Archive for August, 2009
Inglourious Bastards Basterds–UPDATED
Wednesday, August 26th, 2009
Inglourious Bastards might be Quentin Tarantino’s best movie so far. As expected, it’s full of gruesome violence, gratuitous splattering blood, and revenge fantasies. For the subject, it’s all to the good: Nazis die.
Tarantino has some messages for everyone though and they aren’t politically correct. First the trailer. Here are some of the lessons from the movie:
1. Enhanced Interrogation works: The reason William Wallace from Braveheart fame was so remarkable was because he didn’t break. Nearly everyone, eventually breaks. When one gets a bad guy to spill the beans, good guys get saved. It ain’t pretty. But sleep deprivation, psychological discomfort, and in Tarantino’s case, a public head bashing are very effective means of extracting information.
2. There are bad guys. Now, in this politically correct world, only the Nazis may be used as bad guys. Don’t mention the barbary of Native Americans or current slave traders, or Hugo Chavez. Hell, don’t mention the barbaric acts of actual barbarians–the Barbary pirates. These days, the only acceptable bad guy is of German extraction. Anyone who is labeled “bad” is labeled Hitlerian. For fun though, when you go see the movie, just put an Islamist in the place of the Nazi. Every time. Just imagine a freedom hating terrorist biting it hard. It’s profoundly satisfying. If Tarantino were really that edgy, he’d have chosen a more relevant bad guy, but in these times, naming evil is passé.
The movie wins points artistically. The dialogue amusing. Among the blood, guts and nonsense, the story pushes forward with anxiety-producing anticipation.
What made me love the movie most, though, didn’t occur on the screen. The packed theater that made my vengeance-loving heart glad.
So, Americans still hate villains. Americans still want evil doers to pay. After years of mushy, morally ambivalent tripe like Crash, a movie comes out that’s pure good and evil. Well, not so pure. Because war isn’t pure. It’s messy, bad things happen, good people die and sometimes the best soldiers are just this side of normal. Righteous vengeance though, is satisfying. People want evil, innocent-killing psychos to pay–preferably with their lives.
Primal? Uncivilized? It’s pretty to think so. More like, normal people recognize that tolerating evil encourages evil. You know, like the Iranians who repeatedly raped a young boy who defied the Iranian leadership during the protests. That evil.
So, while I’m still waiting for Quentin Tarantino to show some real courage and portray the monstrosity that is Islamofascism–the psychotic Muslim element who carry around Mein Kempf for moral encouragement–I’ll take what I can get. And right now, a movie where the bad guys get incinerated is profoundly satisfying.
It’s nice to see the good guys win. It’s nice to see the bad guys suffer and die. I’m hoping that Inglourious Bastards starts a trend. Now, to choose a more timely enemy.
P.S. Brad Pitt is hot. And the way he says “Nazis” makes me smile. I’m saying it that way from now on. Nat-zees.
P.P.S. This is why I feel no shame about vengeance fantasies. There is no death painful enough to balance the inhumanity of what some evil bastards will do in the name of their despicable cause.
The moral equivalence crowd can shove their sanctimony up their collective ass. There are people right now who loved seeing Americans die in the World Trade Center. They relished it and still do. The Lockerbie bomber, Al Qaeda, the Taliban all glory in their death cult. No reasoning, no gentleness will change their black souls. Just as Nazis felt justified in their abject cruelty, so do the Islamofascists who carry out their modern mission of freedom killing violence.
The only solution? Kill the killers.
After reading Rachel’s post, I’m going to screw up my courage and go visit the site of the Twin Towers. Even though just typing this post makes me angry enough to cry at the injustice, I will see it. And when I go to Germany, I’ll do that heinous visit, too.
There is a reason America continues to fight this pesky foe. It’s us or them. Let it be them.
UPDATED AGAIN:
Actual, real live Inglourious Basterds courtesy Winston Churchill. I love him even more:
Some were in the Brigade – a unit set up by Prime Minister Winston Churchill in 1944, made up of more than 6,000 volunteers. He said: “It seems to me indeed appropriate that a special unit of the race which has suffered indescribable treatment from the Nazis should be represented in a distinct formation among the forces gathered for their final overthrow”.
The following year, the Brigade was in the front line for the Allies’ final push against the Nazi menace and worked with the rest of the British Army in the immediate aftermath of the war.
Official orders dictated that any Nazis captured should be interrogated, not executed. But the revenge squads within Brigade ranks had other ideas.
Go read the whole thing to get an idea of how the Nazi hunters exacted justice.
By the way, to the liberals out there: Was World War II a revenge fantasy? Because technically, the European theater wasn’t “our” war. I mean Germans didn’t attack us. And that war cost a lot of money. And hell, we still have troops stationed in Europe. I mean, it’s like totally a waste, ya know?
I do not regret that America took the war to the terrorist murderers. A sense of moral outrage should determine foreign policy. Barack Obama’s bland indifference to the people of Iran is telling. Should we go to war there? That can be disputed. But what cannot be disputed is that Iran is a totalitarian, fascist regime that wants to exterminate a whole race of people. IT IS EVIL. To not be affronted by their disgusting philosophy and actions is to show indifference to innocent, freedom-loving people.
The left resisted efforts to get involved in WWII. They didn’t want to see the atrocities of Japan, Germany and Italy, especially, because it didn’t fit their never ending selfish narrative.
Either freedom or tyranny is on the march. It is never static. And freedom must be bought or lost.
UPDATED:
The U.S. declared war on Japan December 8, 1941 in direct response to being attacked. Revenge? The next day, Germany declared war on the U.S. FDR offered monetary support to the British, stepping away from neutrality before this. However, one could argue that going to Europe was taking the fight to the enemy. Perhaps America should have simply played defense. It was not as though Germans were storming Manhattan en masse.
Also, for the “brown people” straw man argument: By defending the Iranian people against their psycho tyrant, I’m suggesting defending “brown people”. What did the war in Iraq become, if not a defense of brown people against Saddam Hussein and his sons and minions? What was the war against Iraq to begin with but a defense of the brown people in Kuwait?
Good grief. There’s evil people of every color. That racism card, though, that trumps everything.
UPDATED AGAIN:
In praise of the Bear Jew:
An old friend just attended the wedding of Eli Lake’s younger brother. I wrote my friend:
Do me a favor, really. Shake Eli’s hand and say thanks to the “Bear Jew” from another Brooklyn Jew, me. He did it Brooklyn style, the way I grew up. Some may have f**ked with me, but none came away unhurt, and never did again.
My old friend sent me this email:
Bruce,
I read your email to Eli and his parents- they all loved it and
that led to the handshake pictured here.
Also, I wrote a follow-up review of Inglourious Basterds here.
Ted Kennedy Died After Living A Full Life
Wednesday, August 26th, 2009I can’t say much nice, so I won’t say much of anything–except to acknowledge that the man lived, died, served his constituents, and was rewarded and acknowledged for that service.
Life is short. And we are all but a blink. Wealth, privilege, connections, power cannot give a person eternal life. They cannot give a person love. They cannot confer happiness. Life must be made in the moment.
P.S. Using Ted Kennedy’s death to prop up horrible legislation is disgusting. Politicizing death: it’s what Democrats do.
Podcast 33: Media Bias & Malpractice With Dan Gainor
Tuesday, August 25th, 2009Dan Gainor of the Media Research Center, Townhall, and Newsbusters joined me to discuss the media’s bias–both covert and overt–and how it shapes public opinion. It does work. The media does shape opinion, even though most news organizations have moved to a British model of journalism. The difference is that a Brit journalist will admit his bias, whereas an American journalist likes to view himself as objective. His delusion makes him more dangerous.
Below, you’ll see some links to some other podcasts. I’d like to draw your attention to Steve Schippert of National Review Online Threat’s Watch. His show is a must for anyone wanting to stay informed about world events. He lays out what is happening strategically with North Korea. I highly recommend listening to his show.
Melissa’s show can also be found on RFC Radio every Monday and Wednesday night at 10:00 pm Eastern.
To subscribe on iTunes, just click here!
When Melissa isn’t on the radio, you can find her at melissaclouthier.com and on Twitter. Her username is MelissaTweets.
– Also, don’t forget to check out our other shows on Take That! –
*** click here to grab the latest Steve Schippert Show ***
*** click here to grab the latest Brass Balls Radio Episode ***
*** click here to grab the latest Raisin’ Hale show ***
President Obama’s Campaign To Pervert 9/11 Truth
Monday, August 24th, 2009Islamofascists bent on destroying freedom, who hate Jews and Christians, and out of soul blotting envy murdered nearly 3,000 innocent Americans on 9/11 should be remembered for being soulless killers. Those lost to their evil should be remembered as individuals who lost their lives because they lived their lives as free men to the end.
September 11, 2001 was not a good day just as December 7, 1941 was not a good day.
It is a day that should pass as a warning and remembrance of evil unchecked. People should be mindful and continue to live. Out of respect for the dead, the day should not be trivialized, but that’s exactly what President Obama seeks to do.
Matthew Vadum of the American Spectator explains:
The plan is to turn a “day of fear” that helps Republicans into a day of activism called the National Day of Service that helps the left. In other words, nihilistic liberals are planning to drain 9/11 of all meaning.
“They think it needs to be taken back from the right,” said the source. “They’re taking that day and they’re breaking it because it gives Republicans an advantage. To them, that day is a fearful day.”
A coalition including the unsavory left-wing pressure group Color of Change and about 60 far-left, environmentalist, labor, and corporate shakedown groups participated in the call. Groups on the call included: ACORN, AFL-CIO, Apollo Alliance, Community Action Partnership, Deep South Center for Environmental Justice, 80 Million Strong for Young American Jobs, Friends of the Earth, Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies, Mobilize.org, National Black Police Association, National Coalition on Black Civic Participation, National Council of Negro Women, National Wildlife Federation, RainbowPUSH Coalition, Urban League, and Young Democrats of America.
Color of Change is the extremist racial grievance group that isn’t happy that TV’s Glenn Beck did several news packages on Van Jones, the self-described “communist” and “rowdy black nationalist” who became the president’s green jobs czar after jumping on the environmentalist bandwagon. The White House may be behind a push to destroy Beck by convincing advertisers to stop buying time on his show. Jones was also on the board of the Apollo Alliance, a hard-left environmentalist group that is now running large chunks of the Obama administration. The group has acknowledged that it dictated parts of the February stimulus bill to Congress.
With the help of the Obama administration, the coalition is launching a public relations campaign under the radar of the mainstream media — which remains almost uniformly terrified of criticizing the nation’s first black president — to try to change 9/11 from a day of reflection and remembrance to a day of activism, food banks, and community gardens.
Go read the whole thing. It’s disgusting.
Once again, the President isn’t about what’s best for America, it’s about what’s best for him. And a country reminded of their Islamist enemies isn’t good for him. He doesn’t like that reality. He doesn’t like Americans being reminded of that reality. So, he’ll try to make 9/11 a day of trivialities and pervert the day’s inherent seriousness.
Does President Obama like America even a little bit? I’m reminded that when he said he was for change, his underlying and unspoken but implied belief is that America is fundamentally flawed and needs to be fixed. So, his fixes are on this order–forget those who died at the hands of terrorists while lionizing lefty causes on the most transformational day in the history of America.
9/11 changed America. President Obama might not like it, but that’s the way it is. Pretending it didn’t happen won’t change reality, no matter how hard he tries to do just that.
Michelle Malkin says, “Look who’s hijacking 9/11“. And, she reminds us that ONLY 11 Senators voted against this piece of legislation. And the Senators wonder why the constituents are angry. Hmmmm…I wonder.
Obama’s Interrogations, Obama’s War
Monday, August 24th, 2009Wow, is there nothing that President Obama can’t do? With the move to control terrorist interrogations, President Obama no longer has plausible deniability. From the Washington Post:
Obama signed off late last week on the unit, named the High-Value Detainee Interrogation Group, or HIG. Made up of experts from several intelligence and law enforcement agencies, the interrogation unit will be housed at the FBI but will be overseen by the National Security Council — shifting the center of gravity away from the CIA and giving the White House direct oversight.
Seeking to signal a clean break from the Bush administration, Obama moved to overhaul interrogation and detention guidelines soon after taking office, including the creation of a task force on interrogation and transfer policies. The task force, whose findings will be made public Monday, recommended the new interrogation unit, along with other changes regarding the way prisoners are transferred overseas.
Who will he blame when the inevitable mistakes happen? Oh wait, that’s what cover-ups are for. Silly me.
America’s Lame Ass Political Class
Sunday, August 23rd, 2009Liberals and progressives are upset with President Obama, but swing voters and independents feel betrayed. From my latest Pajamas column:
The reason President Obama is tanking so quickly, though, is that he has a problem that President Bush didn’t have: Candidate Obama promised the world, sun, stars, and moon to everyone. People pinned their hopes and dreams on him. He stayed vague and hope-n-changy enough that all people felt reassured when he spoke to them. The problem is, he said whatever worked to whatever crowd he stood before. Or rather, his words were suitably bland that people projected their desires on his words. They heard what they wanted to hear, but what was he saying?
I figured it would take longer for Obama voters to be disappointed, but I underestimated the people’s wrath regarding out-of-control spending. Independents and moderates thought the President would govern as he said “responsibly”. Well, that’s not happening.
There are a few bright spots in the government, but the political class in general simply does not understand where the people are coming from. I’m sure they’ve focus grouped every phrase and every policy into oblivion but they just don’t get the overall point: Except for the socialists at the extreme, America does not want to be Europe Lite. They don’t. Perhaps when everyone was rolling in the dough, a little more redistribution sounded okay, but now, it’s patently obvious that people need to keep what they have to survive.
The only solution is an overhaul….change Washington by changing the players in Washington. That means heretofore uninvolved people getting involved, and running for office. Just voting isn’t enough. Making sure your Congressperson knows how you feel and then talking in person…
The wrong people are afraid in this new political equation. That should change.
Self Will Vs. Social Will
Saturday, August 22nd, 2009How much of our behavior is determined by external expectations? How much of our behavior is driven by free will? How much of our future is destiny?
It seems that one day can turn into a week which turns into a year which turns into a life and before a person wakes up, time has passed and a person is down a road he never thought he wanted to travel. The Anchoress wrote a post around this video by Ellen DeGeneres. It’s insightful and I’ve had it on my mind ever since:
The Anchoress says (the whole post is a gem):
And too, I think she spoke a great deal of plain truth. Polonius advised his son, “to thy own self be true” but Degeneres spells out the loss and pain that can come from doing exactly that. The truth – the whole truth – is one part courage, one part discipline and two parts sacrifice; the great paradox of life is that one must be willing to sacrifice one’s very self in order to wholly own who one is. Rather like the gospel admonition: “who would lose his life will save it.”
There comes a moment in all of our lives when we get a sense of what we are born for. Degeneres got it when she wrote that letter to God. Whether she realized it or not, she had a blessing at that moment; a revelation. In her exquisite pain she wrote the whole, honest truth; she revealed herself or, in another sense, gave herself up. And in response she got the truth back at her, an answer, in the form of a “showing” (or a knowing if you will) of what her life would be.
I’ve heard many people talk about the crystalline moment when they suddenly “knew” something or “envisioned” something in their lives and it turned out precisely as it was seen or known. In fact, something very similar happened in my life, when I -also in a moment of huge pain and confusion- spoke to God from the depths of my heart, and rose to my feet knowing with certainty that my life had a plan and a purpose; that plan and purpose began unfolding within hours, and continues to unfold, instruct and reveal itself to me.
To repeat: “the great paradox of life is that one must be willing to sacrifice one’s very self in order to wholly own who one is.” Yes. That is life.
An intentioned life means pruning out producing branches and discarding them so that other branches can produce more. Pruning causes pain, but also growth. So the tree of life is sort of a bonsai tree and can end up being fairly odd-shaped.
Or life can be an unpruned bush, producing little, no shape, no special quality, unrecognizable, anonymous and filler on the world’s landscape.
And how much of an individual’s shape is constrained and/or recognized by others? That is, some people look anonymous except to those who see beauty where others see the banal. And, like the physicist who changes the properties of the experiment he studies, the love of the admirer changes the quality of previously unremarkable individual.
There is individual influence and then there are social influences–the nuns in grade school, the Fraternity at college, the self-selected trade group, the work culture, the movies, Twitter. Each group exerts a pressure to bend and shape and most people seem to underestimate the power of the systems they’re a part of to manipulate their life.
Shaming works, of course, but there are subtler ways to shape a person. Messages are filtered and framed and people accept the messages because it is a lot of work to question every single one and ferret out the truth.
That is why, in the end of the day, people must be intentional. A person who wants to die somewhat satisfied should take time out and consider his ways. A person must seek the truth and attempt to live it. One person’s path is not another person’s path and if it’s the right path for him, it will be narrow. Choices must be made. Well, choices are made, whether conscious or not. At least with intentional choices, they result in fewer regrets.
Perhaps the most challenging part of a well-lived life comes from being awake and choosing. It causes pain and by necessity, loss. There is also this paradox: a person must surrender to purpose in order to be free.
All of this involves pain–the excruciating, dull achy bone-crushing kind. Truth is not easy, but once it’s recognized and chosen, a unique life takes shape.
People Telling Sarah Palin To Shut Up Should Shut Up–UPDATED
Friday, August 21st, 2009Sarah Palin is the only politician reflecting, in plain language, the will of the American people. Charles Krauthammer believes she should “leave the room”. He is referring, specifically, to the concept of death panels and then goes into the provision in the House Bill about end of life counseling. He then comes out against, I think, the very counseling that Sarah Palin also rejects:
So why get Medicare to pay the doctor to do the counseling? Because we know that if this white-coated authority whose chosen vocation is curing and healing is the one opening your mind to hospice and palliative care, we’ve nudged you ever so slightly toward letting go.
It’s not an outrage. It’s surely not a death panel. But it is subtle pressure applied by society through your doctor. And when you include it in a health-care reform whose major objective is to bend the cost curve downward, you have to be a fool or a knave to deny that it’s intended to gently point the patient in a certain direction, toward the corner of the sickroom where stands a ghostly figure, scythe in hand, offering release.
Taken on its own, Section 1233 of H.R. 3200 is not a death panel. It’s more a death recommendation.
Dr. Krauthammer forgets though, that this isn’t the only death-related provision of the bill or of this health care legislation generally. The counseling is an indicator of intent. While a doctor is financially incentivized to have a death discussion, the government program will, by nature of sheer numbers, want people to choose, as President Obama says, a “pain pill over surgery.”
Further, the government, and a bureaucratic board of 27 appointees will be deciding care for people. That is, 27 people will be answering questions like: who receives care? Who qualifies? Who doesn’t? In what circumstances? It will be a bureaucratic answer and bureaucrats, who cannot be sued and have no incentive beyond cutting costs and appeasing political special interests. Individual needs will get lost in the collective good. Some people will die because of these choices.
“Death panel” might be a bit of a rhetorical flourish but it captures the essence of the problem with Government-Run, Single-Payer, Socialized Medicine, whatever one feels comfortable calling it.
The fact is, America needs MORE plain spoken politicians, not less. Sarah Palin has managed to define the debate for Republicans and conservatives. She should be thanked, not shunned.
It is a mark of how effective she is that she’s hated so much. Any person who causes psychological problems on the Left, small government types should be embracing.
UPDATED:
What Republican is seriously taking the administration to task on tort reform? Uh, that’s right no one. But it is a huge issue. Again, from Sarah Palin:
As Governor of Alaska, I learned a little bit about being a target for frivolous suits and complaints (Please, do I really need to footnote that?). I went my whole life without needing a lawyer on speed-dial, but all that changes when you become a target for opportunists and people with no scruples. Our nation’s health care providers have been the targets of similar opportunists for years, and they too have found themselves subjected to false, frivolous, and baseless claims. To quote a former president, “I feel your pain.”
So what can we do? First, we cannot have health care reform without tort reform. The two are intertwined. For example, one supposed justification for socialized medicine is the high cost of health care. As Dr. Scott Gottlieb recently noted, “If Mr. Obama is serious about lowering costs, he’ll need to reform the economic structures in medicine—especially programs like Medicare.” [1] Two examples of these “economic structures” are high malpractice insurance premiums foisted on physicians (and ultimately passed on to consumers as “high health care costs”) and the billions wasted on defensive medicine.
You know, if other Republicans actually talked these issues, they’d have more of a following and people would take them more seriously.
The Name Rule
Friday, August 21st, 2009Robert Stacy McCain wrote a slice of genius the other day. He writes of names and relationships and psychology:
All Girls Named Tonya, the title of that childhood memoir no publisher will ever pay me to write, derives from a principle of human psychology first postulated by a genuinely evil little bastard who became one of my dope buddies in 10th grade. That title is 67% of what I call Art Hembree’s Law:
All Girls Named Tonya Are Sluts.
If your name is Tonya, I apologize on my old friend’s behalf, but as a lowlife trying to score some easy action circa 1978-86, I can testify that Hembree’s Law proved amazingly reliable.
Well, he swapped momentary, if unfulfilled pleasure with Tonya, for a lost lifetime of love with Amy, but I say he got lucky.
If all girls named Tonya are sluts, then all girls named Amy are mean gossips. Now, I’ve lived long enough that the rules have had too many exceptions to be valid, but I’m still suspicious when I meet an Amy. She has a threshold of niceness that she must scale that Anns (they’re smart) just don’t have to.
Don’t forget Susans. To a person, they’ve all been smug, self-righteous smarty-pants. Is there a Susan who is a C-student? I don’t think so. Is there a Susan who isn’t a competitive-better-than-you ball of high achievement? Haven’t met her yet.
My sister says all Melinda’s are fat. That’s not true.
I like John’s. They are unoffensive.
Have to be careful with Michael’s. They can go either way–mean or nice. They are usually smart.
Do names determine behavior? I wonder.
I know a Chiropractor named Dr. Bone. I know a Proctologist named Dr. Butts. No, I don’t know a Gynecologist named Dr. Vagina, but you get the idea.
Anyway, Stacy needs to let it go. He dodged a name bullet. I hope his wife’s name isn’t Amy.
President Obama’s Moralizing
Thursday, August 20th, 2009So, Barack Obama has gotten religion. How convenient. And he’s gotten religion just in time to beat the bitter Bible-thumping, gun-clingers with it. Even better.
Ann Althouse has the whole story:
Bearing false witness? Breaking the 9th Commandment? So his opponents are sinners. I’m trying to imagine the separation-of-church-and-state freakout if George Bush had taken this approach to arguing for one of his policies.
According to the lede paragraph in the linked NYT article:
President Obama sought Wednesday to reframe the health care debate as “a core ethical and moral obligation,” imploring a coalition of religious leaders to help promote the plan to lower costs and expand insurance coverage for all Americans.
Strangely, the context of that quote — “a core ethical and moral obligation” — is missing from the body of the article. Was something cut? Was it too embarrassing? Too Bush-y? I have to go elsewhere:
First, bearing false witness is not the same as lying. Bearing false witness means witnessing against someone, knowing he is innocent, in order to harm him. In the Old Testament days, a false witness could get a person stoned. Is President Obama actually implying that those who disagree with his ideas are against him personally? Of course he is. Because to disagree ideologically is to besmirch his very existence.
Second, health care is a core moral obligation? Of the government? Now there’s the crux of the matter. See, a Christian has a duty to care for the weak, oppressed, widowed, orphaned, imprisoned, etc. But what President Obama is talking about is NOT Christian charity, he’s talking about forced taxation to redistribute to all who don’t have health care. That might mean the able-bodied and lazy, those who don’t care for their health, etc.
President Obama should steer clear of his religious talk. First, he doesn’t walk the talk as Ann points out. Second, he is talking about the state taking on the obligation of an individual’s religion which is a personal choice–whereas taxation is most definitely NOT a choice. Well, not much of one.
