been held in storage....old toys that could probably bring me a pretty penny on Ebay, but is worth a million bucks in memories.

I spent 3rd grade through 6th living in on-base housing at the Air Force Academy. 7th grade, my parents bought a house, then my dad's next assignment took us to South Korea.

Nothing beats Mom and Dad's cooking.

This is a T-38. My father flew these during pilot training (painted in the Thunderbirds' paint scheme).

This is an A-10. According to the placard, on Feb 6, 1991, while assigned to the 706th Tactical Fighter Squadron, 926th Tactical Fighter Group, Capt. Robert R. Swain, USAFA '79, scored the first ever air-to-air victory in an A-10 aircraft. Capt. Swain shot down an Iraqi Bo 15c helicopter during combat operations over Iraq.

My toothpaste got confiscated at the airport in Colorado. I only got two squeezes of use out of it. Goddamn terrorists....

Hammering Out Sparks from the Anvil....

I've been meaning to blog on this for quite some time, ever since Dennis Prager brought this New York Times article to my attention over 2 years ago.

Take a look at the photo at the top. Is there anything strikingly odd about the photo? What do you see? I see a "ridiculous" little Asian boy pretending to be a cowboy, and proud of wearing the get-up. I say "ridiculous", because, of course, there weren't really any Asian cowboys out in the Wild West. If anything, I should be playing the part of an Injun. But back then, at the time, I didn't feel ridiculous. I thought I looked like Robert Conrad.

I was born in 1968, Phoenix, Arizona. My ethnicity? Thai. Beyond that, I have no knowledge of my birth heritage and biological parents, as I was given up for adoption. I do know that whatever the circumstances around my birth mother's pregnancy, she loved me enough to carry me through 9 months to be delivered right away into the loving home of a young Air Force fighter pilot, wed to a Japanese woman in 1964 while stationed overseas. I couldn't have been blessed with a more stable home or asked for more loving parents.

My parents never kept my adoption a secret from me. I've known all my life that I was adopted, so it never seemed strange to me. I do admit, however, that in college, it did begin to occur to me what a unique experience mine might be; and earlier in my pre-teens, I know I was self-conscious when visiting relatives (on my dad's side....which consequently also affected my feelings when around my relatives from my mom's side) in California of the fact that I was not blood-related to people who seemed to offer me unconditional acceptance and love. Still, it couldn't erase the feeling that in a "skin-deep" sense, I didn't belong. And it had nothing to do with how my relatives treated me. One of the experiences that really meant a lot to me was when my grandpa introduced me to his nurse as his grandson. My Dad and I had flown out to visit him in the hospital, because he didn't have much longer to live. My grandfather was a short thin man; a fisherman and a cusser who was known as "Firpy" (my dad inherented the nickname) because in his youth he was scrappy (I believe there was a boxer named "Firpo"). He was not the kind of grandfather you felt comfortable to be bounced upon, on his knee, and run up to for hugs.

The reason why it was a healing experience to hear him tell the nurse that I was his grandson, was that a few years earlier, my mom in a moment of bitterness, told me the story of how Grandpa Phirpy apparently said to my Dad before he shipped to Japan, "I don't care what you do over there, but don't you dare marry a Japanese lady. If you do, I'll disown you." My dad said, "Alright". But of course, things turned out different. And no, apparently he didn't get disowned. But it was another experience in my maturation toward dealing with racism on a personal level.

My earliest memory of being race-conscious, was one day when I was about 4 or 5 living in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina. My mom took me to check out Tinkerbell Kindergarten. It must have been an open-house or something. I went out on the playground where two boys were playing on the monkey bars. They basically told me to go away and I couldn't play there with them; they used racial slurs to reject me. Back then, children used to take their thumbs to stretch the corners out to mock those with "slant eyes". I don't see kids doing that these days. It was one of those experiences that began to shape my consciousness that there was something physically different about me from other "Americans"; that I didn't physically resemble Robert Conrad. And I began to take a closer look in the mirror, to see what others were seeing that I had failed to see.

As a footnote, one of the two boys, Richard, became my best friend and neighbor when we moved into the house across the street. Subsequently, because of that, the other kid, Butch, grew to accept me, too. They were the first ones to teach me a rhyme involving the "N" word. In a moment of ignorant innocence and stupidity, I asked Dad, "Do you want to hear something funny?" And I told him the rhyme. He asked me to repeat it. I think even then, even without the incredulous tone of disbelief in his voice, I knew that I had said something bad. And as young as I was, 5 maybe, I am sure I was conscious of what that word was related to. Richard and I had sang it, while sitting in a car, watching an elderly black man getting into his car. I was ignorant of what I was saying, and yet, part of me I think was consciously aware, and not so blissfully ignorant. My dad told me to never, ever say those words again. I didn't get spanked, but the verbal berating and the gravity in his tone of voice really made me feel ashamed.

My first girlfriend was in kindergarten. She was the only other Asian at Tinkerbell. Basically, she gave me no say in the matter of our relationship, and simply said, "You're mine. I own you." And I went along with it. Every recess, I had to pretend I was Little Joe (Michael Landon) from Bonanza. I still wanted to be James West, though.

I have a vague recollection of Bruce Lee from when I was really, really little. He must have been big, for me to have known about him without having actually seen any of his movies. Back then, and later when the Kung Fu TV series came out, if you were Oriental, you were expected to know karate chops and kung fu. The only Asian hero I remember who "looked like me" when I was young, was Ultraman's alter ego, Science Patrol member Hayata. It came on in South Carolina, translated from the Japanese series, during the afternoon, hosted by a pretty woman called "Happy Rain", dressed like an Indian. Other than Hayata, all of my heroes and role models growing up, the G.I. doll toys I played with, the T.V. and movie stars, were white male figures. When Star Trek was on, I didn't want to be Lt. Sulu. I wanted to be Captain James T. Kirk, dammit.

Multiculturalists would tell the four year-old boy in the photo that he was being white-washed. They would tell the 40 year old blogger hammering this post out on his keyboard, that he is a twinkie: White on the inside, yellow on the out. If I were black, maybe I'd be an Uncle Tom and a sellout. I spent 6 years of my college time living with two of my teammates, who were brothers. They also happened to be middle-class black, from Alburqurque. One day, a student asked Greg, the younger brother, if he had been to any ASU meetings, lately. He replied that, "Yeah, we've been out there; we compete there sometimes." (My roommates and I were on the gymnastics team- the older brother, Chainey, eventually making the '96 U.S. Olympic Team). The guy who asked Greg the question just shook his head and thought my roommate was so out of touch because Greg thought he meant had he been to Arizona State University; but what he really was asking is, had Greg attended any African Student Union group meetings.

UCLA is heralded as diverse and multicultural. That might be. But rather than a melting pot, half of what I saw were self-segregationists. On my way to class, down Bruin Walk, I could see the Chinese Student Union members mingling at the steps of Kerkhoff Hall; on the other side, ASU members hung out together. I attended one Pilipino student group meeting, and found myself turned off by the rhetoric of activism, which had an "Us vs. Them" mentality of persecution. I, as a non-Filipino, felt alienated because I didn't identify myself through my skin-color. They didn't know this, and probably thought I fit right in, due to my shared Malay heritage.

In college, I largely slept-walked (is that even a phrase? Does it matter? It is one now...) through student political activism and consciousness. That is probably a good thing, because even though my father always voted Republican, I was not "overtly" raised on conservative values and principles. My dad is not particularly political. He never really told me "You should think this way, you should not think that way" when it came to political thought. So, really, I was pretty ripe pickings for liberal indoctrination. It happened to some degree. Being an English major, I read a number of modern American literature focused on issues of multiculturalism and racism, with teachers to match. My poly sci professor came to class in tie-dye and Grateful Dead concert t-shirts, jeans, and sandals. He was a Marxist.

Liberalism was all around me, and somehow I was innoculated from much of the "damaging", "brainwashing" effects, even without understanding and being exposed to conservative ideology.

It was only after 9/11, that my political conservative gene was activated. The events of 9/11 shaped my political identity and forced me to exercise a voice in the political direction that this country heads into. Responsibility for the future rests with each of us. I realize now, that there are no sidelines. No fence-sitting. Politics is vital to shaping our values, upholding our traditions, and steering the direction that our country heads into, in a post-9/11 world.

Going back to the NYTimes article....

My opinion is strictly my own and I do not pretend to speak for every person adopted by parents of a different ethnicity. That being said, I strongly disagree with the parents who feel it is necessary to force cultural heritage studies upon a child, based upon the child's ethnic makeup and native culture. Especially if the child expresses non-interest. The Chinese adopted girls do not need to be raised to know intimately, Chinese culture. What they do need to be raised on, are American heritage, American values, American traditions. The adoptive parents are misguided if they feel obligated to give their child a Chinese name and raise a Chinese kid. What they need to do, is they need to raise an American kid and impart the knowledge, traditions, heritage, family history, religious beliefs, that they are familiar with.

My college roommates are now both doctors. They did not embrace Afrocentrism and black separatist nationalism. Nor have they been white-washed simply because they speak perfectly good English, have kept their "slave names", and embrace and contribute to mainstream American society. That is not being "a sell out". It's participating in the American dream. It is enjoying the fruits of their labor in the land of golden opportunities. A country where any citizen regardless of race, gender, or class can grow up to become president.

Diversity is our strength; assimiliation, the glue that binds us all together. E(x) pluribus unum. Out of many, one.

Multiculturalism, as it is preached today, is not about celebrating the beauties of other cultures and appreciating mixed heritages. In the hands of leftists, it is about separatism and narcissism. It is the selfish need to replace already established American values and traditions with one's native values and traditions. All cultures are not equal, when it comes to the historical shaping and founding of America. I am neither Jew, nor Christian; but I fully acknowledge and appreciate that it is what is commonly referred to as our Judeo-Christian values that enables us to tolerate, welcome, and embrace all other cultural heritages. That is at the core of America. When immigrating to this country, the core must be adopted. It is up to immigrants who wish to be American to adapt to American customs and values; not the other way around. Otherwise, we will dissolve into a nation of many nations and many people. Not one nation and one people. I am all for adding one's unique cultural flavor to the mix; but I am not for replacing the established American "core" culture with one's own.

So, who do you now see when you look at the photo at the top?

I see a young boy who will grow up secure in his own identity; who acknowledges his ethnic roots, but is not bound to it by the divisiveness of race and skin color. I see my past which came to shape my present.

And here I am, a proud and grateful American.


Crossposted on Independence Day at Flopping Aces

The End of Wordsmith?!

I've been banned!!!

Repsac3 brings the following to my attention:

Banished Words List for 2008

1. perfect storm
2. webinar
3. waterboarding
4. organic
5. wordsmith / wordsmithing
6. author / authored
7. post 9/11
8. surge
9. give back
10. 'BLANK' is the new "BLANK' or 'X' is the new 'Y'
11. Black Friday
12. back in the day
13. random
14. sweet
15. decimate
16. emotional
17. pop ('makes it POP')
18. It is what it is.
19. under the bus

So......should I change/update my username? Reveal my "secret" identity?

I've long been a fan of kennings in Icelandic Sagas, and "wordsmith" has long been known to me; it's not my fault that the phrase got popularized and overused by society at large.

By the way....I'm awesome.


And no....I've never been to Nantucket.

This....is Reagan Country!

At least it was "Reagan Country" this morning, in the Bob's Market parking lot, in Santa Monica.

After teaching a couple of clients this morning, I stopped by Bob's Market to pick up a roast beef sandwich for lunch- sour dough with a super-dollop of mayo slapped on both sides of the bread, lettuce and swiss.

Being slow in the mornings, there was one cashier on duty, and I got in line behind an elderly lady. She was just setting her goods on the counter, stopped, and asked if I wanted to go in front of her and if I was on a lunch break and whether I was in a hurry. That really caught me off guard, and I shook my head and said "No, I wasn't in a hurry at all". I laughed and smiled and said "thank you, though". She only had a few more grocery items than I had, thanks to several cans of cat food. Another cash register opened up, and I ended up getting out before she did.

As I was walking back to the wordsmithmobile, a car's bumperstickers caught my attention and brought an immediate smile to my face:


I have never seen such bumperstickers! Classic! And in blue-state California, to boot. I went to my car and thought to myself, "I bet you this vehicle belongs to that nice old lady." I could easily have been wrong, as there were quite a number of cars parked in the lot.

Sure enough, that lady who was so courteous to me and to the checkout clerk (I overheard her conversing in a friendly manner) went to the car with the "Reagan Country" and "Reagan '84" bumperstickers.

I grabbed a half-finished piece of origami out of a flyer, and began "cramming" in the finishing touches on it, as I got back out of my car and approached her.

I asked her if I could give her a gift for her courtesy inside, and for the bumperstickers on her car.

She and I spent the next 15 minutes, bonding. We laughed and agreed, talking about politics, Obama and Hillary, the primaries, being conservatives living in Los Angeles/Santa Monica, and on it went. Norma (her name) said I made her day and I pitched back that she made my week.

Norma's originally from Texas, by the way. God bless her!

Click the photos for a larger version (see what Norma is holding up in her hand)

Venice Blvd, Culver City, California: Check this out!

Saw this moonbat mobile loitering along Venice Blvd, on my way in to work.

Notice the seat cover, riding shotgun? This isn't the worst I've seen: I've seen a couple where the front end was also plastered with political messages and stickers. But still....the owner of this vehicle is one seriously disturbed "progressive" mental degenerate.

Why the 2008 Election will be a matter of life and death

I am a former fetus.

Born in Phoenix Arizona, February 1968. If I had been conceived 5 years later, I might not be here today. You see, I was put up for adoption in 1968. On January 22, 1973, the Supreme Court decided that Roe v. Wade established that any state laws restricting or banning abortion was a constitutional violation of "right to privacy".

I don't know who my birth parents are. I do not know the circumstances surrounding the decision to give me up for adoption; whether it was a selfish or a selfless act. Perhaps, both. All I know is that if I hadn't been given life, and given up for adoption, I would not be who I am today; nor have been blessed with two loving parents who provided me with a stable home, values, and the opportunity to become whatever I wanted to become.

In truth, I'm not a hardcore pro-lifer. But I do find myself strongly aligned with most conservative causes.

Regardless of whether or not I am pro-life or pro-choice, one thing I do believe: Roe v. Wade was a flawed, incoherent decision, and a prime example of judicial activism. Which brings me to the issue of appointing Supreme Court Justices.

I believe with utmost confidence, that President Bush 43's legacy will go the way of Harry S Truman- a president who was unpopular when he left office, with even lower approval ratings than our current president, yet who is today, consistently ranked as one of our top 10 U.S. presidents by most historians.

How Iraq turns out, will play a big role in how President Bush will be remembered by later generations; and it is far too early to know what the ripple effects will be, as it is still a "story without an ending".

Of course, I also believe it to be true that the world is such that bad decisions can end with good results, and good decisions can still go badly. This is because no one person controls the course of history, and there are just far too many variables involved in how things play out.

To go back to my point on the Bush legacy, one thing should be clear, that vindicates President Bush in the eyes of conservatives who have been critical of President Bush's brand of "compassionate conservatism", thinking President Bush has taken us off the cliff: in the appointment of judges, President Bush has been outstanding.

As David G. Savage wrote in the Los Angeles Times, almost 3 weeks ago,

After nearly seven years in the White House, President Bush has named 294 judges to the federal courts, giving Republican appointees a solid majority of the seats, including a 60%-to-40% edge over Democrats on the influential U.S. appeals courts.

The rightward shift on the federal bench is likely to prove a lasting legacy of the Bush presidency, since many of these judges - including his two Supreme Court appointees - may serve for two more decades. And despite the Republicans' loss of control of the Senate, 40 of Bush's judges won confirmation this year, more than in the previous three years when Republicans held the majority.

For those who have been harsh upon Republicans in Congress, when they were the majority that didn't behave like a majority in the House and Senate,

"Republican senators have voted in lock step to confirm every judge that Bush has nominated. The Democrats have often broken ranks,"

According to Simon Heller, a lawyer for the liberal advocacy group, Alliance for Justice.

They say the ideological makeup of the courts has grown into a major issue on the right, and it has brought Republicans together, whether they are social conservatives, economic conservatives or small-government libertarians. "This issue unites the base," said Curt Levey, executive director of the Committee for Justice, a group that lobbies for Bush's judicial nominees. "It serves as a stand-in for the culture wars: religion, abortion, gay marriage and the coddling of criminals." Nothing irritates conservatives more, he said, than having unelected judges decide politically charged issues that some believe should be left to voters and legislators. "Conservatives tend to blame judges for the left's success in the culture war," Levey said.

While Republicans find themselves somewhat divided heading into the election year, Bush is widely praised for his record of pressing for conservative judges.

"From Day One, President Bush made the judiciary a top priority, and he fought very hard for his nominees," said Washington attorney Bradford Berenson, who worked in the White House counsel's office in Bush's first term. "He was less willing to compromise than President Clinton. As a result, in raw numbers, he may end with somewhat fewer judges than Clinton had."

When Republicans lost the majority in the 2006 mid-term elections, so too, did President Bush's chances diminish, in getting judges through.

(Update 2/09/08) Rich Galen writes:

Democrats in the Senate holding up - according to the Wall Street Journal - 208 nominees: 180 nominees to executive branch positions and 28 nominees to the Federal bench.

If Rush, Sean, Laura and the rest wanted to really do a favor for America, they would get their tens of millions of listeners amped up about the nominees who are being held up - some for as long as two years - by Senate Democrats who will not allow the President to govern and will not allow the Judicial Branch to function.

As Hugh Hewitt writes, in responding to those who defend John McCain over "the Gang of 14", claiming that the Arizona Senator was right since it supposedly gave us Justices Roberts and Alito, as well as Judges Brown, Owens, and Pryor (Hewitt contends that they would have been confirmed, anyway, once the filibuster ended):

They lost many fine nominees as well. And the confirmation machinery didn't even improve for the rest of the session. Numerous judges were left dangling at the end of 2006 when the Gang of 14 "deal" expired, and most of them like Peter Keisler, nominated to the second most important court in the country, the D.C. Circuit, are hostage still to the Democrats. The Gang of 14 got the GOP nothing.

Majorities matter. This is why, in a general election, it is vital to vote a straight Republican ticket. Sticking to party is a principled position.

So why are the next 4 to 8 years so critical? Because the appointment of Supreme Court Justices can last for decades, and affect generations. It can affect the course of our history and culture in a major way that is rather frightening. On the Supreme Court appointments, Steven M. Warshawsky at American Thinker, in making the case for Rudy Giuliani, writes,

After the president, the most powerful citizens in the country are the nine justices of the U.S. Supreme Court. They make decisions that define our most basic rights and freedoms. When these decisions are clothed in the language of the Constitution, they cannot be overturned except by a constitutional amendment or by a later decision of the Supreme Court itself. I hardly need explain how crucial it is - to conservatives and liberals alike - that judges sharing their worldviews are appointed to the Court. In the balance hangs whether there is a right to abortion or whether affirmative action is unconstitutional or whether gay marriage must be recognized by the states, and numerous other issues central to American life. As a result, there are few events in American politics more momentous, and more contentious, than the selection of Supreme Court justices.
In the next four to eight years, we can anticipate that there will be at least two and perhaps as many as five new appointments to the Court. As of November 2008, when the next president will be elected, the ages of the current justices will be as follows: John Paul Stevens (88), Ruth Bader Ginsburg (75), Antonin Scalia (72), Anthony Kennedy (72), Stephen Breyer (70), David Souter (69), Clarence Thomas (60), Samuel Alito (58), and John Roberts (53). The good news for Republicans is that the three youngest justices are solid conservatives, while the two oldest are strident liberals. These two, Stevens and Ginsburg, almost certainly will leave the bench during the next president's tenure in office. By 2016, Kennedy, Breyer, and/or Souter (not to mention Scalia) also may succumb to age or infirmity. Replacing these justices with solid conservatives may finally accomplish the conservative counter-revolution on the Supreme Court that Republicans have worked tirelessly to achieve for decades.

It appalls me that there are conservatives out there, so hell-bent-out-of-shape angry because their uber-conservative dream candidate of choice is not running, or dropped out of the presidential race, that they plan to sit out the election (as if doing so in '06 advanced the conservative movement) and not vote for the GOP candidate, because the candidate is not "pure" enough.

At the moment, my candidate of choice is Rudy Giuliani. That could change; I will probably hang onto my absentee ballot, until after Florida primaries.

One of the criticisms against Rudy Giuliani is that he is not pro-life. Rudy says he will nominate strict constructionists. That is good enough for me. He has been straight-forth on his position here, and has not pandered to the pro-life conservative base, by "flip-flopping". What he maintains, is that the decision on abortion should be left up to state, and out of the hands of the federal government. Furthermore, Giuliani likes to point out that abortions went down 16% & adoptions went up 133% when he was NYC mayor.

Regardless of whether a president is pro-life or pro-choice, there is no guarantee that they will nominate judges who will end up being strict constructionists, despite the well-intentions to do so.

Warshawsky points out that Giuliani, Romney, and McCain all

promise to nominate "strict constructionist" judges, meaning judges who (in words taken from Giuliani's website) "will follow the text of laws and of the Constitution and will not make policy from the bench." There is no reason to believe that one of these candidates will appoint "better" judges than the others. All of them will select judges from the same broad pool of potential nominees. Nevertheless, as we have seen, for example, with Kennedy (appointed by Ronald Reagan in 1988) and Souter (appointed by George H.W. Bush in 1990), it is impossible to predict how a judge will decide cases once appointed to the Court. So a little humility is in order when evaluating candidates on this issue.

Few Republicans question whether Romney and McCain will appoint solid conservative judges to the Supreme Court. Because Giuliani personally holds liberal views on abortion, gay rights, and gun control, however, many Republicans do not believe him when he promises to appoint strict constructionists to the bench. I do not share this concern. Giuliani is an experienced lawyer and a sophisticated student of the American legal system. He understands the fundamental principles of rule of law, separation of powers, and enumerated rights. It is perfectly consistent for him to believe that the Constitution should be interpreted narrowly, while believing that the people and the states retain the right to pass laws of their own choosing (which may include, for example, laws authorizing abortion). Moreover, in general, Giuliani is more committed to individual freedom and limited government than either Romney or McCain. The idea that he is going to appoint more Ginsburgs and Breyers to the Supreme Court is absurd.

I find great relevance in Hugh Hewitt's 2004 book, If it's Not Close, They Can't Cheat, to this day. Chapter 36, Pg 189 on "Abortion":

The only way for the issue to be returned to legislative control, however, is for the federal courts generally, and the United States Supreme Court specifically, to be populated with genuine constitutionalists- jurists who understand and abide by the principle that our government cannot endure unless elected representatives decide all of the major issues of our society [as opposed to the activist judges usurping that role and legislating from the bench].

The appointment of such judges requires the election of Republicans at every level of the government, but especially in the presidency. Thus, the real pro-life voter will always vote Republican and will do so without threats and demands and loud condemnation of nominees who are insufficiently attentive to their causes.

Pro-choice absolutists cannot expect to control the Republican Party. As a matter of math, the GOP is a pro-life party. If abortion rights is the only issue of import to you, you ought to leave the GOP for the Democratic Party if you believe the issue must be decided by judges. If you are a pro-choice advocate who trusts in the legislative process, by all means stay.

That would be Rudy.

Regardless of how one feels about Giuliani's candidacy, regardless of who the GOP nominee winds up being, I hope the conservative base understands what the stakes are in this election. Aside from the war controversy, all conservatives should rally behind the GOP pick, on the strength of Supreme Court appointments alone.

The Courts will chart the course of American culture and history, for generations to come.

"Look at the Supreme Court today, and you can say the next president will decide its future for the rest of our lives."
- Jay Sekulow

Also blogging 35 years under Roe V Wade:
Bottomline Upfront
Freedom Eden
This ain't hell, but you can see it from here

Sparks from the Anvil Endorses Rudy Giuliani

Five year-old Abby O'Brien waits for Republican presidential candidate and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani to arrive for a campaign stop in Derry, New Hampshire August 16, 2007.
REUTERS/Brian Snyder

Any questions?

Managing Reading Overload

Penny Walsh checks the damages in the local library following a powerful earthquake in Gisborne, New Zealand. The 6.8 quake flattened buildings and caused widespread damage.
Gisborne Herald - AFP/Getty Images

I used to love reading fiction- from classics like Les Miserables and The Three Musketeers; to Grimm's Brothers Folk Tales, Arthurian romances and Icelandic Sagas; to childhood guilty pleasures like The Hobbit, Chronicles of Narnia, and Edgar Rice Burroughs' Tarzan series.

I haven't picked up a work of fiction I can recall since literature classes in college. Since 9/11, the books I have been reading for the last 6 years are political and nonfiction (history and such). I can read fast if I have to; but, since becoming a blogger and trying to be able to debate facts, I read much slower these days, trying to commit to memory dates and stats and facts to back up future arguments. It's exhausting.

Since blogging, I've found my reading time has been diverted primarily from books to internet-reading- primarily multi-newspapers from around the world and poliblogs, from straight news to op-ed articles. I've become a news junkie.

Meanwhile, book reading has suffered. I find that I've acquired quite a library of books that grows faster than I can read them. Sometimes I will peruse them for information, pertinent to my needs at the moment, without having first read from cover to cover. I must be in the middle of about a dozen different books.

The latest to add to my list of "things-to-read" is a Christmas present from a liberal friend: Valerie Plame's new book (It's the thought that counts, right?). Yes, it came with a gift receipt; but I probably won't exchange it. I've read so many anti-Plame/Wilson articles (and pertinent information from books, like Kenneth Timmerman's "Shadow Warriors"- I'm only 200 pages into it) that this book might do me some good (yes, I have my read correction marker prepared to make notes in the margin). The weirdest thing about this book, is the amount of "black out" lines it has. That comes across as a bit pretentious to me; but then, I am a cynical wingnut partisan hack, right?

Anyway, if you have a comment about this book, be nice. The friend who gave it to me might be reading, as she is very much aware of this blog, and reads it from time to time. I even send her links when I make a post I think she should check out.

I actually wouldn't mind reading some anti-Bush and liberal books, if I didn't have to pay for them. If my plate wasn't full, I'd walk down the block and check them out from the library. It'd be interesting to cross-reference Paul Bremer's account, George Tenet's memoirs, Richard Clarke's book, etc. to those books that offer a counter perspective.

I read somewhere, that until everyone's memoirs come out, we may never have a complete picture of how everything happened the way it did, with the decision to go to war in Iraq. Not all the bit-players have all the information; not even the President. I learned this a month ago, when I was researching the criticism regarding the "decision" to "disband" the Iraq army and police force. Reading differently people's accounts of what they remembered happening, was interesting; like putting together a jigsaw puzzle. Sifting through faulty memory, half-truths and outright lies, partisan perspectives, and making sense of known facts and time-lines. Also, keeping in mind that I am interpreting past events with 20/20 hindsight.

So, what are the rest of you reading? Get anything exciting for Christmas? Are any of you drowning in a mound of books as well?

In the right spirit of things

Employees of Everland amusement park dressed in Santa Claus outfits take a Santa Claus qualifying examination during a promotional event for the Christmas holiday season at the amusement park in Yongin, about 50 km (31 miles) south of Seoul, December 5, 2007. About 30 employees took part in a one-day course at its Santa Claus school and will serve customers as Santa Clauses.

REUTERS/Han Jae-ho

A police inspector wearing a Santa Claus hat helps an elderly woman down a flight of stairs in Manila. Some 1,000 policemen are made to wear Santa hats while on patrol during the holiday season.

Aaron Favila - AP

Great how the Christmas Season, in all its religious and secular expression, seems more accepted at times, in other parts of the world, than it is here, in America.

My computer is still in the shop. I'm hoping that maybe it's just the video card. Anyway, I'm typing from a library computer, with only 34 minutes remaining on my time.

Heard about this on the Dennis Prager program this morning: In One Village, Making a Balanced Display for Two Celebrations.

What are your thoughts? I'd type mine out, but...my time here is limited. The "right click" function seems to be disabled on this computer, too. Grrr...

Anyway, today, I handed out 13 origami roses to my intermediate class, today. Each one takes me about an hour-and-a-half to fold. These girls have been working pretty diligently. I have a few Jewish kids and one who is a sikh. I told them these were Christmas presents. Not "winter" presents. Not "holiday" presents. Not "end-of-the-year" presents. CHRISTMAS presents. "It doesn't matter if you don't celebrate Christmas; I do. I'm not Christian but I celebrate the American tradition of Christmas, and respect its deeper religious meanings to those who do celebrate the birth of Jesus Christ. So, take the gifts in the spirit in which they are given. And have yourselves a Merry Christmas."

I didn't say this in so many words; but one girl did say, "but I'm not Christian!" And yet she did not seem willing to surrender up the paper rose, back to me....

Why Democrats are Childish

For those who didn't read my comment in the previous post, my computer has given up on me after 7 years of consistent service. I'm going to try and take it in today and see if the cost of repairs is worth more than investment in a new one. It may be time...

Meanwhile, posting will be light (I'm on a friend's computer now). I have a few pre-made in the drafts section. For current event coverage, Flopping Aces is always a good daily place to go to (not that all of you blog readers don't know where to go to for the best in alternative media; I am partisanly partial to it, after all. Plus, I was just over there, and Curt and his deputized contributors have a whole series of good stuff I'll be printing out to read at work).

The following is a post I made about 2 or 3 years ago, but which I never published, as it was old news when I discovered it:

Last night, while going through the mail on my gmail account, something caught my eye: it was an ad.

I cut and pasted the link and.....isn't this just heartwarming:



Rotflmao!!! I had completely missed this! I think the book came out a year ago. About the book:

Why Mommy is a Democrat brings to life the core values of the Democratic party in ways that young children will easily understand and thoroughly enjoy. Using plain and non-judgmental language, along with warm and whimsical illustrations, this colorful 28-page paperback depicts the Democratic principles of fairness, tolerance, peace, and concern for the well-being of others. It's a great way for parents to gently communicate their commitment to these principles and explain their support for the party.

Why Mommy is a Democrat may
look like a traditional children's
book, but it definitely isn't just for
children. With numerous subtle
(and not-so-subtle) satirical swipes
at the Bush administration and
the Republican party,Why Mommy
will appeal to Democrats of all
ages!

Finally, a portion of the profits will
be donated to Democratic
candidates and party
organizations, so your purchase
will help make an immediate
difference!

Since it was a Google ad that brought this wonderful book to my attention, I Googled to see what people have had to say about it.

From the testimonials page:

"A wonderful story to show my son what REAL moral values are."- Erin White-Johnson, Bakersfield, CA


"In a vivid way, this book shows Democrats as still being interested in solving our real problems: hunger, homelessness, war, healthcare. How refreshing!"-Bill White, Longmonts, CO


"The book is charming- with a message even a child can enjoy and understand."- Debbie Brennan, Moss Beach, CA

Here are some alternative book reviews:

This is definitely slated for the fiction section. If would really be best in a section devoted to various forms of propaganda. This book is all about the indoctrination of young minds, something the libs know a lot about.-Museum of Left Wing Lunacy

Help! Mom! there are liberals under my bed!

Katharine DeBrecht's blog

blog

Wizbang

That was my post, that never got published. I've since seen others blog this as well.

Last Tuesday night, while reading an email from Mike's America, I noticed a "sponsored link" ad at the top in my gmail:




Buwahahaha!!!! This is now on my Christmas wish list. I actually ordered Why Mommy is a Democrat from Amazon, as well as Help! Mom! There are Liberals Under My Bed.




The Democratic Presidential frontrunner:

Nice.

I got those books over a year ago, but never even opened them yet. Now I have to figure out where I stashed them.

From the samples of the new book (click to enlarge image):







I love it! I know "progressive" liberals like to believe they are "free-thinkers", sophisticated and intellectual; but really, I find much of their worldview "childish" and idealistic without practicality. Quixotic. They address issues of poverty, homelessness, war, etc. by tilting at windmills, rather than perceiving the real problems. They "think" with their emotions; not rationality.

Yes, I generalize; and yes, I know the same is said by "them" about "us". And sometimes, they even have a point. After all, this itself is a childish post, mocking the childish worldview of Democrats.

Hope I've given you some ideas on some stocking stuffers!