Whither Logic

An Email I received from my Pops and my response and rant below:

Dad Says:
I was scanning Whitherlogic today and noticed a comment about Kerry's foreign policy skills and successes, due in part, to his knowledge that life is not simple. The old shades of gray comment was referenced in the article. On this point, I am in a small minority. I believe that life is simple! It is the tough decisions which make life difficult from time to time. However, logically speaking, the answers and the correct path are almost always quite clear, along with the associated benefits and risk. A foreign policy decision will typically benefit some and alienate others. The decision might be difficult to alienate some, however it does not mean life is not simple. It merely suggest that making the decision takes fortitude and conviction and could be construed as difficult. Even for those poor souls who are afflicted with some misfortune which makes life especially painful, life is simple. Clear cut logical decisions are apparent. It does not mean those decisions will necessarily make their life less painful, as the reality might be that they were dealt a very bad hand in life. May God bless them! May we serve them. But the point is, life is simple for these afflicted folks, however, difficult and painful it might be.

The shades of gray philosophy is a cop out for those who do not want to make a tough decision. People are likely to say, look, it is a gray situation so I best not make a decisive decision because someone might be offended. Let's try and make a decision that pleases everyone. Sometimes people get hurt by a decision. It is called life. It is really simple if you have courage, conviction and compassion. Oh, I think I just broke the code!

And his logical protoge says in return:

Dad,
You are absolutely correct in your letter below. Perhaps you can shed some light on the propensity of, mostly left leaning individuals, to operate in such a way as to ignore the realties of the world. For example, many of my leftist friends are for increased gun control where I am obviously for very limited gun control. I have taken my position because I know that criminals will act as criminals do. They will procure guns regardless of whether they are legal or illegal and the only thing that restricting access to guns does is restrict the law abiding citizen from acquiring one. (In that he is law abiding and will not procure a weapon if it is illegal to do so). My liberal friends exclaim that if we liberalize gun access, there will be guns everywhere. There are guns everywhere and many in the hands of those who probably shouldn't have them. Concealed carry laws are the answer in my opinion. If a thug thinks that his targeted victim is packing, I would assume he will think twice before aggressing. Also, allowing law abiding citizens to carry protection will not cause some sort of wild west scenario in that we would be allowing people who are already followers of the law to do so. From whence does this idea that arming the citizenry will cause increased crime stem?

Second illogical issue: This one runs the gamut of political support and is probably more isolated on the right, sadly: Drug legalization. When did the government decide that it could tell people what they can do with their bodies. My god, a woman has an absolutely unfettered right to kill her unborn fetus but that same woman can go to jail for smoking marijuana. Prohibition of alcohol was disastrous and the current war on drugs is even worse. Rather than protect the populous from the evils of drugs, we have created a vast black market that exists solely because of their illegality. Now my rightist friends exhibit the same sort of hysteria over drug legalization as my leftist buddies do over guns. They claim that our society will be "stoned" or become lazy and apathetic if drugs are available. Dad, they are available, only in an unregulated, unsafe, and expensive manner. I would prefer that the junkie have a $10 a day habit than a $200 a day habit. He needn't rob my wife to support the former. In addition, alcohol is currently legal in this country and I cannot see the difference. Either the government has the right to restrict what we put in our bodies, or it doesn't.

Democrats and Republicans and the Black vote: It shocks my conscious that black America votes overwhelmingly for the Dems. Remember that the Democrats re the ones who opposed the release of the slaves, opposed de-segregation and today, foster the government programs that hinder advancement in the black community (welfare, affirmative action, poorly managed and unaccountable inner-city school systems). This idea that the Dems really care about black issues is abhorrent. The Democratic party treats blacks like they are second class citizens unable to fend for themselves; that they must be coddled because they cannot compete. I don't believe that for a minute and I also think it smack of true racism. Why is it that opposing a program that treats blacks as inferior is racist but espousing that the black community is inferior is not. It baffles me to no end. Republicans say everyone should compete on the same field, Democrats say that certain members of society are so ill prepared to fend for themselves that they must be treated as inferior. And for some bizarre reason, the Republicans are the racists.

Class warfare: What the hell is a working family and why is it that if I work long hours, delay my gratification, and become successful, that I am no longer a working family member? Where has the logic gone? In my humblest of opinions, there is not one person in this country (barring sickness, disability, and children) who is poor for any reason other than because he chooses to be so. The rich in this country are not rich because they were given it, they worked hard, saved their money, became more educated and succeeded. People don't like it said but this is the land of opportunity. There is a job waiting behind every corner. While it mighn't be the job you are seeking, there are services that need performing that will render one a wage in return. Yes, it would suck if I had to be a garbage man or a janitor but I greatly respect those that perform those jobs and if I had to take a position as a street-sweeper, or a crap shoveler, or a dish-washer, I'd take it and I'd do it well. You see, dignity stems from self worth and self worth stems directly from knowing that you are a productive member of society. To see these pandering Dems get up on stage and talk about the rich as though they are vermin is disgusting. Most of the so-called rich are thus because they busted their proverbial asses. To denigrate them for votes from people too confused and degraded to see the reality is to denigrate everything that makes this country great. Shame!

Aids: Yes, I think it sucks to have AIDS but no, I'm not riding my bike to raise money to support either your treatment or research into a cure. According to the CDC, well over 99% of persons with HIV got it through either unprotected sex or using dirty needles. Yes, there are some that have contracted the disease from being raped, really now, we have limited resources in this country and there are areas in our society that merit the funds far more than the HIV carriers.

Best of the Web: March 5, 2004

While I already have a link on this site to the daily postings of Mr. Taranto and crew, today's discussion of the Roe effect is absolutely fantastic! The data are fascinating. I wonder if the Pro-Choice lobby will stop to consider the implications of 30 years of Roe.

It reminds me of some ranting that I heard a few months back by a feminist who was horrified at mothers in China choosing to abort their babies based on their sex. It turned out that the rate of aborted female babies far outstripped that of males in some "male obsessed" societies. It made me wonder, if what is claimed by the pro-choice movement is true, and that the baby is just a fetus and without rights, why can it be outrageous to abort on the basis of the baby's sex. After all, it's just fetal tissue, right?

NJ Surpasses All States in Teenage Abortion Rate

If you didn't attend a govenrnment school, you can easily see that statistically speaking, 23.5% of New Jersey girls have an abortion while they are between the ages of 15 and 19. Scary.

A Primary Endorsement:

"What his critics see as an inability to take strong, clear positions seems to us to reflect his appreciation that life is not simple. He understands the nuances and shades of gray in both foreign and domestic policy."

You have got to be kidding!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I thought what we needed in a leader was an ability, despite the fact that life is not simple, to discern the right stance to take. It's called leadership.

A Must Read on "Will be Soarin'":

"It is not only Israel that Mr. Soros abjures but Jewish charities in general, an attitude he attributes to his observations of the Judenrat, or Jewish council, that the Nazis created in Budapest, for which he worked as a courier, and by a rather weird experience with the Jewish Board of Guardians during his years in London. If blaming Jewish organizations--or Israel--for the works of the Nazis is hard to fathom, his attitude toward the Board of Guardians is no more explicable. It seems he appealed to it for financial support after breaking a leg, but the board arranged instead for him to receive a British government stipend. When he wrote an aggrieved letter deploring this as a tawdry way for 'one Jew [to] treat . . . another in need,' the board backed down and provided him with a cash allowance for the duration of his recovery. Later, he would confess insouciantly to his biographer the reason he had been so angry: He had already arranged to receive the government payment and had hidden this fact from the board in the hope of receiving duplicate benefits. It was, he said, 'a double-dip,' and one that 'solved all my financial problems.' "

"They personally raped, cut off ears, cut off heads, taped wires from portable telephones to human genitals and turned up the power, cut off limbs, blew up bodies, randomly shot at civilians, razed villages, shot cattle and dogs for fun, poisoned food stocks, and generally ravaged the countryside of South Viet Nam."

I don't care how old he was. Lying for your own personal gain is the hallmark of the leftist modus operendi. As I've said before, it does not matter to the libs what the truth is. The leftist has an idea of what the world should look like. However, his idea of the world does not comport with the realities of life as we know it (he might say that everyone should have a job, or that everyone should be well educated, etc). It smacks of Red China's rural smelting experiments. Anyway, despit the fact that the goals of the leftist are unatainable, he still feels that our logical dismissal of his ideas indicates a character flaw. Since we are obviously the one's in need of correction and guidance, the leftist feels no compunction to tell the truth when attempting to effectuate his plans.

Kerry spread the lies above because he felt that the means would justify the ends: that is to end the war in Vietnam. The problem I will always have is that if you have to tell lies about the status quo, then how can we accurately criticize the current state of affairs. Without a true dialectic showdown, the remedy we all seek will never arrive.

It's America's Fault #2

Democratic lawmakers say the Bush administration’s policy on Haiti reflects a failure to respect democratic virtues there as much as elsewhere around the globe.

AND

Black lawmakers said the White House must prove that Aristide was not kidnapped. They demanded conclusive evidence that the Haitian leader — whose 2000 election victory was internationally condemned as fraudulent — was not forced out at gunpoint.

AND OF COURSE

CBC criticism of the exiled leader was muted, despite long-standing international concern about his regime’s engaging in fraud, thug rule and the repression of opponents.

What is it about the CBC that they insist on propping up these clowns because of their skin color. How are thug rule, fraud, and rigged elections equated in the minds of the CBC representatives with democratic virtues? Don't they have something better to attend to like constituent issues rather than pander to some two-bit, third-world dictator who was a priest of Rome who just happened to amass the largest fortune in Hait despite something about a vow of poverty?

The Libertarian Party:

"That, as they say in the big parties, has traction these days. But, to borrow a page from Gray's day planner, if you're going to tell the Oakland Cannabis Buyers Cooperative on March 10 that along with the freedom to smoke pot comes the freedom to tote guns or, at the San Francisco Bankers Club the following day, say that laissez faire goes hand and hand with a woman's right to choose, you better not be wearing a Druid hood and robe when you're saying it. You'd better be a tall, good-looking guy -- wouldn't hurt to be a vet and Superior Court judge -- who looks like he could have won in one of the big parties; you better be Judge Jim Gray."

Aristide's Racism

Everything is America's fault!!

So, if you are a dictator who rigs your country's elections, disbands its military, and starves its people and the populous revolts, its obviously
"white America's" fault.

The Black Caucus is really up in arms about this and shamefully so. It is a sad commentary on today's PC culture that one cannot criticize another who is black. Regardless of the relative melatonin levels one enjoys, the full brunt of informed criticism should be leveled commensurately with one's crimes or misdeads. Aristide is a corrupted megolomaniac and should be rightly so called.

Do we really think that we are doing anyone a service by refusing to condemn evil people because they happen to be of a darker skin pigmnetation? That's racism, my lefty friends: The assumption being that since they are darker, that they need not be judged in accordance with the standards associated with "others." Hypocrites, damnable hypocrites!!!!

Mike S. Adams:

"A university that has no problem paying for porn stars promoting anal sex will not pay any expenses for conservative speakers because they are simply too offensive."

I am a libertine. While I have long caucused with the Republicans for lack of a better choice, I do believe that government should stay out of my bedroom (and my house, yard, bank account, and most certainly should stay out of my gun safe). Okay, I don't have a gun safe for the reason that they're just not safe for defending my home.

Anyway, even though I am not overly conservative when it comes to sex, drugs, and the right of a woman to kill a child inhabiting her body, I proclaim that a state's refusal to fund conservative speakers (with confiscated money, of course), while at the same time funding a forum on sex techniques, smacks of ideological and intellectual bankruptcy. How is it that diversity is used solely to create forums for liberal (and or non-conservative) programs. Wouldn't diversity require opposing views? Voila!, the left is sadly rotting.

The Sentencing Project's Racist, Criminal Agenda: "By removing those with Democratic preferences from the pool of eligible voters, the report continues, felon disenfranchisement has provided a small but clear advantage to Republican candidates in every presidential and senatorial election from 1972 to 2000."

Shouldn't it read "felon SELF-disenfranchisement?"