Matt Brundage

What really gets my blood boiling these days is the “Communist chic”, especially on clothing and apparel. Why has the wearing of the Soviet hammer and sickle, the red star (of both the USSR and China), or images of Che Guevara, Marx, or Mao become stylish?

First, let’s analyze communism on an absolute basis: 100,000,000 lives lost to democide. Communism, wherever it’s tried, leaves a trail of death.

And what of living conditions of the survivors?

The irony of this is that communism in practice, even after decades of total control, did not improve the lot of the average person, but usually made their living conditions worse than before the revolution. It is not by chance that the greatest famines have occurred within the Soviet Union (about 5,000,000 dead during 1921-23 and 7,000,000 from 1932-3) and communist China (about 27,000,000 dead from 1959-61). In total almost 55,000,000 people died in various communist famines and associated diseases, a little over 10,000,000 of them from democidal famine.^[1]

Throw in chronic political oppression, slave labor, and a basic lack of human rights (including fundamental property rights) and suddenly celebrities, actors, musicians, and Middle America are clamoring to be seen in Communist-themed apparel. Am I missing something here?

I’ve seen images of popular musicians and even television personalities wearing Communist-flavored shirts and hats; for the most part, there is no outrage! These people are subsequently lauded and with no mention of their disgusting logos.

Imagine, for a moment, if a celebrity were to wear, say, a Nazi or Hitler-themed shirt or logo. Remember that Nazi Germany was responsible for the deaths of close to 20,000,000 people — a number that almost pales in comparison with Communism. This Nazi-logo sporting celebrity would be instantly vilified and his career would be essentially over. Well-meaning people would discuss his sanity (a-la Charles Manson). Yet if that same person were to wear a hammer and sickle shirt, replete with red star and perhaps a Fidel Castro-style hat, he would be seen as yet another rational, sensitive, well-meaning liberal. Unbelievable.

Recently, you may have heard about the New York City Board of Health’s push to ban artificial trans fats from restaurant menus. Never mind the fact that trans fat occur naturally in meat and dairy products. Or that trans fats are “FDA-approved”. According to the FDA, a full 17% of our fat consumption comes from margarine. I personally got off the margarine train years ago, but I’ll willing to bet that there are thousands of people of the misguided opinion that margarine is the healthier alternative to butter. Just wait twenty years or so, and margarine will be good for you again.

So: liquid oils — made into solid fats by adding hydrogen — will be banned. But what about saturated fats, shown to be correlated to higher rates of atherosclerosis and coronary heart disease? When will the Board of Health push to ban meats, daily, and cheeses, all of which are typically high in saturated fats? Soon, all we’ll have left to cook with is olive oil. Until they declare war on monounsaturated fats.

Sure, the Board of Health may be trying to act in the best interests of the public, but how far should legislation go? Consider this nugget of wisdom from Barry Goldwater:

I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution or that have failed their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is “needed” before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents “interests,” I shall reply that I was informed that their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can.

Goldwater’s words strike a chord with those who believe New York is turning into the “Nanny State.” Additionally, the excerpt stands up like a fortress to the illogic of New York State Senator Carl Kruger, who has proposed legislation banning iPods and other such devices whilst crossing a city street.

Kruger says that while he is trying not to intrude upon personal freedoms of New Yorkers, it becomes difficult to leave the problem alone when pedestrians tune-in to an iPod/Blackberry/cell phone/video game only to walk blithely into a speeding bus or moving automobile to meet with near certain death.

Yes, Kruger may say that he is “trying not to intrude upon personal freedoms of New Yorkers…”, but he is failing miserably at his goal. Even without considering the personal liberty issues at stake in this issue, consider the holes in his proposal:

• People with headphones cannot hear approaching cars or their horns. Neither can the deaf. Should deaf people also be fined for crossing the street?
• People watching their stock quotes or playing a portable video game aren’t watching traffic. For that matter, nor are the blind. Should blind people also be fined for crossing the street?
• Should we fine people for not looking both ways?
• What if the music is coming from an old-school boom box not directly attached to the pedestrian’s ears? What if the pedestrian is listening to music originating from a street performer, a source he cannot readily eliminate without force or coercion? Would the iPod cops put the kabash on street performers in the best interests of pedestrians?
• Should we fine people who put their hands over their ears as they cross the street?
• Kruger has said that people can simply take the earbuds out of their ears as they cross the street to avoid the fine. But what if the pedestrian simply pauses the song, essentially turning the device off? How would the iPod cops know? And what would they do about those twenty-something interns wearing earmuffs?

Seriously, Kruger acts as if pedestrian deaths suddenly started happening after the iPod was launched in 2001. I hate to break it to him, but non-attentive pedestrians have been getting run over for millenniums. If this illogical proposal becomes law, expect New Yorkers to take to the streets. With their iPods and french fries, of course.

So Saddam’s execution is imminent after two and a half years of trials and less than thirty days after his appeal was rejected by Iraq’s highest appeals court. Contrast the efficiency of the Iraqi Criminal Tribunal with that of the California court system, which took over 26 years to execute that shred of human debris Tookie Williams.

The catch-phrase “Every child a wanted child” makes me want to hurl. Instead of the concise retort “Every unwanted child a dead child” on my random thoughts page, why not the awkward but effective “Every child that manages to make it out of the birth canal without either being injected with a toxic saline solution, sucked out and torn limb-from-limb by a powerful vacuum, or having its brain sucked out by a catheter, thereby allowing the scull to collapse and the entire body to pass more easily through the cervix a wanted child.”

I read a report recently that conveyed concern over the number of children that are injured or die due to falling TVs and TV stands. Pier 1 has even recalled an item after one Canadian child died after leaning on the open drawer of the TV stand. One child.

Try this lecturing on for size:

… The CPSC also advises keeping your TV as far back as possible on its stand. Make sure the stand itself, whether it’s a bookshelf, dresser or armoire — is stable itself. If possible, anchor it to the wall or floor.

Keep all electrical cords out of a child’s reach. Also, don’t give your kids a reason to climb the furniture.

“Avoid putting on top of TV sets or other pieces of furniture, items that could tempt a child to climb, such as a remote control or a toy,” advises Nord.

I know most of this is just common sense and goes without saying. Perhaps we can use this “crisis” as an opportunity to impart to our children a basic knowledge of classical mechanics. If ten deaths a year is to be considered a crisis, what word can be used to explain the early deaths brought on by nicotine, saturated fats, and the like?

I still don’t give a left-handed flying farkle about crude oil prices. Yes, it’s nice right now to pay relatively lower prices. But will my worrying about it cause prices to fall? Will not worrying about it cause prices to rise?

CNN’s Bill Schneider recently claimed that lower oil prices could be the result of a conspiracy by Big Oil to help Republicans in upcoming midterms. Wha? Yet, just a few months ago, conspiracy theorists claimed that Big Oil colluded to jack up prices at the pump. So, regardless of if prices rise or fall, Big Oil and out to get you.

This lose-lose situation is also found in articles about the economy. On Tuesday, USA Today ran a story called “Gas Price Decline May Spur Inflation“. When prices rise, inflation will occur. When prices fall, inflation will occur. As usual, Newbusters has spot-on analysis of this phenomenon.

What have we learned today? Regardless of the price trend of crude oil, inflation is imminent and Big Oil is conspiring against you. Oh, and your TV wants you dead.

Five years ago today, the United States fell victim to a vicious, unprovoked attack by terrorists acting on the orders of Osama bin-Laden that forever changed this nation and its people.

The acts of violence committed by al-Qaida, terrorists on September 11, 2001 left more than 3,000 people dead and wounded in New York City, in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, and at the Pentagon. This tragedy shall not and should not ever be forgotten. Today, on this grimmest of anniversaries, I hope we will take time to remember what we have lost, to reflect on what we must do and to recommit to meeting the challenges that lie ahead with vigor and determination as the President has asked us to do.

The acts of these few committed fanatics may have led to the destruction of families, the destruction of property and the destruction of a sense of security the end of the Cold War brought to America; but they did not destroy the American ideal, the spirit of liberty that has made this nation a beacon of hope for the world for more than two centuries.

We have responded to these attacks with appropriate force, taking the battle to freedom’s enemies. Since September 11, more than 1.3 million U.S. servicemen and women have joined this battle, with more than 2,900 giving their lives in defense of this noble cause. We owe them and their families a special debt of gratitude.

We have made considerable progress in this fight against terror. Many of the masterminds of September 11 and other terror plots have been captured. They are being detained and will be brought to trial and are, as the President said Wednesday, being treated “with a mercy they denied others.”

To all of you in the Department of Energy family for whom the losses on September 11 were personal, I extend condolences on my own behalf as well as on behalf of the President. I also want to extend my gratitude to all DOE Federal and contractor employees who work so hard to preserve the freedom and welfare of this great country. Together, we continue to pay tribute to those whose lives were taken on September 11, 2001, by serving our Nation and its citizens with honor, humility, and hope.

Thank you.

Source: Dept. of Energy

Everybody’s more upset with this cartoon than they are about the suicide/homicide bombers that [Muslim extremists] make of their little kids.
—Rush Limbaugh

See also: The Cowardly American Media

Another spot-on entry from Newsbusters. An excerpt:

The UN is a failure. While the United States pays the biggest portion of the tab, the UN makes backroom deals with our enemies. In 2005 UN diplomats lounged around on what looks like a 1970s Merv Griffin set by day and double parked their cars by night. “Peacekeepers” of the UN raped those they were sent to help, including children, across the world. In the 10 years since Black Hawk Down, 9 million more Africans have been killed from conflict [PDF]. The last time that many people died, we held people accountable. What, if not this, is the UN for?

Where are the editorials condemning the current state of the UN? The media was too busy in 2005 trying to scuttle the John Bolton nomination because he might be hard on the UN. Had the media spent the broadcast time and column inches on UN reform that they spent chasing moonbat scandals, they could have made a difference in lives.

I’m wondering when a domestic politician will call for the United States to completely withdraw from the UN, given our return on investment is so low. The world would probably be better off with its dissolution.

How quickly he forgets. Muhammad Yousef Al-Mlaifi, a director at Kuwaiti’s Ministry of Endowment, believes that Hurricane Katrina was a “soldier of Allah.”

“But how strange it is that after all the tremendous American achievements for the sake of humanity, these mighty winds come and evilly rip [America's] cities to shreds? Have the storms joined the Al-Qaeda terrorist organization?

…I began to read about these winds, and I was surprised to discover that the American websites that are translated [into Arabic] are talking about the fact that that the storm Katrina is the fifth equatorial storm to strike Florida this year… and that a large part of the U.S. is subject every year to many storms that extract [a price of] dead, and completely destroy property. I said, Allah be praised, until when will these successive catastrophes strike them?

“…I opened the Koran and began to read in Surat Al-R’ad ['The Thunder' chapter], and stopped at these words [of Allah]: ‘The disaster will keep striking the unbelievers for what they have done, or it will strike areas close to their territory, until the promise of Allah comes to pass, for, verily, Allah will not fail in His promise.’ [Koran 13:31].”

What Muhammad is failing to remember is last year’s Indian Ocean earthquake and tsunami which killed 200,000 people — about half of which were Muslims from Indonesia. I’m willing to bet Muhammad didn’t call that disaster a “Christian soldier” or a harbinger from the United States. Muhammad is also forgetting about the chronic earthquakes in Turkey and Iran, two countries that are about 99% Muslim.

It’s quite sad that it’s come to the point where a proper study of Islamic culture must be prefaced with the explanation “Not all Muslims are terrorists”. But it’s obvious why the “stereotypical terrorist” is Muslim, as the great majority of terrorist acts in the past 30 or so years have been committed by fundamentalist Muslim extremists.

That the Oklahoma City bombing wasn’t committed by Muslim extremists doesn’t explain away their growing track record:

1998, the U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed … 2000, The USS Cole was attacked and more than 15 American Sailors were killed in Yemen … 11 Sept 2001, four airliners were hijacked and destroyed and thousands of people were killed … 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and beheaded … 31 July 2002 5 Americans were killed by a Palestinian HAMAS bomber in Jerusalem while attending school … 12 Oct 2002 more than 200 innocent civilians (including 200 Australians and 5 Americans) were brutally murdered in a Bali nightclub … 29 Oct 2002 more than 700 Moscow theater goers were taken hostage and threatened with execution … 11 Mar 2004 Madrid train bombings which killed 191 people and wounded 1,460 … 1-3 Sept 2004, Beslan, Russia school children taken hostage; 344 civilians were killed, at least 172 of them children, and hundreds more wounded … 7 July 2005 London bombings, 56 people were killed in the attacks, with 700 injured …

*Note that these specific atrocities were not committed within the context of declared wars.

To put this into perspective, there are over 1,000,000,000 peace-loving Muslims in the world who are not extremists. The idea of jihad has been corrupted by extremists to the degree that it justifies the murder of innocent people (especially Jews, Christians, and Westerners) for the purpose of instilling fear and terror into peoples and governments. That some Americans react negatively to the concept of “Arab” or “Muslim” is a testament to the terrorists’ effectiveness in instilling fear and terror.

When law enforcement and government agents are assigned the task of looking for terrorists, it seems prudent to me to profile people who are most likely to be terrorists. Put another way, instead of confiscating the nail file of an elderly woman with Alzheimer’s, we should be looking for terrorists. It’s all about statistics. It would be absurd to ignore them. A distinction should be made between statistical profiling and racial profiling, the latter of which is prejudicial and not based upon common sense.