Bias Rampant in Berkeley

The article is here.

First, you will notice that about three-quarters of the quotes in support of the numerically-inferior Code Pink. My primary objection is not to the predictable bias of the reporter, however. Pay particular attention to this: “Pete Salvatore, age unavailable, of Rocklin near Sacramento, was arrested shortly after 1 p.m. on suspicion of brandishing a weapon, said Berkeley police Sgt. Mary Kusmiss.

A group of Code Pink supporters wrapped Salvatore in a large banner and he claimed he needed the knife to free himself, Kusmiss said.”

That’s right: not only did the Berkeley Police Department hang up
when Move America Forward called for assistance yesterday, but now they arrested a man for being assaulted.

I can only hope that neither the California nor federal governments accept Berkeley’s non-apology, and seriously crack down until this nonsense ends. This is in no way free speech issue, and must not be treated as one. This is sedition, assault, and harassment.

Worse Than I Thought…

Well, I’ve been saying for a while that Hollywood hasn’t had an original idea in 25 years. I’ve been saying even longer that the movies Hollywood DOES make SUCK.

Well, now they can’t even figure out TIMING. Let’s look at last Halloween. What horror movies came out? I don’t recall any–but ALIENS VS. PREDATOR 2 was sure out for CHRISTMAS! And now, for some inexplicable reason, The Spiderwick Chronicles is being released on Valentine’s Day! Like Hollywood couldn’t find a sappy romance.

The Problem of Post-Modernism

While logic, mathematics and rhetoric were all in use thousands of years ago, in pre-Classical Greece, they would not bear their sweetest fruit until the Enlightenment in the 18th century C.E. Inspired by the writings of Bacon, Locke, and others, reason came to be seen as the source of authority. This movement was called “modernism.”
The innate human capacity for reason meant that every human being had the capacity to self-govern, and to deny that right, as in traditionally statist European systems, was to deny the fulfillment of the human race. Under the guidance of reason, modernism established free markets and scientific method; abolished slavery and affirmed tolerance.

Post-modernism is a reaction to that.

The most essential argument of post-modernism is that, because human beings are not perfect and infinite, our perceptions of the world around us are imperfect. It then postulates that, because our perceptions are imperfect, our logical inferences based upon those perceptions are also imperfect. Thus far, these assumptions are true, and the modernist would agree.
The divergence occurs here: the post-modern asserts that, because our logic is incapable of addressing an absolute truth, of being without flaw, that it is valueless. Any attempt at reason or argumentation is no more true or valuable than any other blank assertion, and exists only to be “deconstructed” into a chiaroscurio of the author’s various biases and ignorances.
Further: since no position can have any inherently superior value to another (such as by virtue of being logical) all human interaction is viewed as nothing more than the oppression of one group by another. The freedom-affirmation of the modernist Civil Rights and Women’s Liberation movements became, under post-modern influence, vindictive race activism and feminism. The Enlightenment was viewed, not as the promotion of discovery and liberty throughout the world, but as rich white men forcing their culture on everybody else.
Post-modernism is worse than a useless philosophy; it is an inherently destructive philosophy–which, after all, is exactly what “deconstruction” is just a spineless way to say.

From Neo-Neocon’s Blog

My apologies for the length of the post; I am combining several short replies to items that came in while I was away.

This is what I’m getting at – this is either meant seriously, which indicates a really messed-up view of people who disagree with you politically, or its a really bad joke that…well, indicates a really messed-up view of people who disagree with you politically.

Code Pink does not qualify as “anyone who disagrees with me politically.” My best friends of 16 years “disagree with me politically.” Code Pink holds mockeries of military funerals—outside of Walter Reed Medical Center. Code Pink physically assaults people attempting to enter recruiting stations of their own free will. Code Pink compares President Bush to Hitler for his invasion of Iraq (historical inaccuracies aside, the irony of a group publicly identifying themselves as having a socialist agenda attempting demonize someone by comparing him to a former head of the German National Socialist (Workers?) Party is just outstanding).

And aren’t liberals supposed to be the whiny cry-babies who can’t stand criticism? Come on! If you’re in the military, man up! You’re supposed to be made of tougher stuff than that. No? Who cares if Hollywood makes fun of you? (About which I’m a little incredulous, since I can’t really think of any movies I’ve seen that portray the military negatively.)

I don’t recall whining; I’m quite proud to have people like Code Pink think of me as an enemy. If I am to be hated by someone, I’d much rather be hated by bullying postmodern socialist wackos than by people who actually go out to make the world a better place.

Ok, here’s a clarification: maybe I was wrong, but I interpreted the above comment about collaboration as being a dig against liberals qua traitors.

I saw a comment about a movie. Perhaps you could clarify how it ties into treason for those of who haven’t seen that particular movie?

It must be tiring, getting worked up so much.

I wouldn’t know. Why don’t you ask those people who are spending entire days assaulting people and disrupting local businesses near the USMC recruiting station in Berkeley?

In the same comment thread, we have one commenter expressing his entertainment over a scene in a movie (True Lies) in which Arabs, the villains, are hilariously gunned down by a dropped, spinning weapon. We also have another commenter bemoaning the fact that liberal Hollywood refuses to depict Arabs as villains.

“True Lies” came out in 1994. Try finding one post-9/11! Even “The Kingdom,” probably the best treatment I have seen of the subject by Hollywood, in the end turned into a moral-equivalence argument between mass-murdering terrorists and the FBI agents trying to stop them—which simply isn’t valid, no matter how emotionally involved agents might get in any particular case.

Part of the problem here is the assumption that “Hollywood” is a single, undifferentiated entity, rather than a huge array of writers, producers, directors, etc etc etc, ad infinitum, all working together and competing to get their projects made.

Two volcano movies in the same summer. Two mass-extinction by impact movies in the same summer (one by asteroid, the other by comet). Two alien invasion movies the same summer. 99% of vampire movies treat vampirism as a disease which renders its victims allergic to ultraviolet light, rather than the historical idea of demonically-possessed corpses who were less powerful in sunlight due to its symbolic connection to life. There hasn’t been a movie since “The Green Berets” in which the infantry wins by doing what the infantry does—closing with and destroying the enemy. In Hollywood, it’s always “hide and wait to be rescued by tanks or helicopters.” If any offensive action takes places, its usually immoral and lead by some schmuck who’d rather be smoking pot in his parent’s basement. Need I continue?

do you honestly imagine there exists such a (liberal) human being who thinks to himself “the best way to really take a crap on that jerk Heinlein, who expressed some conservative ideas, is to take a book – a book widely considered to be critical of fascism in a subversive, satirical manner – of his and spend months or years of my life immersed in the material, creating a film that’s a really dumb version of the book that’s sure to piss off legions of devoted, nerdly fans”?

No, I know that there was a working script by the Heinlein estate that was faithful to the original work, and Ver Hoeven refused to use it. His depiction of the military had to be fascist and incompetent—as a beginning of the changes he made. I doubt the feelings military personnel or fans of Heinlein actually entered his mind. I’m not familiar with “Starship Troopers” being directed particularly against fascism—and certainly not in a subversive manner, which would require that fascism actually be in force in the U. S.

Questions for the Libertarian Party

As you know, I identify myself as a neo-libertarian, but refuse to affiliate with the Libertarian pary. Here’s a major reason why:

Libertarian Party Reiterates its call for Iraq Withdrawal

Quick questions:

“Democracy cannot come from the barrel of a gun…”

Remind me, how did we end our status as colonies of Great Britain? I must have forgotten.

“Our obligation is to our soldiers: to keep them as safe as possible and to use them only in the direct defense of our nation.”

This sort of anti-military contumely always gets under my skin. Why do you suppose people volunteer for military duty? We take up the obligation to keep you safe.
Schmuck.

My Investment Strategy

I trade through Investools.com and thinkorswim.com. I have a small holding in GLD, which I see as increasing as uncertainty in the world situation increases (but not at a rate fast enough for me to root for a Democrat for president). Additionally, every other week (the Saturday after payday) I invest in one growth stock (using the Investools strategy) and one value stock (using the Magic Formula and some research on the Investools page). The growth stocks are set to automatically sell if they drop below a certain level, which I re-adjust up (but not down) during each bi-weekly investment session. The value stocks I sell after 52 weeks, regardless.
I opened my account just as the housing-market troubles set off and Bhutto was assassinated in Pakistan, so there was an understandable initial loss. Since then, I’ve been making decent gains, which I hope to improve as my investment savvy increases.

Rest Stop

What a waste of 90 minutes of my life. I mean, I’ve seen worse movies–recently–but really! I have no problem with an “unexplained” monster villain (who is only vaguely a monster) but… some plausibility, please!
I knew it was going to be bad as soon as the old man in the RV started spouting off made-up Bible verses (and I mean OBVIOUSLY made-up; not even close to anything in the Bible). Then there was the scene where the villain pumped about a quart of gasoline through the window-grill of a rest station built entirely of cinder-blocks and threw a lighter through the window (which the heroine, seeing it coming and holding in her hands a wastebasket much larger than the window, made no attempt to block), thereby causing the rest station to explode.
I won’t even start with the dying cop’s radio and gun!!!

Update

I have removed the link I posted yesterday defining fascism as a type of socialism. I was in a hurry when I posted it, and only read the first paragraph–I later read further and found out that it degenerated into conspiracy theories quite rapidly.

I have, therefore, been doing more reading into the relationship between fascism and socialism. All of the resources I can find on the internet continue to label fascism as “ultra right-wing”, “conservative” and “opposed to socialism.” However, they also list “government control of the economy” as one of the tenets of fascism, which sounds awfully socialist to me. Of course, they also list “individual freedom” as a liberal, left-wing value–which certainly don’t apply in the United States, where liberals espouse racial demogoguery, wealth re-distribution, political indoctrination through government schooling, and massive government control in all possible areas (I shouldn’t be allowed to own a gun, but should be forced to purchase government owned health insurance).

I should also point out that sustainment of the class structure is often cited as an element of fascism. This may be unbelievable to some of you, but there is no class system in the United States. One may certainly be born to wealth, but there is a difference between being born to privilege (that is, upper class). Just as there is a difference between being born to poverty and being born to servitude (lower class). The United States is an entirely middle-class nation–anyone, through a combination of intelligence, work ethic, and luck, can rise or fall in economic and social status. There ARE NO CLASSES.