This post marks the innaugural post to a new category for this blog: "The Worst Generation."
This refers, of course, to the children of the "Greatest Generation," who, for all their greatness in other areas, were lousy parents. They may have saved mankind from an immediate threat of tyranny, but by raising spoiled, narcissistic children who--like all other children--rebelled against Mom and Dad but--unlike most other children--never stopped rebelling against the status quo. In fact, these parents raised perpetual rebels in much the same way that some parents raise perpetual students. Somehow, they never got the message across that rebellion in and of itself isn't an achievement to be lauded. Rebellion needs to have a (here's the kicker) worthy goal!
But Alois says it much better than I can.
The Sixties radicals who now run our media and our universities (and, lamentably, much of our government) are all a-flutter over the possibility of "another Vietnam" and a masochistic demonstration to the world of the Limits Of American Power as they "teach Chimpy Bu$Hitler a lesson". This evokes no images of the Vietnamese boat people or the millions slaughtered by Pol Pot; instead, they envision Joan Baez at Woodstock, the SDS riots at the Democratic Convention, and a generation that brought The War Machine to a screeching halt (never mind that it was the wrong thing to do).
I will go call my father and thank him for being born a decade shy of the "Worst Generation," which--thankfully--was enough.
Pete reports that Palestinians are not only presuming to speak on behalf of "the world's Muslims" (news in and of itself--in particular to many of those who would prefer we see them as "moderates"), they are claiming that they are driven to violence by "memories" of desecration of their holy places by (I presume) non-Muslims (because why do I suspect their "feelings" wouldn't be as wounded if they were digging for treasures that would prove that they and not the Jews, had originally occupied the land on which the mosque sits?).
GAZA, February 12, 2007 (WAFA) - Gaza Community Mental Health Programme (GCMHP) condemned Monday the diggings near Al-Aqsa mosque, warning of the ramifications of agitating Muslims' feelings.In a press release, GCMHP expressed its full condemnation for this dangerous act that harms holy places and highly inflames Muslims feelings.
"The diggings and destruction to the Mosque is considered a clear provocation to Muslims worldwide and a blatant violation of the principles of the international law, particularly, the fourth Geneva Convention that prohibits the destruction of civilian properties - especially holy places," according to the press release.
"Such acts bring memories back to what Al-Aqsa was previously exposed to of incidents that violated its sacredness and led to eruption of violence in the region."
*Sniff!*
Wouldn't want to bring back any unpleasant memories of the horrible day when Ariel Sharon walked his filthy keffer feet onto the hallowed ground of the Temple Mount! Egads! How on Earth do those poor Palestiand get through their days, the flashbacks must be debilitating! (heavy sarcasm).
Gee, maybe *I'm* the one who needs a mental health professional, but seems to me they ought to be more worried about the shithole they're living in, or that the hatred their burdening their children with...But what do I know about anyhthing? I must just be one of those unfeeling infidels who just doesn't "get" what the word "sanctity" means. Apparently it applies to DIRT more than to human life.
Whaddaya know, learn something new every day.
Well I knew this would happen, but color me (naively) shocked to find that a Republican governor has been the first to cave to the lobbying efforts of Merck.
Yes folks, in the once-great state of Texas--a state with a population that typically doesn't cotton to being told what to do by the government (even Republican-led government), Governor Rick Perry has mandated that every girl between the ages of 9 and 26 receive Merck's new Gardasil vaccine against HPV (Human Papilloma Virus).
Nine year old girls need a vaccine against an STD?? Excuse me? And the consequences of not receiving this vaccine--if a girl should get HPV--are that she might get one of the few strains that causes cervical cancer? Why not mandate PAP smears while he's at it since routine PAPS catch almost all cases, and since even Gardasil recipients are advised (or we HOPE they will be advised) to continue to get their PAP smears as if they never had the vaccine?
What about boys? Why didn't Merck test the vaccine on men, especially since a woman who gets HPV gets it from having sex with an infected MAN? Oh, because Merck is run by MEN? Sure, I know, men don't have a cervix, but you know what, I betcha if men got testicular cancer by sleeping with infected women, the vaccine they'd make would be tested on and given to WOMEN first. Just a hunch...
All I know is, this is some scary shit. I hope the mandate is successfully challenged, and I hope there's a huge backlash against Merck. What I also hope is that despite how angry I am at this moment, none of the girls who will unwittingly comply with this mandate will suffer any adverse side-effects. I hope, but I won't bet my daughters' health on it!
I received this article about dropouts in MA from my Dad just now, with the following comment from him:
Why do liberals, whose world view rejects the notion of God in favor Darwinism and evolution, find it impossible to understand the consequences of Darwinism--that some members of the human race are inferior and are not destined to succeed.
Now that ought to be long enough for those of you with the capacity for rational thought--long enough to at least recognize what he (and I) are saying for what it is: A simple statement of FACT. First, there's the fact that most liberals do reject creationism in favor of natural selection, evolution in favor of intelligent design. Second there's the fact that "natural selection" means that, by definition, some members of *every* species are simply not as well adapted to succeed in their enviroment as others. This isn't a cruel value judgement made by a snob, it is the cruel reality of NATURE.
And this is also not to say that nature can't be given a helping hand (we humans call that "nurture"). The problem is that most liberals don't understand where a "helping hand" leaves off and "social engineering" and "denial" beginl They believe that civilization must be measured by quality of outcomes, not quality of opportunities, and they are willing to pursue equal outcomes at all costs. They are so devoted to this mission in fact, they fail to accept (or simply don't care) that their pursuit carries with it a hefty cost for those members of the species who (and here's the key) might have done better if not bogged down by those they are artificially propping up, those who otherwise might not be naturally selected for success.
No one is suggesting--least of all this Christian--that we love the less well-adapted any less than those obviously better suited to this environment of ours. In fact, what I'm saying is that truly loving and caring for them--if nothing else--ought to start with accurately assessing their capabilities. Pretending they are what they are not, or that they should be what they can't seem to become is, if you think about it, CRUEL. What's more, holding back everyone else because of embarrassment regarding what they are capable of, is equally cruel. The difference is, in the latter scenario, we all suffer.
If you were asked to negotiate a deal with someone you knew couldn't be trusted--someone who made false promises and offered phony handshakes with their own friends and relatives--would you do it? Would you even bother?
Well that's what we're doing when we ask the Israelis to "negotiate" for peace with these guys.
Besides, why bother negotiate with these maniacs? Just ignore them long enough and they may ignore enough of their own internal negotiations that there aren't any more of them left to talk to in the first place! (One can only hope)