Typical ‘progressive’ reactions to terror attacks on U.S. soil provide unintentional comedy

Here we are again, dealing with yet more instances of radical Islamic terror, and “progressives” in politics and in the media are, again, figuring out how to handle it all. ( I use quotations on the word “progressive” because all too often it is a contradiction in terms.)

We’ve already seen how some of our usual “buddies” have dealt with it, like our pal Dan Slott slamming GOP presidential candidate Donald Trump for having the unmitigated gall to refer to the bombing in New York City as just that — a “bombing” — before, allegedly, all the facts were in. He even retweeted a tweet from a transgender activist who said Trump was “actively rooting” for the bomb to be terror-connected. Nice.

But … where is Slott, et. al. regarding Hillary Clinton doing the same thing — not to mention the mainstream media, in the form of CNN this time, covering for her by selectively editing out where she referred to the attack as a “bombing”??

The polls not going her way and desperately seeking an opening, Hillary upped the ante today, spewing the typical “Trump’s rhetoric is giving terrorists an excuse” nonsense:

I don’t want to speculate but here’s what we know and I think it’s important for voters to hear this and weigh it in making their choice in November… We know that a lot of the rhetoric used by Donald Trump is being seized on by terrorists… Wea [sic]also know from the former head of our counter-terrorism center, Matt Olson, that the kinds of rhetoric and language that Mr. Trump has used is giving aid and comfort to our adversaries.

“Aid and comfort?” Why, that sounds like … treason! 

Naturally, in cases like these (CNN Clinton assistance aside), the media provides no shortage of qualifiers — like “potential”:

This is where we are in early 21st century America with the Left, folks: For offering solutions to Islamic terrorism, however unpalatable they may seem to some folks, Trump is helping groups like ISIS.

All the while the Fourth Estate is busily helping Trump’s opponent.

I am no fan of Donald Trump. I never thought his candidacy would last, that he would poll lousy and eventually drop out. I don’t believe he is really conservative, and given many of his statements and his temperament, he potentially could make Barack Obama’s abuse of executive authority seem like our first African-American president is the greatest constitutional adherent ever.

But the Left really has no one to blame but themselves for the rise of Trump. It is comical to watch the disbelief coming from the Left: “How can anyone support this guy?” they angrily exclaim.

Even though many on the right have reservations about the GOP candidate, they are weary of the last eight years’ collection of lies, obfuscations, political correctness, and outright criminal activity.

Not to mention, when the media ponders how they’re having little effect on Trump’s outrageousness, one only has to look at how they treated the two George Bushes, John McCain, and worse, Mitt Romney. When a guy like Romney is portrayed as evil incarnate, it’s going to be rather difficult to make people believe what you have to say in the future … even when it is warranted. Like with Trump.

To coin a cliché, “The Boy Who Cried ‘Wolf.'”

So, I, for one, am enjoying watching Trump take on the ridiculous PC which has overtaken us, and thumb his nose at the mainstream media. By the media and the Left routinely giving average Americans the middle finger — calling them “bigots,” “hateful,” and “xenophobes;” refusing to call “radical Islamic terror” just that; championing “sanctuary cities” while belittling those who want immigration laws followed and enforced — they’ve helped make Trump the very manifestation of the reaction to that middle finger.

Side note: I want to extend my heartfelt gratitude to Doug for allowing me to voice my thoughts here now that it had become impossible to keep The Colossus of Rhodey updated regularly. As Doug mentioned, you can catch my regular writings over at The College Fix.

MoMA: New York City’s zoo that masquerades as an art musuem

Museum of Modern Art is a strange place. It has everything one would expect from a first class art museum, but in many respects it is more like a zoo. Your friendly neighborhood blogger went to MoMA on his day off from work to check out art like Gustav Klimt’s Adele Bloch-Bauer II, but instead struggled not get to swept away in a rip tide of tourists taking selfies.

Perhaps the best way to describe what it feels like to walk through MoMa is to use a painting analogy: I felt like Georges Braque’s “Man with Guitar” (1911). It’s easy to feel like you’re coming apart at the seams as a cacophony of laughs, giggles, squeals, shuffling feet, and jumbled conversations make it incredibly difficult to properly take in each artist’s work.

Man with Guitar BraqueWhile it is impressive that any museum in the world can convince the average tourist to pay $25 to view Marcel Duchamp’s “In Advance of the Broken Arm” (1915) — yes, that’s right, Mr. Duchamp literally hung a shovel from a ceiling and deemed it art — packing in as many people into a museum as humanly possible isn’t necessarily a good thing.

Marcel DuchampMoMA is certainly a place every art lover should go to — once. I suppose Mr. Duchamp would call me a “bourgeois” snob for saying it, but I don’t care: It’s hard to appreciate art in a museum when families are invited to run around like a bunch of chickens with their heads cut off.

There is plenty to do in New York City if you love the arts. Unless you have a burning desire to check it out, I would suggest looking at the snow shovel in your garage, pretending you’ve just seen “art” by Duchamp, and calling it a day.

Eric Garner protesters miss the point: More government equals more force

Police Chokehold DeathSince a grand jury’s decision not to indict New York City Police Officer Daniel Pantaleo for his role in the death of Eric Garner, protests across the country have popped up. Racial complaints have taken center stage at these gatherings, but I have yet to see any protesters call attention to the role an ever-expansive government played in Mr. Garner’s death. Government equals force, which is why policemen were sent to bring an American into compliance with laws on selling loose, untaxed cigarettes.

Oddly enough, there are protesters in New York City who have turned the problem on its head — they’re holding “capitalism” accountable for Mr. Garner’s death instead of the politicians who want limited resources to go after the guy on the corner selling loose cigarettes.

USA Today reported December 6:

NEW YORK — Protesters staged a “die in” Friday night in an Apple store on Fifth Avenue and in Macy’s at Herald Square. …

Zandir Santos, 30, of Brooklyn, relished in the idea that protesters had disrupted life at an Apple store and a Macy’s in New York. The filmmaker said this is a pivotal time in American history and that police must change how they treat people.

“The CEO of Apple knows we shut his store down–that means capitalist America is going to take us seriously,” he said. “We are going to shake up your business and we want to hit you where it hurts.”

This blog covered Rosa DeLauro’s (D-Conn.) desire to tax Americans for every ounce of sugar they consume. This blog also covered New York City’s interest in banning e-cigarettes. The list goes on and on, but the point is always the same: when you vote for more government then you get more government, which includes the power to send cops to your door if you sell loose cigarettes, sell e-cigarettes, consume too much sugar, etc.

How many of the people protesting “capitalism” voted for the New York City politicians who crafted the laws that prompted NYPD to show up at Eric Garner’s footsteps? It’s a morbid question, but one worth considering: Did Eric Garner vote for the very same people whose rules and regulations played a part in his demise?

President Obama said Monday that the protests Americans are seeing now are “necessary” (provided they are peaceful), but he too only focuses on race — there have been thousands of federal regulations put in place under the Obama administration, and with that comes the power to enforce the government’s will.

The Hill reported May 15, 2013:

From 2009 through last year, there were more than 13,000 final rules published in the Federal Register, while fewer than 12,400 were finalized from 2005-2008, the report found. That’s an increase of nearly five percent.

Race is certainly an issue in Eric Garner’s death, but not in the way the media is portraying it. The National Journal reported November 9, 2012:

“93% of African-Americans voted for Obama, down 2 percentage points from 2008, although 96 percent of black women supported him.”

Translation: 93% of African-Americans voted for a guy who craves power to be consolidated into the hands of small elite in the nation’s capital, although 96 percent of black women supported him.

The conservative man and woman — white, black, brown, blue, or orange — just wants to be left alone. One way to make that happen is not to vote for power-hungry politicians who write endless lists of legislation that may require law enforcement officials to knock on your door in the middle of the night.

Keith Olbermann, aging smear merchant, attacks class act Yankee because he’s the anti-Jeter

Keith Olbermann JeterOn Thursday night future Hall of Fame Yankee Derek Jeter played his last game in Yankee Stadium, and he delivered the winning run in the bottom of the ninth. He went out a hero, and then handled himself with class — something he has always done — which is why aging smear merchant Keith Olbermann recently directed a seven-minute ESPN-flavored version of his “Worst Person in the World” routine at the shortstop.

Here is an excerpt:

“For all we know, Jeter will sprout wings and be taken up to Mount Olympus to play shortstop  in the Big League in the sky. […]  How many times did Derek Jeter lead the American league in any offensive production category? The answer is three. Twice in hits, once in runs scored. No batting championships. No stolen base titles. No leading the league in doubles. Well, how many times did Jeter lead the Yankees in any offensive production categories? We’ll give you the big eight: doubles, homers, RBIs, stolen bases, batting average, on base, slugging, OPS — 17 times.

Over 19 season, 152 guys led the Yankees … it was Jeter only 17 times. […] How many MVP awards did he win? None.

Congratulations to Keith Olbermann — he was able to go through a guy’s 19-year career on one of the most successful franchises in baseball history and find a slew of statistics to slime him with as he exits the league. In telling fashion, Mr. Olbermann went out of his way to ignore Jeter’s character, his leadership on and off the field, and his statistics as seen through the prism of an era forever tarnished with steroid use.

Sports Illustrated clears a few things up for Mr. Olbermann:

From 1996 to 2009, Jeter hit .318 with a .388 on-base percentage and .459 slugging percentage and averaged 152 games a year at shortstop, one of the most physically demanding positions on the field. Other players could play at that level for a month or two, or even a year or two. Very few could do it for that long.

And if you view Jeter in the context of his era, you can appreciate that he was a special player. For a long stretch of his career, baseball did not test for performance-enhancing drugs. It’s pretty obvious that some of the players who out-performed Jeter were juicing. We don’t know for sure that Jeter refrained from using steroids, but there has never been a hint that he used them. It’s fair to imagine that, if baseball had tested for PEDs for Jeter’s entire career, his numbers would look even better than they do, relative to his peers. …

Ripken is the best comparison for Jeter — not just because they played the same position (though Ripken moved to third base late in his career), but also because they are admired for reasons that go beyond their stats. Ripken’s numbers (.276/.340/.447) were not the best of his generation. You could reasonably argue they are not as impressive as Jeter’s (.310/.377/.440). But Ripken was a Baltimore icon, had his amazing Iron Man streak and won a championship with the Orioles. If he were asked to throw out a first pitch in Baltimore in the upcoming playoffs, you would expect a thunderous standing ovation. Baltimoreans are willing to overlook his flaws and his down years, because he is theirs.

Jeter was a consistently terrific player, he was extremely durable, he almost always represented his franchise well and he played for five championship teams. He also apparently didn’t use PEDs at a time when so many players did. That helps explain why he is beloved, and why so many people have found ways to make money off his retirement tour. But don’t let the business distract you from the game. Derek Jeter was a great player.

That is what one calls fair journalism — something Mr. Olbermann has never taken much stock in.

The truth of the matter is that once again a man who spent years perfecting the craft of personal destruction is only running from himself. Keith Olbermann attacks Derek Jeter’s sterling professional career with one team by using Photoshopped angel wings and insults for a very specific reason: everywhere he goes there are burned bridges smoldering in the distance years after his departure. There will be no extended celebrations of Keith Olbermann’s career because, quite frankly, so many people do not like him. He is weirdly-obsessed with statistics because his character and integrity are lacking. Derek Jeter’s leadership skills are ignored because Keith Olbermann is not a leader. Only a man with deep-seated psychological issues would allocate that much air time to bashing Derek Jeter as he closes a marvelous chapter of his life.

Keith Olbermann is the anti-Jeter, and deep down he knows it.

NYC considers ban on e-cigarettes because its officials are addicted to power

Ecig AP

In places like California’s San Rafael City, it is now illegal to smoke in your own home. Because New York City officials can’t be outdone by the west coast’s bureaucratic robber barons — and because they’re addicted to power — they’ve moved on to controlling the lives of those who use e-cigarettes. How weird will it be when they go after candy cigarettes down the road?

Reason reports:

The real problem with e-cigarettes, according to [New York City Health Commissioner Thomas Farley] and other supporters of the ban, is that they look too much like the real thing. “E-cigarettes threaten, in my opinion, to undermine enforcement of the Smoke-Free Air Act,” City Council Speaker Christine Quinn said last week. “Because many of the e-cigarettes are designed to look like cigarettes and be used just like them, they can lead to confusion or confrontation.”

You might think that people of ordinary intelligence would pretty quickly learn to distinguish a burning stick of dried vegetable matter from an e-cigarette, which contains no tobacco and produces no smoke. And once they learned the difference, they could explain it to the New York City Council. “These are being touted as safer than cigarettes,” says Councilman James Gennaro, “but we don’t really know that.”

So now it’s okay to work on banning people from activities that look dangerous. It’s okay to ban activities that state planners fear might lead to “confusion” or “confrontation.” When do the bans on toy guns begin?

Where does it end? Answer: It doesn’t.

To the elitist mastermind, you are too dumb to be trusted with sodium consumption. You are too dumb to decide how much soda to drink in a single sitting. You are too dumb to decide how much water your toilet uses per flush and what kind of light bulbs you use in your home. You are too dumb to decide which health care plans are best for you — particularly if you’re young and healthy and only want a package that only includes catastrophic coverage. In the quest to create heaven on earth, officials addicted to the task create hellish fiefdoms all over the globe.

The reason why the compulsive do-gooder is so dangerous is because his regulations come in drips and drops over time. Whether you liken it to Chinese water torture or death by 10,000 paper cuts the results are the same — a slow death. Ironically, the bureaucratic busybody’s endless attempts to prevent individuals from harming themselves only hastens the death of free nations.

Related: When idiots dream big, they dream of Mayor Bloomberg

Remembering 9/11 and the ‘what if?’ that never ends

On September 11th, 2001 I was just over a year out of the military, taking college classes and preparing myself to transfer to the University of Southern California. My grandmother spoke to me from our living room and said a plane had hit the World Trade Center. I talked about it with her from the kitchen for a few moments, and just as I walked into the family room I saw United Flight 175 hit the South Tower. A chill ran down my spine. The phone rang seconds later. It was my sister: “A plane just flew by my window. What’s going on?” she asked. Sadly, I don’t even remember my response, and I’ve never thought to ask her. I know that she was evacuated from her building, and that a kind stranger offered her a tee shirt to breath into to avoid inhaling dust and debris. I also know that on a deeper, more philosophical level I’ve been trying to answer her question — as it pertains to Islamic terrorism — ever since.

We can count dead bodies. We can put a dollar amount on the damage to the city of New York and the country as a whole. We can calculate the economic impact al Qaeda had on the United States and the world, but what we can’t do is quantify the psychological toll the terrorist attacks of 9/11 wreaked on the nation. Regardless, I am more than happy to offer myself up for amateur and professional sociologists everywhere.

Prior to 9/11, I was not much of a crier. As a former infantryman, I prided myself on having a bit of a “tough” exterior. I was a master at hiding my emotions and keeping my “military manner” when necessary. On that day though, I remember driving to class with tears in my eyes. I had to compose myself in the parking lot before entering the building, and while my body was in a college classroom my mind was somewhere else. Psychological aftershocks were reverberating in my head, and it wouldn’t be until years later that I would be able to look back and identify many of the changes to the landscape.

For instance, post 9/11 I found myself tearing up just listening to Tony Blair defend Western Civilization. I’d see pictures of George W. Bush meeting with injured soldiers and I’d get a lump in my throat. Sometimes, random stories about 9/11 would come on television and I’d struggle to keep my composure. I tried to tell a friend about former Navy SEAL Marcus Luttrell and I couldn’t finish because my voice kept cracking. I’ll now see the random veteran in public, and I although I want so badly to thank them for their service I rarely can do so because the tears begin before I ever utter a word. I can’t control it and I understand how it comes across as inane. However, I tend to think of my physiological response to these situations as something born out of the realization that the freedoms we enjoy are much more fragile than most people realize. When I think about the idea of America I have reactions that late night comedians find humorous — and I don’t care.

A friend of mine recently asked what my life would have been like if I entered the military after attending USC. It’s a good question, and it’s a slightly different version of the same question I ask myself almost every day: “What if I stayed in?”

When I exited the service in August, 2000 I was generally of the mindset that I had fulfilled some sort of unspoken, patriotic duty. In my mind, war could have broken out at any time, but it didn’t during my enlistment. I was under the impression that any war that involved the United States would take place years after I was in any position to help out. After returning to civilian life, working so hard to get into a prestigious university, taking out college loans and charting out a new path for myself, 9/11 suddenly had me second guessing everything. My friends were being sent to Afghanistan, and then Iraq. While I was in Southern California reading and writing my friends were being shot at. In California I was dating the woman who would ultimately become my wife, and yet there was always a part of me that screamed “You should be over there!” And I wasn’t. How many of my tears are of guilt and remorse I guess I’ll never know.

As a religious man, I have tried my best to live up to God’s plan for my life. There are too many coincidences — sheer blessings — for me to to believe there isn’t someone upstairs looking out for me. And so, my mind and my spirit tell me that writing is what I was made for. My mind and my spirit tell me that I can do more for God and country through the written word than I could with an M16A2 or an M4 carbine — but my heart often tells me I failed to be there for my buddy Leija or any number of other guys I knew from Charlie 1/18.

Perhaps the better question is: What would I be like if September 11th never happened? In a sick and twisted way, I think I would have been worse off spiritually. Hopefully, I’ll have many more September 11ths to turn it over in my head, along with the the friends I’ve met through this blog.

Thanks for reading,

Doug

What if this kid had stayed in the military instead of getting out and going to USC? I ask myself that almost every day.

New York Vendor, Hero. Dhimmitude Consumers Silent.

I’d like to take a moment to thank the New York City T-shirt vendor who saw something wrong and did the right thing:

…The bomb was left inside a dark green Nissan Pathfinder, left with its engine running and hazard lights flashing near the junction of 45th Street and Broadway.

A T-shirt vendor, who was a Vietnam veteran, alerted police when he noticed smoke coming out of it. Police hurriedly evacuated thousands of tourists and theatre-goers, including women in evening gowns, from the area on Broadway’s busiest night of the week.”

Juxtapose this story with that of the heartless bastards who did nothing as a hero lay dying on the cold concrete, which was warmed temporarily by…his own blood. How easy

This Spider-Man panel is interesting for two reasons: 1. It imparts an important lesson to readers of all ages. 2. The kind of people who would kill New Yorkers simply for being New Yorkers find this comic offensive.

would it have been for this vendor to scuttle away and say, “not my problem,”? For every hero, there are a slew of people who, for whatever reason, slink away from the responsibility to do what is right.  I’m just glad that on this night it was the Vietnam Vet who happened to be nearby, and not the herds of sheep who ensured the death of Alfredo Tale-Yax.

This story is also interesting for the South Park component, but at the same time I’d like to wait a few days to see how it all unfolds before jumping to conclusions:

The device, which failed to detonate, was left near the offices of Viacom, which owns the irreverent cartoon series.
Last month postings on an Islamic website warned the creators of South Park – Matt Stone and Trey Parker – that they could face violent reprisals after an episode of the show featured Mohammed in a bear suit.

Is it possible that we live in a world where sick and twisted souls would attempt to cause large scale death and destruction because of a cartoon image of Mohammed in a bear suit? Unless you’ve been living under a rock for the past decade or so, you know that the answer is a resounding YES (although, Osama Bin Laden seems to have been living under a rock for years and he’s precisely the kind of guy who would do such a thing…so even you Neal Gabler Mole Men don’t have an excuse for not knowing the correct answer).

There are a lot of ways this story can twist and turn over the next few days, so I’ll refrain from giving my opinions on Viacom for now. However, I would like to take a moment to ask the President how all that outreach to the Islamic world is paying off. It appears that fanatics are…just as fanatical. And it appears that the clash (or should we go with really bad chafing action?) of civilizations that everyone wants to pretend isn’t happening—is.