Category Archives: Ethics

Updated: Goons Against Gays, Gun Owners & Other Good Folks

Criminal Injustice, Ethics, Feminism, Gender, Homosexuality, Law, Military, The Military, The State

I’ve been concentrating quite a bit lately on the way the State moves swiftly and speedily against good, patriotic Americans, who’ve transgressed some or another petty rule. But to dangerous or undesirable aliens—the very people upon which the state must clamp down and control — it almost always grants immunity and inordinate privileges.

Consider the latest SCOTUS decision that encourages and incentivizes identity theft. Or the many cases where a gun owner is nabbed for self-defense or for nothing much at all.

Deporting or bringing to book an illegal criminal takes forever, and often doesn’t take place at all. On the other hand, the military, a lumbering complex, moves against gays and lesbians who’ve come out at the speed of light.

Dan Choi, West Point graduate, Arabic linguist, and a Lieutenant in the United States Army, was fired for coming out in no time at all. No sooner did it become known that Choi was gay than he was dismissed.

The same goes for “Sandy Tsao, who was booted from the military after telling her superiors she was gay in January.”

That’s one fast and efficient bureaucracy.

Now, homo or hetero—you ought to keep you sexuality to yourself, and out of my face, be it in the army or in the office. I’ve lamented before that, sadly, “The closet has come to signify oppression, rather than discretion.”

Moreover, women ought to barred from the military completely, unless they are lesbian Amazons; a rare breed which can almost match men in physicality, and is unlikely to have the toxic effects straight women have on esprit de corps (and on rates of illegitimacy and welfarism).

Still, the way the state has hounded and proceeded against gays and gun-owners so quickly and callously goes to show again that in a corrupt, fascistic country, the law protects the outlaw, not the law-abiding.

Update (May 11): The Israelis use women in auxiliary roles; not as equals on the battle field or as candidates to consider for The-Right-Stuff sort of missions. I will say, that I’ve watched an Israeli woman (on American TV) instruct American men in face-to-face combat. She was as good as a man. But more importantly, Israeli women are different from American women; they’re tough, no-nonsense types, who do not whine much, speak quite well, and don’t report for duty with breast implants and painted finger-nails. The women I’ve seen who rise to prominence there inspire confidence; which is more than I can say for the flaccid empire’s females.
There are exception, of course. CNN featured a few tragic stories of upbeat, wiry little American girls, minus a few limbs, who graduated from military academies and were just gems. Still, these exceptional young women (tiny and nowhere near as resilient as a fit young man) do not belong near the battle fields, other than in supporting roles.

If you’re interested in the subject, STEPHANIE GUTMANN, a very good writer, whose book “The Other War: Israelis, Palestinians and the Struggle for Media Supremacy,” I recommend, wrote the best book on the topic. Fred Reed praised her books too.

The Burden Of Barack

Barack Obama, Economy, Ethics, Morality

Tom Knapp @ the Knappster, protests our parasitical prince’s hypocrisy. However, Tom would have done well to make a less egalitarian assessment of Barack’s burden on his “company’s 300 million ‘investors.'” Most Americans are tax consumers. The few taxpayers will be forking-out for The Man:

“I watched the president’s speech last night. … He got in a good zinger about those CEOs and their private jets. For some reason, he decided to hold off on announcing that he’ll be giving up his personal jet — you know, the one he used last week when he flew all the way to Denver to sign a bill he could just as easily have signed on the top of Teddy Roosevelt’s old desk in the Oval Office.”

“Make no mistake here: Barack Obama is a CEO, just like the ones he’s chewing out.”

“Among the perks he gets as CEO of the US government — perks he’s evinced no intention of giving up to set the example for those he’s scolding — are a $400k annual salary, free residence in a palatial home (complete with groundskeepers, cooks, doormen, etc.), a 24/7 personal security detail, transportation to wherever he desires via limousine, helicopter or personal jet, and a “golden parachute,” which includes a pension of nearly $200k per year for life, continuation of that security detail (and the costs of any accommodations required for it to fit into his lifestyle), and his own library.”

“What do we get for the millions of dollars we annually lavish on our golden boy CEO? A definition of ‘fiscal responsibility’ that comes to a $1,600+ annual loss for each and every one of his company’s 300 million ‘investors.’ This, from the guy who assures us that he’s the one who can ‘fix’ the economy. Jee. Zuz.”

Update II: Sully Sullenberger: Hero Of Flight 1549

America, Bush, Ethics, Human Accomplishment

Captain “Sully” Sullenberger, III, did not walk on water after performing a perfect landing on the Hudson River, but he did walk the aisles–twice. Sullenberger was ensuring all passengers had disembarked the sinking plane before he did. I know this is what professional pilots are supposed to do, but how common is perfect professionalism and gallantry?

By now, you’ve heard of “Chesley B. ‘Sully’ Sullenberger, III, the US Airways pilot who today amazingly crash-landed a US Airways jet in New York’s Hudson River without any apparent fatalities. The heroic Sullenberger, 57, has worked for US Airways since 1980, and before that spent more than six years as a U.S. Air Force F-4 fighter pilot. Sullenberger, who now must be considered the front runner to replace Hillary Clinton as New York’s junior United States Senator, is also the founder of Safety Reliability Methods. The firm describes itself as providing ‘technical expertise and strategic vision and direction to improve safety and reliability in a variety of high risk industries.'”

More on The Smoking Gun.

Images here.

“Sully” Sullenberger’s website and picture.

Update II (Jan 17): On the day a coward and a bully of a man (Bush) delivered his hyperbole and boosterism-filled Farewell Address to the Nation, a real man (“Sully” Sullenberger) stepped up.

In August 2001, Bush was briefed by a CIA analyst about Bin Laden’s plans for the US. “All right, you’ve covered your ass now,” is how Bush responded. (He did nothing else.)

This is the repulsive human being the Republicans are now vindicating.

How apropos that on the day “W” drools before the nation for the last time, we hope; on that day a silent, steely hero–a manly man– shows the pipsqueak president up.

The contrast could not be greater. The one man is spoilt, indulged, used to throwing his toys around and getting his way throughout his life, without ever having to say, “I’m sorry.”

The other, “Sully” Sullenberger, is a mensch–an ordinary man with extraordinary abilities and stellar character.

Charity Choice

Ethics, General, IMMIGRATION, Morality, Multiculturalism

I suspect wily parties may be scamming private charities on a regular basis. I don’t have proof beyond what I observed on the one occasion. And I don’t know to what degree generalizations beyond this occasion are warranted.

In any event, what we saw turned us off donating food to our local food bank, which promises to supplement local, elderly pensioners. The latter, no doubt, will be hurt by our decision—but primarily by those who capitalize on the generosity of Americans.

We bought a boatload of non-perishable food for said food bank. Driving by to drop the stuff off, we observed a number of Hispanics (I’ll go out on a limb and venture that they are here illegally) waiting in line. I would gladly send a charitable donation to Mexico, if they returned there. As it is, they drain local medical, educational, and law enforcement services, for which I already pay.

I’m not forking over twice.

At this point, open-border libertarians will chime in with their gold standard non sequitur for belittling the burden of illegal immigration on the American taxpayer. Living at the public’s expense, they will allow, does indeed violate the rights of taxpayers. But why single out non-nationals? Is it any less of a violation of the taxpayer’s rights for native-born individuals to suck at the public teat?

To quote, “From the fact that you oppose taxpayer-funded welfare for nationals, it doesn’t follow that extending it to millions of unviable non-nationals is financially or morally negligible. (Or that it comports with the libertarian aim of curtailing government growth.) The argument is like declaring that because a bank has been robbed by one band of bandits, arresting the next is unnecessary because the damage has already been done.”

Back to the food bank queue. Another interesting specter was a worthy Asian gentleman, reasonably well-dressed, ample empty and sturdy bags in hand, who parked his relatively new vehicle, and entered the establishment to collect what I was about to drop off.

Again: No thanks.

We’d like to have a greater amount of control over our donations. So we’ve decided to bypass the iffy middle men and give the food stuff to an American family we know. They need it, will be glad to accept it, and won’t begrudge us for being the “oppressors” we are.