Saturday, September 29, 2007

Praying that Gnomes don't steal your Underpants

Please join in the Valley of the Shadow Annual Fundraiser. We are raising $7,700. Please hit the Tip Jar here to contribute. Thank you.
In the South Park episode, Gnomes, the aforementioned characters steal Tweak's underpants to make a profit, but it is never explained how. I enjoyed the episode, and like all South Park episodes, tweaks (yes, I said it) some big institutions. Here, it is Starbucks and the anti-Wal-mart crowd. And if I have to explain the latter, I'll just tell you, watch the show.

Using the same logic as the Gnomes, the Anti-war crowd is planning to protest the war on October 27, 2007. From Answer to United for Peace and Justice, they will gather. They will gather people, who aren't focused in on the Iraq War -- but, like in pictures 5, 6 and 7 -- support Hamas' rights to blow people up, rather then say, the export of Democracy to third world nations; In other words, these protest groups support dealing with dictators under Nixonian Realism rather try to follow Wilsonian idealism. Strange for a band of idealists.

Another protest group, Code Pink, uses Gnome logic too. Look at how they act in Senator Byrd's (D-WV) Appropriations Committee hearing:

Unfortunately, now that Marcel Marceau is gone, this is modern street theatre. But it fails to have either humor or vision.

How does interrupting a Senate hearing accomplish the goal of "ending the war"? How do protests by Pro-Palestinian groups aid in "stopping the war"? If the election of 2006 was so important to stopping the war, shouldn't the votes already be there?

There is a saying in Washington: The President proposes, the Congress disposes. In short, the President can authorize anything he wants, but Congress has to be there to budget it. If the Democrats want to stop the war, all it takes is two Appropriations bills.

And how do these protests win converts? I have yet to see one vote change after a protest. Throughout the websites I visited, not one word on what the vision of what Iraq should be when we "leave,"

OK all you peace protesters, do you envision a world made peaceful by dictators (Darfur, anyone) or peace with a world filled with Democracies (Thomas Friedman's Golden Arches theory)?


  1. JSF, I've got to tell you that these people who come to these protests and make desperate stretches to tie their pet cause into the message of the protest have become one of many reasons I don't go to protests anymore. Giving up on the idea that my government might ever do the right thing regardless of how many people come into the street to demand it is another.

    I understand how you would like the Pro-Palestinian crowd the least. I'm no fan of how they've hijacked so many protests, and I think the issues are deeper than their bumper sticker sloganeering. But my least favorite are the Animal Rights crowd. There's a damn war going on and these people want to save the poor cows. And as if telling me what to eat isn't annoying enough (though granted I definitely need to eat better), the fact that these people want to impede medical research that can help save human lives absolutely infuriates me! We didn't evolve our way to the top of the food chain for nothing! I'm also no fan of these college socialist groups hawking their newspapers at every protest and many picket lines. I briefly considered joining the ISO back in college. They're a lot more radical than I am (even back then when before I got all cynical), but they had a lot of really cute punk rock-ish girls that I wanted to get to know a little bit better. In the end the chance of getting meself some revolutionary piece of ass wasn't worth the dogmatic and cult-like vibe or having to sell their damn newspaper all over campus.

    There have to be some of the constituencies on the right that you find equally annoying, whether an actual contingency of the republican party or just outside allies who you might sometimes com into contact with at right wing events.

  2. Hhhhmmm, the end of my post appears to have gotten lost. I had said that I'd really enjoy hearing about which groups on the fringe of the right that get under your skin and why. Please don't try to give a safe answer. I really want to see you throw some group under the bus like I just did. I know there's got to be a bunch that you wish would just go away because they either support an issue that you disagree with or have obnoxious tactics or just drag your side down.

  3. Jason,

    Too easy. The Pat Buchaninites/Ron Paul/(occaisional) YAFfers isolationist anti-Israel crowd. Isolationism was a good place to be before WWI and during Manifest Destiny.

    These people are intensely idealistic to the point of not seeing the real world situation. They try to shout people down (At least the GOP follows Roberts Rules of Order or no one else would be able to speak). Imagine a Jehovah's Witness who after yelling in your face for an hour, decides to yell some more. Passion, with no sense of decorum.

    But these guys are equal to about 5-8% of the GOP (and a majority of the Liberterians). The equivlent is a hell of a lot more back with the Dems.

    What's your take of Code Pink interrupting Congressional Committees?

  4. Code Pink is a tough one. I fully support their cause. And when our government refuses to hear the voices of the people who they are supposed to represent, I support the people getting their message to these employees of ours however we can. Since they work for us, we are their bosses. Sometimes the boss needs to chew out unruly employees. Of course, this could all probably be avoided if these employees of ours would at least pay some lip service. The republicans always throw bones to their most extreme constituencies and therefore you rarely see right wingers pulling these kind of stunts (though it's not entirely unheard of and I support their right to directly confront our lawmakers as well).

    The problem with Code Pink in particular is that they can be kind of shrill and annoying. The anti-war left desperately needs an image makeover, better message control, and better spokespeople.

    What are your thoughts on hardcore social conservatives? Are they just a constituency that you accept as a necessary ally, or do you really buy into their self righteous crap?

  5. What are your thoughts on hardcore social conservatives? Are they just a constituency that you accept as a necessary ally, or do you really buy into their self righteous crap?

    What are your thoughts on social conservatives, Jason? Oh that's right, you've made them patently obvious 'self-righteous crap'. Perhaps you'd prefer the 'progressive' morals of, say, Germany and The Netherlands who are promoting pedophilia at a political level...yes, promoting.
    I don't get how you people who believe in smashing the pillars of society out from under us think. Would you prefer to be set free to go out raping and murdering or whatever it is that your subjective relativist morality tells you its OK to do? You people love to hammer those of us who are still trying to defend what remains of what's good and decent in the west but once we're gone, you will be whining about the amoral cesspool you find yourselves and your children sinking into.
    THIS is why I loathe Leftism...nihilists.

  6. JSF, how on earth do you take this woman the slightest bit seriously? It's a damn shame that the irony of bashing me for calling social conservatives self righteous right before spewing off a whole bunch of holier than thou self righteousness is wasted on her.

    So back to what I was saying, you seem far less of the uptight type than that lunatic from down under and I would genuinely like to know how you feel about the social conservatives. I get the feeling that sort of thing isn't really your bag, but you don't want to piss off the more rabid part of your base (like you know who above).

  7. Jason,

    My view on social conservatives is that they bring they food and drinks to the Party. They have candidates, voters, and finances. They share almost the same amount of space as the Economic Conservatives.

    The only ones I truly distrust are the Liberal republicans. Personal experience shows that they will turn on you like a dime -- In CA, they support Dems quicker than (any) Conservative Republican.

    I've actually had better dealings with social/economic Conservatives than Liberal Republicans. Why? Contrary to media reports, in most of my interactions with them, they are less judgemental, less snobbish and repect loyalty from above and below.

    PS: Aurora earned her right here, in the Valley, like you. Both of you argue, but I see the wisdom in both of your worlds.

  8. JSF, that's a nice and safe answer, but I guess what I really should have asked is what you think of social conservatism. Go up and re-read Aurora's ridiculous bit of sanctimony and tell me whether you are personally OK with that kind of mentality in government. I genuinely have the feeling that you are more of a live and let live sort of guy when it comes to social issues and I think you would find a socially conservative country to be just as oppressive as I would. Am I wrong about that?

  9. Jason,

    You do have me pegged. I do have a "Live and Let Live" attitude. But I am also a cynic and pragmatist, if I want my views to be publicized, I'm going to need allies.

    Look at it like this: When I was younger, the Liberal Dems were Live and Let Live people. But , in the 90's, the Democrats became puritanical (The Social Conservatives are also puritanical, keep reading) -- i.e. no smoking, no red meat, etc.

    I have always lived in Liberal areas (NYC, DC, LA). In a Republican area in NJ, it was boring, but it was safe. I don't feel opprossed among social conservatives as I do among Democrats.

    Why? Social Conservatives believe in redemption after sin, modern Democrats do not believe in any form of redemption. Try typing on the Daily Kos, MyDD or Firedoglake, that you voted for Bush twice and see the reaction.

    If the Social Conservatives did not believe in redemption, I would step back from them. But some of the nicest people I met are social Conservatives. Some people who I met are Liberals do not like people. (Jason, you,thankfully, do not fall in the catagory)

    Aurora might be harsh, but she is passionate about her views as you are. Like you, she's tried to post and lost comments too (Thank you Blogger). But I consider you both good people. And as I said once before, I learn something from both your worlds and both your interactions.

    Anyway, LA is a one party town and they can't even get the city running smoothly.

    To be continued....

  10. JSF, now this is the sort of real talk we should always have! I agree with you that social conservatives can be some of the nicest people I've ever met, just as long as certain topics are avoided. Would I enjoy a nice dinner with social conservatives? Absolutely! In fact I had a great time at my wife's big Mormon family reunion this summer. But would I want them to be in charge of my government and able to force their ways on me? Hell no! And I don't think you would either. I'm no fan of authoritarians regardless of their politics. That's one of the many reasons I quit my job at the DNC 2 weeks before the 2000 election. There was a small part of me that just couldn't work for the husband of the woman who tried to destroy the music I listened to when I was younger. I understand alliances, but I also understand that they can sometimes leave some personal misgivings.


Welcome to the Valley! Please comment about the post and keep to the subject.

There is only one person (JSF) keeping track of comments, so as long as what you write is civil and close to the purpose of the post, you will see it.

Keep this in mind: Politics should not be Personal; then you have a place here.

Write! History will remember your words!


Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...