Category Archives: Elections

Update III: Your Kids: Dumb, Difficult & Dispensable

Democracy, Education, Elections, English, Etiquette, Family, Intelligence, Liberty, Propaganda

The excerpt is from my new, WND.COM weekly column, “Your kids: Dumb, Difficult & Dispensable”:

“Don’t ask why the ‘news’ is all aflutter for Meghan McCain, but earlier in February, she issued another of her sub-intelligent messages, on a forum – ABC’s ‘The View’ – that is a fertile seedbed for mind-sapping stupidity:

The Tea Party Movement was ‘innately racist,’ Meghan said. This was why “young people were turned off by the movement.” And , in her most grating Valley-Girl inflection: ‘I’m sorry—revolutions start with young people, not with 65-year-old people talking about literacy tests and people who can’t say the word vote in English.’

The rude reference was to Tom Tancredo’s observation that people ‘who cannot spell the word vote or say it in English’ are determining elections in America.

The former congressman and 2008 Republican presidential candidate was on to something. The Founding Founders decided in their wisdom that only propertied males would vote. To justify distaff disenfranchisement look no further than ‘Meghaan.’ As to the other limitation: The founders were not democrats; they foresaw today’s pillage politics – and they understood that, unchecked, overbearing majorities would be more malignant than monarchs. And all too well did the founder know that, granted a vote, the unpropertied masses would help themselves to the belongings of the propertied.

But what would ‘Meghaan,’ a member of the Millennial generation, know about a group of truly great revolutionaries whose average age, in 1776, was 44?

“The ‘Meghaan’ Millennials are a generation of youngsters that reveres only itself for no good reason.” Yes, ‘Meghan is a member of a studied cohort, born between 1980 and 2001.” Read more about these “needy and narcissistic dullards.”

The column is “Your kids: Dumb, Difficult & Dispensable.

And do read my libertarian manifesto, Broad Sides: One Woman’s Clash With A Corrupt Society.

The Second Edition features bonus material. Get your copy (or copies) now!

Update I (Feb. 19): To the critic hereunder: The column references “The ‘Trophy Kids’ Go to Work,” an article that distills the conclusions of a book packed with data. The method of the column: go from the particular to the general; go from one colorful case everyone knows and move to the general.

Update II: “Thomas” below is yet another instructive case study on the Millennials, their demeanor and capabilities. Note the run-on, ungrammatical, misspelled, incoherent sentences. T. has not been taught to write a simple sentence with a subject, a verb and the attendant clauses. Not his fault, I guess, but I know many self-taught individuals who’ve made up for the deficiencies of their teachers just fine.

He’s arrogant and insulting; is big on the ad hominem and the non sequiturs; but incapable of putting forth an argument. An example of a non sequiturs hereunder: I should be picking on another generation, he says. Maybe, but this column is about his generation (I presume). The the fact that another generation is problematic doesn’t invalidate a critique of the Millennials. See what I mean by a non sequituir?

My column argued that, for the most, not his but my generation has invented and is perfecting the gadgets he cannot do without, yet he repeats the following fallacy: The twitterering twits are prescient and streaks ahead of us, their parents.

In fairness to the poor creature, I have received many such letters in my career. They tend to be from younger people, but not always.

Finally, another typical sign of grandiosity: He has not read the posting policy on this blog. Since rules are not for his ilk, he does not dare limit the reader’s exposure to this word salad of his. A good teacher would have red inked this letter, and taught the young man to say what he is struggling to say in one short paragraph.

As you can imagine, there are a dozen more insulting messages demanding space on this, my private property. The insults, moreover, evince the utter absence of intellectual curiosity—T. had not read any of my writings or my bio, so has cheerily lumped me with all of Hannity’s handmaidens.

Update III (Feb. 22): Robert’s point I’m afraid is simplistic; and certainly not the thrust of my article. Hint: Most everything I direct my cultural commentary at, and this column is no exception, can be summed up thus: ORDERED LIBERTY. Ordered liberty is about hierarchy. Read “THE IMPORTANCE OF BOUNDARIES.” Perhaps the larger philosophical point of everything cultural I write will become clearer.

Updated: The Fair Lady Endorses The Randian

Elections, libertarianism, Liberty, Neoconservatism, Outsourcing, Republicans, Ron Paul, Sarah Palin, Technology

Sarah Palin has donated the maximum allowable in support of Rand Paul’s bid for the Kentucky U.S. Senate seat. Neoconservatives are furious. David Horowitz’s new NewsReal blog offers an attempt at an analysis of the contradictions of a Palin endorsement of a Paul.

Since very few brain cells went into designing the site, I will be unable to quote from it. Not only is NewsReal incredibly busy in a bad, ADHD kind of way, but someone really “clever” has ensured one cannot “Ctrl c” so as to “Ctrl v” any excerpts therefrom. In other words, you can’t cut and paste for quotation purposes.

I’m certainly not going to bother typing this stuff out—no body is. Maybe the web designer thought that the originality of the contents warranted anti-copying software.

Rand Paul’s site, on the other hand, is original in all the right ways and reproducible. Sarah for Rand is here. And yes, “Rand is for real”:

Rand Paul is beating all U.S. Senate candidates in both parties and … has huge Tea Party and grass roots support driving his overwhelming success against establishment politicians and their budget-busting ways.

If Sarah helps send Tea Party Paulites to DC, and snubs establishment Republican oinkers—she will have done America more good than most.

Update: On the petty issue of being able to “cut n’ paste” from the NewsReal blog: Could it be that the webmaster fixed the flaw following my post? I suspect so.

The facility is working now, but another reader informed me just a couple of hours back that “cut & paste” was possible, albeit by right clicking only on the text. I’m glad the facility is working now, pursuant to my complaint.

As to the busy, boggling nature of the site: I fully admit that the youth is more inclined than me to white noise. I like clean, clear, and unfussy. However, as Hollywood has made clear for decades, the older generation has nothing on the youth when it comes to technology, style, smarts, etc.

Enable sarcasm. I live with someone who makes the innards of the toys and telephones our deeply stupid, attention-deficient mites depend on to sustain brain waves. He himself doesn’t use all that crap technology (other than a PC and a cell, when needed). Telling, ha? Most thinking people like clear, clean, and unfussy.

The white-noise producing toys, by the way, are usually made by older people (with advanced engineering degrees)—often Asians, many of whom are older—beavering away under one or two really smart Americans (also older), all in an effort to keep the brainwaves of the younger generation (mostly Americans) from flatlining.

Bite Me, Bitches!

Aesthetics, Democrats, Elections, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, Media, Sarah Palin

You gotta love Sarah Palin for her staying power in the face of the foul attacks she’s endured for annotating the palm of her hand in a rather endearing way, during the Q & A at the first Tea Party Convention. Something her favorite child would do (that would be the poppet Piper, if you’ve read Going Rogue).

Here’s the little Botticelli embraced by the same slender hand (my, the Palin kids are beautiful. Ditto the Palin spouse).

So today (or was it the day before), during her campaign stop with Governor Rick Perry of Texas, Palin had a laugh at the expense of all those loathsome liberals. The message inked into her palm this time was, “Hi Mom!”

Updated: If Justice Samuel Alito Were Ill-Mannered …

Barack Obama, Constitution, Elections, Free Speech, Individual Rights, Law

He’d have cried out “You Lie” at the president during the State of the Union, last night. It so happens that Justice Alito is a gentleman, so he didn’t. All Alito did was gesticulate in surprise at the president’s audacious “misrepresentation ” of the SCOTUS’ invalidation of “a portion of the McCain-Feingold Campaign finance law.”

Writes Judge Andrew P. Napolitano:

“The 20-year-old ruling had forbidden any political spending by groups such as corporations, labor unions, and advocacy organizations (like the NRA and Planned Parenthood, for example). Ruling that all persons, individually and in groups, have the same unfettered free speech rights, the court blasted Congress for suppression of that speech. In effect, the court asked, ‘What part of ‘Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech’ does Congress not understand?’ Thus, all groups of two or more persons are free to spend their own money on any political campaigns and to mention the names of the candidates in their materials.”

“Thus, as a result of this ruling, all groups may spend their own money as they wish on any political campaigns …”

“On Wednesday night, during his State of the Union address, the president attacked this decision by arguing that the ruling permits foreign nationals and foreign corporations to spend money on American campaigns. When he said this, Justice Samuel Alito, who was seated just 15 feet from the president, gently whispered: ‘That’s not true.’ Justice Alito was right. The Supreme Court opinion, which is 183 pages in length, specifically excludes foreign nationals and foreign-owned corporations from its ruling. So the president, the former professor of law at the one of the country’s best law schools, either did not read the opinion, or was misrepresenting it.”

For posterity:

Update (Jan. 29): Randy Barnett on “a shocking lack of decorum”:

“In the history of the State of the Union has any President ever called out the Supreme Court by name, and egged on the Congress to jeer a Supreme Court decision, while the Justices were seated politely before him surrounded by hundreds Congressmen? To call upon the Congress to countermand (somehow) by statute a constitutional decision, indeed a decision applying the First Amendment? What can this possibly accomplish besides alienating Justice Kennedy who wrote the opinion being attacked. Contrary to what we heard during the last administration, the Court may certainly be the object of presidential criticism without posing any threat to its independence. But this was a truly shocking lack of decorum and disrespect towards the Supreme Court for which an apology is in order. A new tone indeed.”