'No Friends'

W. James Casper = Racist = Repsac3 has no blogging friends. He's a user and a loser who himself is being used. Pure hatred is like a feeding frenzy. Indiscriminate attacks. No loyalties. Progressives suck that way. (Well, he's got Fauxmaxbear, but FMB's everyone's stupid enemy anyway, and he doesn't count for jack.) Yeah, recall that Racist = Repsac3 recruits progressive nihilist attack masters, and then he complains when they bail out after writing just "6 American Nihilist posts." Oh, please. Just 6 posts that helped launch the epic campaign of workplace intimidation at my college. And when that was done, OCTO threw away idiot racist Repsac like a piece of progressive feces. Yep, progressives destroy everything. For the left, Racist Reppy's as useful as human waste. Freakin' douchebag loser:

You're a liar if you follow all trends
Get out of here asshole, you've got no friends.

W. James Casper is a Coward, a Fraud, and a Liar

Well, again, I hadn't planned on engaging this debate too much further, but my ace commenter and good friend Jan bravely ventured over to enemy territory today to repudiate the vile hatred that boils at American Nihilist. I've already attempted to talk reason with these people, but that's impossible, as I noted in an earlier post.

I'm not linking American Nihilist directly, as I rarely send traffic to epic asshole W. James Casper. Here's the Google link for the thread. I take my hat off to Jan, wading through that muck of pure dreaded evil. A cesspool of cowardice and lies. Repsac3 refuses to answer questions because he's ASFL and a sick little stump of a man. Jan states:

"I don't think that anyone should be falsely accused of anything...it just isn't right. We all have faults, no one is perfect, but I don't see the good in making false accusations, or trying to make others look bad."

And here's the cowardly W. James Casper's total spineless dodge:

I'm not sure what you meant by that... but I'm hoping that it's placement in the comments of this particular post are not simply a matter of happenstance...

It'd be funny if this wasn't so serious and evil. It's a straigthforward statement. I posted the details to my final comment at the previous thread yesterday. W. James Casper refuses to acknowledge the facts. His allies have "falsely accused" me of sexual harassment, impersonation, civil rights violations (alleged mandatory requirements of exploitative materials), etc. This is fact. And coward W. James Casper runs like a burnt chicken. The whole thread's one big fraudulent scam. And W. James Casper's lying. He writes earlier at the post:

Why has he been using my full name in his recent posts (or, what he thinks is my full name, anyway), when he and I had a conversation several years ago about my preferring to use this screen name online? Don't you think he's attempting to do me some harm by doing so?

Hello? No one's doing any "harm" to W. James Casper. I've never contacted his employer and W. James Casper blogs publicly, and he's done so as long as he's been stalking me and attempting to get me fired. He's a fraud, cheat, liar and coward. Here's his PuffHo page, with his name displayed for the entire world:

W. James Casper's avatar is a slithering reptile, and it's available on all his blogs, Twitter, and social networks. He's lying when he alleges he's being violated or "outed." The fact is he's an accomplice to bad acts that have crossed the line of propriety. When my good friend Jan called him out he went limp, avoiding the statement with "I'm not sure what you meant by that..."

Wrong. W. James Casper knows exactly what Jan meant by that. But his evil program of hatred forces him to lie and equivocate. He's like a vampire exposed to the sun. He's dying when forced with the truth.

That's what I have on my side: The truth and goodness. W. James Casper has lies and deceit.

Conservatives and the New York Times

William Kristol never really took hold for me as a conservative columnist at the New York Times. Kristol's neocon creds are unimpeachable, but he never really shook things up at the newspaper or in punditland. He was, in a word, milquetoast.

Thus all of the stirrings on the left and right at the news of Kristol's last column yesterday are quite interesting. Leftists want Kristol dead and buried, so it was incomplete shadenfreude yesterday at some of the top nihilist blogs. Driftglass well represents this derangement:

Change I can believe in ....

If true, I would have to rate these six words as the happiest to be published by the New York Times as a result their own actions in the last year:

"This is William Kristol’s last column."

Of course, based on the Law of the Conservation of Villager Idiocy, I assume he has been let go to, oh, say, boss PBS, or take over as editor-in-chief at the L.A. Times, or run Citibank, or work part-time as the $175,0000/month rebranding manager for the Palin/Plumber '12 exploratory committee.

But for the next little bit I can dream that a just Universe has laced up its kicking shoes and finally, finally, finally punted this smirking, bestial, blood-soaked hack into the ranks of the unemployed and that the next we'll hear of him will be a mention in the Walton Family house organ as "Greeter of the Month" at the Sadr City WalMart.

Bestial, blood-soaked hack? Whew, that does really capture the essence of the hardline left's excoriation the Bush administration's war "cheerleaders."

On the right there's some chatter about who should replace Kristol at the Times. Since I rarely read the paper's editorial pages, Patrick Ruffini's argument really hit home:

Let me first state that I don't particularly care who writes for the New York Times op-ed page, and think all the handwringing about who will replace Bill Kristol is a collosal waste of time for conservatives ....

I will, however, say this about the selection process for the New York Times op-ed page.

The goal of conservative new media should not be to legitimize the status quo in media, but to challenge it and shift the balance of power. To hang on the prestige of a Times appointment is a mostly useless exercise by navel-gazing pundits whose sole concern is accurately describing the status quo, not moving the ball forward.

Doubly disturbing is the notion that the Times' token conservative should be someone who is acceptable to sensibility of liberal (and hence more civilized) Times readers; that only a certain type of conservative will do - a "smart," "reasonable" figure worthy of dining with President Obama.

I have a great deal of respect for Bill Kristol and David Brooks (or for that matter, Charles Krauthammer and George Will), but they play a very defined role in the process - which is to represent a safe flavor of Beltway-centric conservatism that is acceptable within the Acela corridor. I appreciate that someone has to play this role, but by engaging in this parlor game, we are playing with fire: feeding the left's desire to elevate a narrow elite of Times-worthy conservative pundits whose job it is to hold the braying Coulterite masses in check.

Hmm, the Coulterite masses? That's interesting, mainly because I've noted many times on this page that I'm actually not the biggest fan of folks like Coulter and Malkin. It's mostly the lack of nuance, not to mention a kind of unwashed right-wing anti-intellectualism, which I don't think should dominate conservative punditry.

That's said, we need fighters, and one thing I'm going to do myself over this next few years is to abstain somewhat from intra-conservative squabbles over doctrine and ideology. Whatever happens on the right is nowhere near as diabollically disastrous as the venomous effluvient seeping from the funk-cheese cracks of blogs like Driftglass and their nihilist link sponsors.

Be sure to read the rest of Ruffini, where he makes the case for Rush Limbaugh as Kristol's replacement at the Times.

Rolling Stone Smears Palin as "Gidget at the Reichstag"

I read Rolling Stone's new attack-piece on Sarah Palin the other night.

Entitled "The Lies of Sarah Palin," the piece was so over-the-top with screaming left-wing excrement I was literally shaking my head in disbelief while wading through the article's demonizing slurs - and this is after 9 months of non-stop Democratic assassination politics in which nothing has been considered out of bounds. Matt Taibbi, Rolling Stone's in-house attack-master, has outdone even the most evil smear-merchants of the nihilist leftosphere, and that's saying alot, given the depths of the depravity so far mucked by the left's anti-Palin industry.

And I asked myself: How many young Americans actually read this nihilist bull?

Rolling Stone's not only a popular rock-junky rag, but is available at supermarket checkout stands nationwide. Young Obama supporters, already dazed and confused by "The One's" ethereal nothingness, will be amply indoctrinated into even more mindless drivel with Rolling's Stone's bird-cage padding.

Now it turns out that Jann Wenner, Rolling Stone's publisher (who also rolled out Us Weekly's tabloid slam on Palin earlier this month), is sending out the current issue unsolicited to mailbox's nationwide. As an e-mailer to Michelle Malkin notes:

Dear Michelle - I was surprised to pull Oct. 2 issue of Rolling Stone magazine out of my mailbox day before yesterday addressed to my 20 year old college daughter. I asked her if she had subscribed and she said no. After the US mag cover and hatchet job on Sarah Palin and knowing same person owns both mags, I think this might be a subtle way to influence young 1st time voters in presidential race. We live in Virginia and I have heard it’s a toss up state. Rolling Stone cover headline says “The Lies of Sarah Palin.” Magazine calls her a “tawdry, half-assed fraud.” The article is disgusting. Was this just a random thing or was the magazine sent unsolicited to quantities of young voters?

Check the link for additional testimonials, and especially the recommendation for recipients to send the issue back REFUSED via return-trip U.S. postal service.

Here's taste of Taibbi's vileness:

Palin is a symbol of everything that is wrong with the modern United States. As a representative of our political system, she’s a new low in reptilian villainy, the ultimate cynical masterwork of puppeteers like Karl Rove. But more than that, she is a horrifying symbol of how little we ask for in return for the total surrender of our political power. Not only is Sarah Palin a fraud, she’s the tawdriest, most half-assed fraud imaginable, 20 floors below the lowest common denominator, a character too dumb even for daytime TV — and this country is going to eat her up, cheering her every step of the way. All because most Americans no longer have the base energy to do anything but lie back and allow ourselves to be jacked off by the calculating thieves who run this grasping consumer paradise we call a nation…

…She appeared to be completely without shame and utterly full of shit, awing a room full of hardened reporters with her sickly-sweet line about the high-school-flame-turned-hubby who “five children later,” is “still my guy.” It was like watching Gidget address the Reichstag.

"Gidget at the Reichstag" is one of the most inventive BDS-style slurs I've seen, but it's totally keeping with this week's stream of filth pushing the "BushCo fascist coup" meme and accompanying calls for a popular uprising against the state.

Click here for the full text of "The Lies of Sarah Palin."

Read it, rip it apart in a post, and send it viral. The left is doing everything it can to alienate middle Americans from the Democratic Party, so let's return the favor with the widest possible distribution of this trash.

International Reaction to Israeli Self-Defense

This photograph, so deeply offensive and saddening, has gotten me thinking once again:

The image is available at Ralph Peters' essay, and the caption reads: "Propaganda: Activists around the world, like this woman in Spain, protested Israel's airstrikes."

As Peters indicates at the article:

DEAD Jews aren't news, but killing terrorists outrages global activists. On Saturday, Israel struck back powerfully against its tormentors. Now Israel's the villain. Again ....

Yes, Israel's always identified as the villian, but folks shouldn't comfort themselves by suggesting that it's only the global left-fringe that's demonizing Israel's airstrikes. It's not just global activists denouncing Tel Aviv's "disproportionate" response. This morning's Wall Street Journal indicates that the United Nations has decried Israel's "excessive" force, and French President Nicolas Sarkozy has done so as well. It's clear by now that without the United States Israel would be standing alone against the forces of global postmodernism and appeasement to terror. The response at the U.N.'s General Assembly is the diplomatic equivalent to the swastikas on Spanish antiwar protest banners. People need to take a look around. Israel stands at the center of a global culture war. From international institutions, to the halls of heads of government, to the streets of the nihilist left's demonstrations, the plague of moral equivalence keeps creeping up - gaining strength just a month after Mumbai's demonstration of nihilist destruction - like a modern-day Black Death.

Here's Melanie Phillips, thankfully, on the left's smear of "disproportion":

All too predictable – and going to plan, with assistance from the Club of Terror U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon who condemned ‘excessive use of force leading to the killing and injuring of civilians’, and Navi Pillay, the ludicrous U.N. High Commissioner for ‘Human Rights’, who ‘strongly condemned Israel’s disproportionate use of force.’ Of course, the Club of Terror U.N. has been silent about the actual violations of international law by the Palestinians, as pointed out here by Justus Reid Weiner and Avi Bell ....

But for exercising its legal duty in accordance with international law, Israel is condemned and told to stop by politicians such as French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Britain’s Foreign Secretary David Miliband. The moral inversion is staggering. Miliband has called for an immediate ceasefire by Israel. The implication is that Israel should suffer the Palestinian rockets attacks indefinitely.

If anything has been ‘disproportionate’, it’s been Israel’s refusal to take such action during the years when its southern citizens have been terrorised by rockets and other missiles raining down on them from Gaza. No other country in the world would have sat on its hands for so long in such circumstances. But whenever Israel defends itself militarily, its response is said to be ‘disproportionate’. The malice, ignorance and sheer idiocy of this claim is refuted here comprehensively by Dore Gold, who points out that Israel’s actions in Gaza are wholly in accordance with international law. This permits Israel to launch such an operation to prevent itself from being further attacked ....

Those who scream ‘disproportionate’ think – grotesquely - that not enough Israelis have been killed. But that’s in part because Israel cares enough about human life to construct air raid shelters where its beleaguered civilians take cover; Hamas deliberately stores its rockets and other apparatus of mass murder below apartment blocks and in centres of population in order to get as many of its own people killed as possible as a propaganda weapon. Hamas is thus guilty of war crimes not just against Israelis but against the Palestinian people. Yet on this there is – fantastically, surreally – almost total silence in the west, which blames Israel instead. Historical resonances, anyone?

As I've noted in my previous essays, what's most disturbing about the outbreak of war is the reaction on the left to Israel's actions. Again, readers should have no doubt, the left's denunciations against Israel are rhetorical displays of those Spanish protest banners. For the postmodernists, for all intents and purposes, the Israel state is the new Nazi regime. Melanie Phillips gets it. Caroline Glick gets it. And my friend Stogie at Saberpoint gets it, and I'll give him the last word:

We can expect the mainstream media to once again portray the Muslims as victims and the Israelis as aggressors. The overwhelming number of news photos coming out of the conflict depict Palestinians wailing over fallen comrades, or wounded ones with blood on their faces, being helped to the hospital. There are the usual photos of fat Muslim ladies with their mouths wide open in faux horror as they pose for the news cameras, and dusty wreckage of some Palestinian shithole recently renovated by Israeli ordnance. There are never any pictures of dead Israelis, or Palestinian rockets, or mutilated bodies of kidnapped and murdered Israelis. Even Fox News contributes to this gross imbalance in news coverage.

As for you, Palestinians, who rejoiced when your fellow barbarians murdered 3,000 Americans in 2001, I rejoice in the righteous destruction and long overdue payback for your evil, your barbarian savagery, your murderous and false religion. You have earned every bomb and every bullet, and since we don't practice Islamic finance, there will be a great deal of interest due with every payment. Enjoy.

W. James Casper Continues Campaign of Intimidation and Criminal Harassment

An apology to readers: I've been in and out all day today, and I've also been trying to get progressives to take responsibility. So, here's an update to my post from the other day: "Progressive Trolls? Update on W. James Casper, Commissar of State Security, People's Commissariat for Internet Affairs."

I'm currently in the process of getting written apologies and retractions from the criminal progressives who mounted campaigns of workplace intimidation, and as W. James Casper has been a ringleader, by his own words, I'm putting this comment here for the record:

You recruited bloggers to harass, ridicule, and intimidate:

'I intended for American Nihilist to be a one off joke on the silly "nihilist" meme you created. I sent invites to all the "nihilsts" I could find, thinking we'd all just have a quick laugh at the expense of the silly little meme, & that'd be it... But some of 'em wanted to sign up, and once they did, and started writing--in character--it became something better than the one off joke I intended...'

YOU CROSSED THE LINE!!!!!

These are your words. They are posted at your own blogs. You thought it be just a laugh, but quickly escalated into workplace intimidation and outrageous campaigns of harassment. THAT IS ILLEGAL. YOU HAVE LEGAL LIABILITY AND YOU ARE ON RECORD. Your very words show you ORGANIZED a conspiracy. And you have people currently in your threads making threats, issuing taunts, and spiking the football.

YOU've not denounced a bit of it. Why? Answer that. Why? Because I blog and "attack" people. That's what you say repeatedly. Because I blog and "attack" people you decided to round up a lynch mob. YOUR words. This is what you have done and continue to do. YOU are on record.

YOU are the administrator of this blog and YOU thought it perfectly fine to publish this.

When that was posted you didn't reject it. YOU didn't repudiate it. YOU endorsed it and clapped about how my my college administration should "be aware of his antics." Then later you pulled the post when your lackey left you hold the bag of sh*t. YOU f**ked up. It was never the right thing to do. Always an evil act. It's done. It's on record. YOU are the accessory to make this happen. That sucks you got used. But you recruited people who then f**ked you up. Sucker!! You deserve it. It's you who organize the hate. Make it right by apologizing.

And YOU continue to promote the hate. YOU consort with criminal progressives who continue their campaigns. YOU are doing this. YOU sponsor it right here in this thread. THIS thread.

YOU pledged an intimidation campaign: "As long as Donald Douglas is posting a public blog that accepts comments, I'm going to continue to comment on what he posts, whenever and wherever I choose'

I banned YOU. But you publicly admitted my wishes were to be disrespected and that you would taunt, harass, and intimidate "whenever and wherever I choose."

And one of those places was my college. YOU had henchmen do it for you so you could claim plausible denial. But the cat's out now. YOU are liable.

And YOU ignore, deny, distort and blow off the facts of YOUR evil as some 'crazy paranoid allegations'.

Not.

Don't deny. Don't ignore. Don't dismiss. Don't prevaricate.

Man up to your program. THIS is what you do.

These are your words. YOU recruited all you could find to harass, ridicule and intimidate. YOU endorsed, as the admin, a campaign by (O)CT(O)PUS. And YOU have defended all the others right here in this thread. YOU do not denounce the hate and criminal activity.

YOU are the ringleader of hate. THIS is a hate site. I POINT OUT your evil action. YOU deny because you're without a shred of decency.

You need to be right with goodness in the world and issue that apology!!

I know some readers wonder why I deal with this, and believe me, it's not fun. But since my college has been involved there are a lot of loose ends legally that I'm working to wrap up. W. James Casper harbors a clinical hatred for me and he's long mounted a war of personal destruction. I can't impinge his free speech rights, but he's got no legal right to his continued campaign of criminality and the politics of personal destruction. He's a sad man, I know. But he's more than the laughingstock of the progressive left. He's Satan's henchmen working to destroy those of good will who stand up for what's right. I'll keep fighting because that's what you do: Never back down to the mob. It only emboldens them and they will kill and maim even more. This is what these people are about.

Nihilists Out in Force at G-20 Protests

Hmm, I think I'll dedicate this post to the folks at the American Nihilist shithole - and please pardon my French ... sometimes there's just no good word substitutes! Check out (O)CT(O)PUS, for example, "BILLIONAIRES FOR WEALTH CARE: IF YOU CAN’T BEAT ‘EM, JOIN ‘EM." These folks hate America.

But hey, help is on the way. It turns out that the People's Cube has a great post up on this week's anti-globalization protests, "Dude! G20 Riots In Pittsburgh." Great images and photos. Plus, "Down With Capitalism!!!" And the narrator's got this red rooster to assist the chronicle of events:

Yep, awesome stuff! And there's lots more like this at American Nihilist! See, "MATTERS OF LIFE AND DEATH IN AN ALTERNATE UNIVERSE":

In short, the most expensive healthcare system in the world has not made us healthy, wealthy, or wise. To maximize earnings, private insurers “cherry pick” the most profitable subscribers, reject high-risk applicants, eliminate those with “pre-existing” conditions, and limit benefits. One inevitable consequence of a profit-driven system is a large pool of “medically uninsurable” applicants who are denied access to affordable, quality healthcare.

Another consequence are high premium costs that partition our people into ‘haves’ and ‘have nots.’ An estimated 47 million people lack healthcare coverage, and medical debts will drive a million people each year into bankruptcy ....

Real people in the real Universe have no lobbyists, no PR funds, no advocate to argue their case, and that is how the interests of America’s well-healed healthcare cartels win every time.

That's right!! People just like this - "real people in the real universe" - are out in force this week in Pittsburgh. Nihilists of the world unite!

8chan Founder Says 'Shut It Down'

I don't care about 8chan. I've never visited any of the troll message boards, although I don't think they should be regulated by government. Preventive action is key. If it's not 8chan it'll be something else. There's unlimited outlets for shitposting trolls to gather, spew, and foment nihilist racist propaganda.

Following-up, "El Paso Shooting Suspect Posted Online 'Manifesto' Decrying 'Ethnic Replacement' in the U.S. (VIDEO)," and "'Shitposting Nihilist Trolls' and the Lolz of the El Paso Shooting Massacre."

At the New York Times, "8chan Is a Megaphone for Gunmen. ‘Shut the Site Down,’ Says Its Creator":

I talked to the founder and former admin of 8chan this morning. He told me he wants the site to be shut down, after being involved in 3 mass shootings this year. https://t.co/tewgBEqYeF

— Kevin Roose (@kevinroose) August 4, 2019

Fredrick Brennan was getting ready for church at his home in the Philippines when the news of a mass shooting in El Paso arrived. His response was immediate and instinctive.

“Whenever I hear about a mass shooting, I say, ‘All right, we have to research if there’s an 8chan connection,’” he said.

Mr. Brennan started the online message board 8chan in 2013, as a spinoff of 4chan, the better-known message board. In its early years, the site was known as an unmoderated free-for-all site populated by anonymous posters, where shocking and offensive humor reigned.

Now, 8chan is known as something else: a megaphone for mass shooters, and a recruiting platform for violent white nationalists. And Mr. Brennan, who stopped working with the site’s current owner last year, is calling for it to be taken offline before it leads to further violence.

Interested in All Things Tech?
The Bits newsletter will keep you updated on the latest from Silicon Valley and the technology industry.

“Shut the site down,” Mr. Brennan said in an interview on Sunday. “It’s not doing the world any good. It’s a complete negative to everybody except the users that are there. And you know what? It’s a negative to them, too. They just don’t realize it.”

So far this year, three mass shootings — El Paso, the mosque killings in Christchurch, New Zealand, and the synagogue shooting in Poway, Calif. — have been announced in advance on 8chan, often accompanied by racist writings that seem engineered to go viral on the internet.

Moments before the El Paso shooting on Saturday, a four-page message whose author identified himself as the suspected shooter appeared on 8chan’s politics board, known as /pol/. The person who posted the message encouraged his 8chan “brothers” to spread its contents far and wide.

Given its repeated involvement in mass shootings, 8chan has become a focal point for those seeking to disrupt the pathways of online extremism.

“8chan is almost like a bulletin board where the worst offenders go to share their terrible ideas,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, the chief executive of the Anti-Defamation League. “It’s become a sounding board where people share ideas, and where these kinds of ideologies are amplified and expanded on, and ultimately, people are radicalized as a result.”

8chan has been run out of the Philippines by Jim Watkins, a United States Army veteran, since 2015, when Mr. Brennan gave up control of the site.

The site remains nearly completely unmoderated, and its commitment to keeping up even the most violent speech has made it a venue for extremists to test out ideas, share violent literature and cheer on the perpetrators of mass killings. Users on 8chan frequently lionize mass shooters using jokey internet vernacular, referring to their body counts as “high scores” and creating memes praising the killers.

Mr. Brennan, who has a condition known as brittle-bone disease and uses a wheelchair, has tried to distance himself from 8chan and its current owners. In a March interview with The Wall Street Journal, he expressed his regrets over his role in the site’s creation, and warned that the violent culture that had taken root on 8chan’s boards could lead to more mass shootings.

After the El Paso shooting, he seemed resigned to the fact that it had.

“Another 8chan shooting?” he tweeted on Saturday. “Am I ever going to be able to move on with my life?”

Mr. Watkins, who runs 8chan along with his son, Ronald, has remained defiant in the face of criticism, and has resisted calls to moderate or shut down the site. On Sunday, a banner at the top of 8chan’s home page read, “Welcome to 8chan, the Darkest Reaches of the Internet.”

“I’ve tried to understand so many times why he keeps it going, and I just don’t get it,” Mr. Brennan said. “After Christchurch, after the Tree of Life shooting, and now after this shooting, they think this is all really funny.”

Mr. Watkins did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

In the early days of 8chan, Mr. Brennan defended the right of 8chan users to post anonymously, without censorship. And he dismissed incidents of harassment or violence by users of the site as the price of being an open forum...

Oops! MSNBC's Rachel Maddow Spews Hatred of American Exceptionalism: Racist Attack Blogger Walter James Casper III Caught Lying Again!

Newsbusters has the story, "Rachel Maddow Sniffs in Disdain at Belief in America as 'Shining' City on a Hill."

I've been avoiding the racist anti-Semitic hate-blogger Walter James Casper III, but he and his progressive attack posse continue to stalk this blog --- and the comments at the American Nihilist shithole are filled with deranged screeds demononizing yours truly. And since I've been carefully documenting Casper's racist, hate-Israel pro-Occupy agenda, it's worthwhile to further expose his classic anti-Americanism and bankrupt lies about America's founding culture of American exceptionalism.

Recall first that I posted on Callista Gingrich's paean to American exceptionalism last week. Walter James Casper's hate-addled commenters freaked out over that (see the top Google result here). These nihilist goons were especially pissed about my comparison to First Lady Michelle Obama, who in 2008 admitted that "for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country." That got Casper all lathered up like a mule, and he writes:

Like too many republicans, mrs newt #3 is trying to sell a meme about the left that is a lie. I agree with 99% of everything she says in that video. There is no "great debate" about what American exceptionalism" means except in a few folk's divisive, partisan, fevered imaginations.

Whether one believes man was endowed with inalienable rights by a Christian God or by human nature, the end result--the form of government that makes America exceptional--is the same. It is our American ideals that make us unique in the world, and it is our desire and ability to sell our ideals to others--both immigrants who come here to seek a better life and become a part of this country, and to a lesser extent, those foreign nations who have incorporated some of our American ideals into their governments--that make we Americans unique.

Too often, however, there IS a certain degree of arrogance when talking about American exceptionalism. There are too any who believe that America was a nation chosen by God from among all (or most) others, and that we Americans are a chosen people. They are often nativists who don't want to share and expand American exceptionalism. Immigrants and other groups are demonized and deemed unworthy. "All men are created equal." Except Muslims (American or otherwise.) Except gay folks. Except liberals. That kind of American exceptionalism isn't worth the breath with which it's spoken...

I believe in American exceptionalism... But unlike too many on the right I'm not particularly threatened if the citizens of some other country feel the same about their ideals and way of life (though I do think they're wrong.)

This is classic denialism and dishonesty from epic hate-blogger Walter James Casper III.

First, actually, there is a "great debate" about American exceptionalism, and it's perfectly encapsulated by the contrast between Callista Gingrich and Rachel Maddow. And as is true with any other examples of the left's socialist program, Walter James Casper III is confronted with facts that are simply too difficult to acknowledge. So he lies about them. He's a pathological liar.

Here's Maddow at the video above:

Chris, I have to, I have to put it to you because you're the only person I know in the world to whom I can complain about this, but the city on the hill does not shine. The city upon a hill with the eyes of the world, with the, with the, right, the eyes of all people upon us, the city on the hill never shined. I don't understand why it always has to be shining.

One can't be more clear than that. Maddow's statement is a complete and total rejection of the historical vision of America as a light unto the nations. Progressives can't stand that, because they want to bring America down. Progressive ideology posits racist imperialism and implacable oppression as the hideous marks of an nation allegedly founded upon genocidal conquest. Thus for Maddow, "the city on the hill never shined." And when progressives are called out for such anti-Americanism, they simply deny the essential goodness of America's founding, and they revise the historical narrative to fit their collectivist agenda. We see that with Walter James Casper's dismissal of American exceptionalism as not "worth the breath with which it's spoken."

Now, secondly, Walter James Casper idolizes Rachel Maddow --- he's a huge fan of her poorly-rated show and he tweets regularly that he's tuning in to the program. And now --- rubbing hands together with hilarious glee! --- we have Maddow's own words proving --- beyond a shadow of  doubt! --- that Walter James Casper's a despicable liar. It's pretty rich.

Some time back, President Obama dissed American exceptionalism, announcing that "I believe in American exceptionalism, just as I suspect that the Brits believe in British exceptionalism and the Greeks believe in Greek exceptionalism." Picking up on that and more, Victor Davis Hanson responded to left's attacks on America last Fourth of July, at the New York Post, "What makes America exceptional":

 ...there has never been any nation even remotely similar to America. Here's why. Most revolutions seek to destroy the existing class order and use all-powerful government to mandate an equality of result rather than of opportunity -- in the manner of the French Revolution's slogan of "liberty, equality and fraternity" or the Russian Revolution's "peace, land and bread."

In contrast, our revolutionaries shouted "Don't tread on me!" and "Give me liberty or give me death!" The Founders were convinced that constitutionally protected freedom would allow the individual to create wealth apart from government. Such enlightened self-interest would then enrich society at large far more effectively than could an all-powerful state....

Individual freedom in America manifests itself in ways most of the world can hardly fathom -- whether our unique tradition of the right to gun ownership, the near impossibility of proving libel in US courts, or the singular custom of multimillion-dollar philanthropic institutions, foundations and private endowments. Herding, silencing or enfeebling Americans is almost impossible -- and will remain so as long as well-protected citizens can say what they want and do as they please with their hard-earned money.

Race, tribe or religion often defines a nation's character, either through loose confederations of ethnic or religious blocs as in Rwanda, Iraq and the former Yugoslavia, or by equating a citizenry with a shared appearance as reflected in the German word "volk" or the Spanish "raza." While America was originally crafted largely by white males who improved upon Anglo-Saxon customs and the European Enlightenment, the Founders set in place an "all men are created equal" system that quite logically evolved into the racially blind society of today....

The Founders' notion of the rule of law, coupled with freedom of the individual, explains why America runs on merit, not tribal affinities or birth. Most elsewhere, being a first cousin of a government official, or having a prestigious name, ensures special treatment from the state. Yet in America, nepotism is never assured. End that notion of American merit and replace it with racial tribalism, cronyism or aristocratic privilege, and America itself would vanish as we know it...

And note something about "all men are created equal." The Declaration of Independence sets forth the ideal that all of those born, under God, are endowed with equality of opportunity and with basic natural rights, that among these, is the right to pursue happiness. American equality is equality of birth, not equality of outcome --- not the forced equality of the socialist state. See Ralph Benko, at Forbes, "Gingrich vs. Obama: American Exceptionalism vs. The Reconquest of America By Europe":

America — rooted in Democratic Capitalism — defines itself by equality of opportunity. Europe — rooted in Social Democracy— defines itself by equality of results. One of [Newt] Gingrich’s three key tenets is American exceptionalism. The 2012 election likely will determine whether America remains exceptional or, finally, is, culturally, reconquered by Europe.

Exactly.

Simply put, progressives hate American exceptionalism, and when confronted by proud assertions by conservatives about America's goodness, they react with visceral demonology. Rachel Maddow can't stand the country as it is, so she promotes an entirely different model --- the unexpectional collectivist welfare state of the kind now dragging the European democracy into purgatory.

And Walter James Casper III hates America too. His classic play is to attack conservatives who stand up for fairness and moral right as bigots and racists. The truth, however, is that Walter James Casper's a vile racist and Israel-basher, and when called out on it he lies and distorts reality in a never-ending attempt to hide from the facts. But as we see with his creepy idolatry of Rachel Maddow, Walter James Casper can't stand America. He's a liar and a stump of a man. His ideology has driven him to destroy others, with attacks, harassment and threats against the safety of his enemies.

What a disgrace.

PREVIOUSLY:

* "Walter James 'Occupy' Casper Continues Campaign of Lies: Childishly Whines About 'McCarthyism' While Endorsing Anarchists and Anti-Semitic Communists."

* "Racist Walter James Casper III Doubles-Down on Endorsement of Revolutionary Anti-Semitic Occupy Wall Street."

* "Hate-Blogger Walter James Casper III and Progressive Evil: Denial of Israel-Hatred Enables Exterminationist Anti-Semitism."

* "Manifesto: Occupy for the Revolution."

UPDATE: Stalking hate-blogger Walter James Casper III, who is banned from commenting at this blog, nevertheless commented at a different post because comments are closed at this entry explicitly TO PREVENT THIS KIND OF HARASSMENT.

Racist Walter James Casper III writes:

1 comments:

repsac3 said...

Sorry, Donald... but your "american exceptionalism" attack is nonsense. I never said that exceptionalism was not worth the breath with which it was spoken; I said there are those who use it as an excuse for nativism and divisiveness, and it is those excuses that are unworthy... Even your readers will be able to see the difference, Donald...

As for Rachel, I don't really know what she was trying to say (unless it was that America isn't perfect, maybe), but your guilt by association attack, as though I agree with or have to answer for every word the woman speaks, is pretty lame. I said my piece... Attack that... Don't just call it denialism and dishonesty... Show that it is either of them...

I feel bad for you Donald... Your need to lash out at others makes you a pathetic excuse for a man.

But thanks for "stalking" my blog and Twitter stream enough to launch this kind of ridiculousness... It shows how much of a hypocrite you really are...

January 27, 2012 1:52 PM

Racist Walter James Casper continues to harass this blog. He can't stand being called out for his anti-Americanism so he simply ignores the argument (progressives hate exceptionalism), ignores the evidence (undeniable and substantiated), ignorantly waves away Maddow's statement in dishonest non-acknowledgement of her America-bashing (the city on a hill "never shined"), and continues his lies and derangement.

In fact, contrary to stupid f-king racist asshat Walter James Casper, there is indeed a debate over exceptionalism. Seriously, stupid liar Walter James Casper perfectly represents it with his own claims that, "There are too [m]any who believe that America was a nation chosen by God from among all (or most) others, and that we Americans are a chosen people. They are often nativists who don't want to share and expand American exceptionalism."

Well hello progressive asshat!

That IS American exceptionalism. AMERICA IS A NATION CHOSEN BY GOD AMONG ALL (OR MOST) OTHERS.

Duh, if God didn't choose America as a light unto others we wouldn't be exceptional.

AND THEY ARE NOT "NATIVISTS WHO DON'T WANT TO SHARE" IT BECAUSE EXCEPTIONALISM HOLDS THAT ALL PEOPLE ARE BORN WITH NATURAL RIGHTS THAT CANNOT BE DENIED.

RACIST WALTER JAMES CASPER IS AGAIN LASHING OUT WITH ATTACKS AGAINST CONSERVATIVES AS "RACIST" IF THEY DON'T KNUCKLE UNDER TO THE LEFT'S POSTMODERN SOCIALIST AGENDA.

The stupidity! The denial! It burns!

America was chosen by God and that IS what Callista Gingrich affirms at her video. And that IS what John Winthrop declared in 1630, that the United States IS a city on a hill. And that IS what Rachel Maddow denounced as "never shining."

Racist Walter James Casper is beaten, beaten badly. What an epic loser and piece of shit progressive tool.

And racist hate-blogger Walter James Casper is now in likely violation of Google's terms of use. He is banned from commenting here and he is abusing his Google privileges. I am now approving all of hate-blogger Walter James Casper's comments and submitting them to Google as a record of the harassment.

The Left's Demonology of Vengeance

At the same time that Barack Obama's been presumptiously preparing his presidential transition team, the hard left forces of the nihilist left are sharpening their knives in preparation for a campaign of legal vengeance against the Bush administration's alleged record of war crimes in the battle against global terror.

Salon, for example, ran a piece earlier this week entitled "Exposing Bush's Historic Abuse of Power," which suggests the formation of a new "Church Commission" to investigate domestic surveillance in the Bush years (the article includes the obligatory Nazi Reichsadler pictured above).

Also, there's news this week that left-wing bloggers (and their allies on the Paulbot right) are mounting a program of electoral mobilization against Democrats who supported the FISA reform bill just passed in Congress. Leading the pack is Jane Hamsher, who has teamed with fringe libertarians to form a group called The Strange Bedfellows. The organization's goal is to promote an "accountability" campaign of legal recrimination against the administration's "lawless surveillance state."

One gets a good sense of how intense are the demands for extremist retribution in Matt Stoler's post, "Democratic Congressional Candidate Alan Grayson on Iraq Reckoning: 'We'll Put People in Prison'":

One of the most exciting candidates I've met this cycle is Alan Grayson, a high profile trial lawyer who has been suing defense contractors for fraud, and is now running for Florida's eighth district in central Florida. I spent some time with him at Netroots Nation, and took video. Usually I have to push candidates to become more aggressive, in Grayson's case, he pushed me. Grayson is part of a new crew of progressive professionals, people like Darcy Burner and Donna Edwards with a tremendous track record of success in fields other than politics who are crossing over into the progressive sector out of a sheer revulsion of where this country is headed. It's different than the civil rights era of liberalism and the single issue liberalism of the 1980s, much more fearless.

Because of his track record suing defense contractors, Grayson is completely uninterested and unintimidated by ridiculous arguments about secrecy and national security. He thinks that war crimes have been committed, that people need to be put in prison, and that we absolutely cannot let bygones be bygones with the 2000-2008 era.

That last section really sums it up.

For the nihilist left, few are putting a priority on improving the econony, rebuilding infrastruce, or exploring means toward American energy independence - some of the top issues facing the mass of rank-and-file Democratic Party voters. What's motivated the hard left hordes are subterranean questions of lawbreaking by the administration. The agenda of electing "agressive progressives" is code language for mounting a campaign of revenge against Republicans who are routinely alleged to have taken the country "recklessly toward war. Just this week Representitive Dennis Kucinich, a leader of antiwar contingent in Congress, held hearings on Capitol Hill to investigate the administration for "leading the country to war under false pretenses."

Recall that the Iraq war, of course, was launched under a bipartisan congressional mandate, but within months of the same Democrats in Congress - who supported America's goal to rid Saddam Hussein of weapons of mass destruction - turned around for cheap partisan purposes to advocate the craven withdrawal from Iraq, the abandonment of our troops, and the surrender to the forces of Islamist totalitarianism.

As for the legal case for war crimes, the issue's debateable, and establishing them as a top priority in 2009 would create a political circus. The administration might do well to prevent a massive witch hunt by issues blanket pardons before leaving office.

Of course, it's hard to see the left's push for criminal prosecutions as more than diabolical partisan revenge. These developments, indeed, are the natural consequence of the left's doctrine of hatred. The incessant calls for criminal prosecution against the Bush administration satisfies the radical left's psychological need for vengeance against the percieved slights of intellectual and political marginalization.

It's not enough to organize for a restoration of the public spirit in health care, transportation, or other areas of needed revitalization, under a possible Democratic administration. The modern ideological hatred of the secular left demands nothing short of a totalizing political persecution for the very democratically-legitimated conservative leaders who have run the run the country for the last seven years.

Army Sergeant Testifies to Iraq Success, While Left Keeps Head in Sand

Anthony J. Diaz, a staff sergeant in the U.S. Army Reserve, argues at today's Washington Post that success in Iraq is real and undeniable, and political progress continues apace (via Memeorandum):

One often reads of the chaos plaguing Iraq. Yet the media accounts only infrequently seem to grasp the successes being achieved....

Late last year, I witnessed something inspirational in a rather unlikely setting: an ordinary neighborhood advisory council meeting. Attendance was the highest I had yet seen, with about 40 prominent locals present. The coalition was represented by our squadron commander, a few colonels from the embedded provincial reconstruction team and a political officer from the U.S. Embassy. Discussions ranged from the persistent lack of electricity to sewage problems to economic development. What struck me were the comments of some Sunni workers from the district's power station, who came to complain that the (mostly Shiite) Iraqi army had mistreated them and accused them of distorting the distribution of electric power, something over which these workers have little control. The men said they would strike until they received better treatment and pleaded with the council chairman, a Sunni, for help. That was an unlikely outcome, given the entrenched animosity between Shiites and Sunnis and the lack of substantive political reconciliation even at the highest levels of government here. But these men did something many Americans would take for granted: They voiced grievances and sought assistance. These are the seeds of representative government, citizens coming forth and demanding change from their representatives. Much work remains to be done, but we have clearly made a start.

Even the Iraqi army has taken a turn for the better here. Not long ago its troops were seen as an obstacle to reconciliation and were accused of arresting locals without evidence, only to request ransoms for their release. There are still occasional incidents of graft and abuse, but now Iraqi troops provide security and make efforts to build rapport with the populace.

Through continuous prodding, our squadron has influenced the local army contingent's understanding of the values of civil affairs. One particularly adept Iraqi captain has coordinated numerous efforts to hand out humanitarian assistance, organized medical and dental missions in local schools, provided security for deliveries of much-needed fuel, and even delivered wheelchairs himself.

There is still much left to be accomplished in Iraq. But the successes of the men and women serving in this once explosive area of Baghdad cannot be overstated. Sitting here in Adhamiyah, one thing is certain: The surge has worked.

That's the straight story from an Army reservist, but note as well what Lieutenant General Raymond T. Odierno said this week:

Explaining the reduction in violence and its stra­tegic significance has been the subject of much debate. It's tempting for those of us personally con­nected to the events to exaggerate the effects of the surge. By the same token, it's a gross oversimplifica­tion to say, as some commentators have, that the positive trends we're observing have come about because we paid off the Sunni insurgents or because Muqtada al-Sadr simply decided to announce a ceasefire. These assertions ignore the key variable in the equation--the Coalition's change in strategy and our employment of the surge forces.

That oversimplification - indeed, dissonance - is hard to resist. At the same time that more and more indicators of success become available, hard-left nihilist forces here at home continue to deny military and political progress in Iraq.

Newshoggers, while not on the top-tier of the America-bashing left blogosphere, nevertheless is relentless in its campaign of demonization and denial of America's emerging victory. See here:

I stick by my assessment that the US Surge is preordained to fail - that internal Iraqi dynamics dictate that as soon as the various factions have cause to fight instead of hold fire, they will do so and that none are invested in finding cause not to fight while the U.S. acts as buffer and protector to all. Which means that, eventually, there will be a fight in which the US can either take sides, be shot at by all sides or withdraw. Better to withdraw first.

Preordained?

Well, all of the military improvement this last year has discounted any predetermination of defeat. The Newshoggers' post is windy and confused, in any case, but the conclusion is what really matters: "Better to withdraw first"

There you have it, damn the consequences.

The U.S. will be in Iraq for a long time. Depending on what happens in the short-term politically, we're likely to have as many as 70-80 thousand service personnel in the theater a decade from now.

The odds of that happening will be better, of course, if this fall's election results in the accession to power of an administration not beholden to a nihilist, defeatist antiwar war fringe unable or unwilling objectively assess the dramatic turnaround of America's strategic fortunes in Iraq.

See also, Captian Ed, at Hot Air.

Anti-Intellectualism and the Marxist Idea

I had a brief exchange the other day with Brendan of BJKeefe blog. I don't normally go over there, but his link showed up in my Sitemeter and I found a post suggesting that someone should "take the shovel away from Donald Douglas." Brendon apparently thinks leftist demonization is a barrel of monkeys, and as I disabled comments to avoid the abuse, Brenden writes: "Nothing like the wingnutosphere's love for the frank and open exchange of ideas!" Check the post for what follows. Actually, it turns out Brendan's not so intellectually prepared for the "open exchange of ideas." For starters, I left one of the Sadly No! sample comments from my blog: "... you're nothing but a bag of meat and your thoughts and desires are meaningless and you are a worthless piece of" shit. Sure. And I guess that's quality high-octane exchange for lefties. So I respond to Brendan, "So you wanna debate, bonejobkeefe? Bring it on." And what's he do? Runs from debate!

Thanks also for the invitation to debate. Perhaps someday we shall. I do not think it likely in this case, however. Take whatever admiration you have for David Horowitz and multiply it by -100, and that will approximate how I feel about him. On this matter, to borrow from someone whose name I have forgotten, sorry, but our views of reality do not overlap sufficiently to make discussion possible.

For the record, my own sense of Horowitz is this: If in the past decade he's said anything beyond "Yes, waitress, I'll have some more coffee, please" that isn't utter lunacy, it's escaped my notice. One does not engage with so determined a conspiracy theorist. One simply abandons him to his milk crate at Speakers' Corner and seeks more worthwhile voices elsewhere.

I would say in particular that this phrase from your blurb of his book -- "the freakish nihilism of the radical left" -- doesn't even make sense in light of what this book of his is supposed to be about: "the Left has continued to advance its socialist schemes …" Stipulating for the moment that We have such an Agenda, it can hardly be said to be nihilist to have one -- to seek to advance a different social order (or to foist one upon you, if you insist) is not at all the same thing as wanting to do away with any and every social order, just for the sake of destruction.

Two things of interest right away: (1) The complete dismissal of David Horowitz's ideals as sheer lunacy, and (2) the rejection of my use of the phrase "freakish nihilism" to describe the ideological agenda of the left. There's a word for this: Anti-intellectualism. And that stance marinates in a devilish sauce of hard left-wing hubris and deceit. It's further soaked in hatred, for to hate one's enemies is to categorize them as beyond the pale of reason and civilization. Perhaps there's some psychology at work for Brendan. Someone as esteemed as David Horowitz, who lived through --- in direct participation --- all the cultural revolts of the last couple of generations, is ridiculed as a crazed milk crate screamer? Brendan certainly thinks he's got it all figured out. But I doubt he's actually read the book in question, Horowitz's The Politics of Bad Faith. I respond at the post, in any case:

I guess we have nothing to talk about then, since with the exception of Melanie Phillips, I can't think of someone more penetratingly clear on the left's ideological campaign of death and destruction. (And you're down with that, apparently.)

And seriously, you should at least read the book (cited at the link below) before you blow off "nihilism." The left has recycled Soviet Marxism-Leninism, giving a pass to the murder of 100s of millions. When those apologies for totalitarianism --- what leftist refer to as "actually existing socialism" --- become a defense of a failed ideology, all you have left is utter nothingness, hence nihilism.

Now note something here: This is substantive. There are ideas on the table, postulates to consider. It doesn't matter who's producing them. A hypothesis is just out there, to be evaluated. And how does Brendan respond? With more anti-intellectualism. My comment was caught in the Blogger spam filter, and Brendan takes that as a launch pad for some wise cracks, and then the non-response:

I have to say, now that I have restored your comment of 1:57 PM, September 18, 2010, maybe I am not completely surprised that it got flagged as spam. Because it sure does read just like the wingnut chain emails one sees on Snopes, for example. Are you really a college professor? At an accredited school? And not, say, teaching math or something?

Anyway, our discussion so far:

You: Let's debate! Let's talk about David Horowitz and how great he is!

Me: There, we have nothing to talk about.

You: Let's talk about David Horowitz and how great he is! No, how he's greater than great!!!1! Because left nihilist leftist soviet Marxist death evil left effete dark side BLARGH BLARGH blargh …

Me: Nice milk crate.

And so, David Horowitz, and myself, apparently, are out standing on a corner, on milk boxes, raving like alleged lunatics? This is what Brendan calls debate. As I said, concepts are in play here. Ideas have consequences. Why is it that Democrats utter nary a peep when declared Stalinist ideologues wind up gaining access to the top levels of the Obama administration? These same folks, including many Democrats in Congress --- including dozens who have open affiliations with the Democratic Socialist Party of America --- call for and implement a Castro-style healthcare regime in the U.S. Of course, these people blow off the mass murder and desolation of the such communist thugs. It's not what they do, it's the ideals of humanity and transcendence that count! And thus with Brendan, to contemplate the nothingness in the wasteland of leftist neo-communist ideology is to scream "BLAARRGGHHH!!"

Yeah. And how about that "exchange of ideas" Brendan was pumping up? Not so much, eh?

But that's not all. Brendan tells me to "grow up." No kidding:

I was not typing "Blargh" in response to your effort to twist the definition of nihilism to fit your own preconceived notions. It was in response to everything else.

Seriously, Donald, be your age. Do you really think you're going to interest me in any sort of discussion where you start off by howling how everything Left is irredeemably evil? I'd just as soon discuss spherical geometry with a Flat Earther.

This is pure dismissal. It's definitely not intelligent discussion. Check the link to the post. I'm not going to waste more time on someone who is that closed-minded, at least not at that entry. What you see here is the notion that leftist ideology is UNCHALLENGEABLE. There's nothing that can penetrate the hard-shell of neo-communist ideology. Anyone with a different idea is literally a "Flat Earther."

Truly amazing. Meanwhile, these people and their grand schemes for a nationalization of the U.S. health delivery system under ObamaCare socialism are running for the hills. It's not working. Costs are not going down. Firms are responding by not hiring, precisely at the same time that unemployment keeps rising. It's statism that's failing, and the idea that state planning --- THE CENTRAL COMPONENT OF ALL SOCIALIST IDEOLOGY --- is proving just one more disaster rammed down American throats by the mandarins of the Democrat-Socialist Party in Washington.

I don't know how old Brendan is. He is idealistic. Perhaps the real world will intrude sometime in his life, and he'll learn to appreciate an actual argument for what it is an not the twisting evasion of some wingnut hokus pokus.

In any case, sometimes it's necessary to actually read the writings of your political enemies. (I didn't love wading through Markos Moulitsas' American Taliban, but I don't begrudge him for writing it. I know exactly where he stands now, and I'm all the more determined to resist him.) Perhaps Brendan might actually exhibit a little bit of personal maturity and actually attempt to engage some of these ideas, for example, this passage on Page 57 of The Politics of Bad Faith:

Totalitarianism is the possession of reality by a political Idea --- the Idea of socialist kingdom of heaven on earth; the redemption of humanity by political force. To radical believers this Idea is so beautiful it is like God Himself. It provides the meaning of a radical life. This is the solution that makes everything possible; the noble end that justifies the regrettable means. Belief in the kingdom of socialist heaven is faith that can transform vice into virtue, lies into truth, evil into good. In this revolutionary religion, the Way, the Truth, and the Life of salvation lie not with God above, but with men below --- ruthless, brutal, venal men --- on whom faith confers the power of gods. There is no mystery in the transformation of the socialist paradise into Communist hell: liberation theology is a satanic creed.

I'll have more later. Maybe tomorrow, even.

Mark Thompson and the Scientific Falsification of God

It's certainly cliche to suggest that faith in the public square is in retreat. Of course, while polls show that Americans by a huge majority "believe in God or a universal spirit," there's nevertheless an extremely vocal and increasingly influential contingent on the progressive left that is intent not only to deny the potential epistemological basis for religious faith but to excoriate anyone who deigns to make a reasoned case to that effect.

I normally don't get involved in these tussles, but with the vicious neo-Stalinism we've seen on the left in response to California's Proposition 8 and the Warren invocation (and that's just for starters), it's pretty clear that the hordes have swept over the windswept passes of the barbarian steppes and folks of good standing need to stand a post and do battle in defense of eternal goodness and right.

What got me going on this is Mark Thompson's crudely pedestrian essay, "Falsifying the Unfalsifiable," over at the Ordinary Gentlemen.

Readers may recall that Mark is the publisher of Publius Endures. Once a staunch libertarian, Mark has sold out to the Obamessianism that has engulfed the land following "our national holiday from reason that was the Obama presidential inauguration" (to quote myself). In one of the strangest introductions to a blog post I've ever seen, Mark cites Homer Simpson - that's right, that Homer Simpson - as an authority on the ontology of religious faith and evangelical trust, arguing that the Simpson's get right to "the crux of the problem." And to think, Robert Stacy McCain generously called these guys "intellectuals." Go figure?

In any case, here's a key snippet of the point that Mark is trying to elaborate (and elaborate ... frankly, ad nauseum, at least 25 times at the piece):

For the religious person, there is simply no way to prove through science that god exists or does not exist - as long as there is something in the universe that cannot rationally be explained, there is a basis for trusting in the existence of god. For the atheist, there is likewise simply no way to prove through science that god exists or does not exist - as long as a scientific or rational explanation for anything in the universe is theoretically possible, there is a basis to trust in the ability of reason to explain everything, and no basis to trust in the existence of god.

And this is why I think Chris - and E.D. - are absolutely correct in stating that the proper response to the question of the existence of god is “Who Cares?” The existence of god simply cannot be proven or disproven through pure reason, and neither side does themselves any favors when they insist otherwise.

I think Mark wants to say "there is no basis for trusting in the existence of God" in the first paragraph, but if it's not clear in the passage cited, we've got redundancies galore at the post to confirm the point.

And this is why I'm spending time to correct Mark, and, frankly, to reveal him even further as the rank nihilist that he is.

I'm still figuring out where Mark and his gang are coming from, but they certainly aren't conservative, despite the circle-jerk exclamations for Culture 11 found repeatedly at the blog. Think about this in the context of this essay from the Calgary Herald, "At Least Atheists Got Mentioned":

People appear very keen for a lot of things to change on the Obama watch. One of those hopes is that Christianity would revert more to a private choice rather than the state religion it often appeared to be under George W. Bush.

Now before I debunk this slimy palaver, I just came across Troy Anderson denouncing those of faith who respond to such bunk as "Christian apologists."

Really, Christian apologists?

So we've got those on the left hip to the "Age of Obama" who are looking to see Christianity revert to a "private choice" rather than a "state religion"? And those who debate in favor of the existence of God are "Christian apologists"?

Sometimes I doubt this is the same United States of America where I grew up?

When Mark Thompson slops out such intelletually deadening prose as " the lunacy of religion attempting to masquerade as science," I'm frankly at a loss at the metaphysical methodology of the enterprise.

The fact remains, and it has thus been, that there is no epistemological basis for asserting religion as science in the first place. It's a sickly straw man to posit intelligent design as threatening nearly fifty years of post-Engel secularism in U.S. constitutional jurisprudence. If we see science as the scholarly generation of explanatory theory based on logically derived predictions based on observable phenonomen, it makes little sense to suggest religion is "masquerading as science." There is no data with which to subject the claim that "God exists" to falsification. Sure, we can debate the scientific legitimacy of the Gospels, but to find proof for the verity of the divine is nonsense. Perhaps Mark Thompson can clarify the point in a future post, but thus far he's been too busy playing ring around the rosie with Freddie and the rest of this nihilist gang.

The larger question in any case is the problem of Judeo-Christian ethics. When Christopher Hitchens argued early this decade for the morality of regime change Iraq, it's unlikely he was drawing on any other well of fundamental right outside of the Biblical narrative of Mosaic universality.

It is, of course, precisely this Western Judeo-Christian heritage that the progressive left seeks to destroy. Andrew Sullivan is no conservative when he promotes a gay radical licentiousness that knows no moral boundaries. Thus, the solution: just rebrand the model in your own image and label adherents to classic teachings as "Christianists." I mean really, Mark Thompson cites E.D Kain as suggesting "who cares"?

Well, excuse me, but damn! I'd think we all would. The West is best. QED.

I'll have more on this later, so I'll close with Licia Corbella's rebuttal to the privileging of atheism over religion in the public square:

The atheist ethic has killed more people than any religion by a staggering margin. Fascism, Nazism and Communism have murdered many tens of millions of people. Think of the former Soviet Union, Cambodia, Vietnam, the Nazis, Communist China etc. Mao Zedong's regime alone murdered 70 million countrymen. Stalin, 20 million. Their successors millions more. To this day, Falun Gong and Christians are jailed in China and then killed to harvest their organs.

It's no coincidence the freest, most prosperous nations in the world are virtually all Christian-based, not atheist or even Muslim, Buddhist or Hindu. As the Bible says: "Where the spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty."

With the exception of Japan, which had its democratic system imposed on it by the U. S. after the Second World War, and Israel, which is Jewish, no non-Christian country is truly free.

Atheists make up a very small minority of the "believers" in our society and yet it is their religion that is constantly being rammed down the throats of the majority.

They better be careful what they wish for. So should all people who love freedom, regardless of what they believe.

The Left's Big Lie: A Chronology of Progressive Deception in the Aftermath of Tucson, 1/8/11

I'm intrigued by the meme this weekend on the blame-righty progressive left. It turns out that Gateway Pundit mistook the closed-captioned "applause' text at the Phoenix Jumbotron for audience prompts at last Wednesday's Obama-Democrat Tucson exploitation rally. And then faster than you can despicable smear, Charles Johnson slams Gateway as a "dim bulb" troglodyte of the "wingnut blogoshpere." But Gateway's Jim Hoft came back with a withering reply: "Figures. Charles Johnson’s Crackpot Hero Arrested For Threatening to Kill Tea Party Leader on National TV." Heh. That's good.

And staying with it for a moment, compare these two screencaps from Little Green Footballs. When James Eric Fuller threatened some conservatives at this weekend's ABC News town hall in Tuscon, Johnson chalks that up to the "Wild West" atmosphere in Arizona. Completely understandable, no doubt.

But just the other day we had news that Congressman Jim McDermott of Washington State received death threats, but that was the work of raving right-wing "lunatic." And Charles chirps in with feigned superiority: "I wonder how the wingnuts will try to explain this one away."

That's typical for the morally bankrupt "husky pony-tailed blogger."

But there's more.

I cruised over to Althouse earlier, and she has a hilarious post picking up on Whiskey Fire's demonic ramblings at Firedoglake: "Hoft gets this through Instadouche and, unsurprisingly, Ann Althouse, who has been looking at pictures again, something that never ends well..." The Whisky Fire proprietor is Thers. He's a classic progressive and morally-bankrupt attack blogger from the TBogg "F*ck Me Pumps" school of racist misogyny and character assassination. Or, as Ann responds, "Heh. I got FireDogLake writing in the anti-Althousiana genre." The link goes to FDL:

Jim Hoft, The Gateway Gobshite, the Dollar Store version of Michelle Malkin, is very possibly the dumbest wingnut on this or any other Internet. To be sure, he has his competition (SASQUATCH ISRAEL!). But he is rather special!

Notice that? The "competition" is me, from last September and my "Sasquatch Israel" gaffe. I noticed some traffic coming in last night from the Sadly No! asshats, and I chuckled this morning at finally figuring out the source. Even better is that I'm lumped to not only with Jim Hoft, but the great Michelle Malkin. Now that's some bragging rights, yo!

But stupid is as stupid does, as they say. Or in this case, as evil does, and you can't touch the left on that. Because as I've been documenting, along with many other voices of moral clarity on the right, the aftermath of Tucson has revealed a depth of progressive depravity thus far unknown to man. I have yet to see a single progressive publish an apology or retraction for their baseless smears that came within minutes of the shooting on January 8th. It's been truly sickening. Here's Thers, for example, at Whiskey Fire, alleging "heated right-wing rhetoric" for the death and destruction at the Gabrielle Giffords event:

Busting wingnut rhetoric for these latest shootings wouldn't be like busting Al Capone for tax evasion. It would be like busting Al Capone for fucking jaywalking.

The reason the Tucson nightmare fearfully resonates is not because of a simple causal relationship between say Glenn Beck and direct incitements to murder, but because "conservatives" have an insatiable appetite for crazy bullshit.

Are wingnuts opposed to incitement to murder because, well, it's incitement to murder, or because they're afraid being caught out doing it might lose them Valuable Political Points?

Dunno! But once you've gone ahead and, say, made excuses for state-sponsored torture, if you want the benefit of the doubt, fuck you.

These people have no shame.

Whiskey Fire posted these lies on Wednesday, fully four days after the shooting. By then it was fully known of Jared Loughner's insanity. But the Democrat-rats smelled a political opportunity, and that night we saw crowds erupt in applause for President Obama at the progressive's University of Tucson progressive pep rally that should have otherwise been an evening of somber reflection. It was just that morning that Zach Osler, a "best friend" to the deranged Loughner, indicated at ABC News that the shooter "didn't listen to political radio, he didn't take sides, he wasn't on the left, he wasn't on the right":

But this is how it all works.

It's the big lie of the progressive-left, as I argued yesterday, as well as Diana West earlier, "Tragedy Exposes 'The Big Lie'":

The suppression of the facts is by no means the most dangerous aspect of any Big Lie. After all, facts don't go away even amid efforts to suppress them. All sorts of inconsistencies, impossibilities and clues remain behind, and sometimes in plain sight, for anyone who cares to look. The real threat the Big Lie poses to society comes when it is not stopped in its tracks, exposed and trashed for what it is -- a lie -- but rather accepted, accommodated and, indeed, treated as if it were the truth. At that point, a Big Lie is a big success, having created an alternate reality that turns its very targets into hapless accomplices.

Unfortunately, that last bit describes most Republicans' supine reaction to the reaction -- the Big Lie -- about the Arizona massacre ....

In the end, though, what's worse than the Big Lie itself is the failure to reject and expose it -- the failure, in this case, to identity the lie as a naked influence operation to mute conservative political expression. This failure is the crime Republicans are guilty of each time they stoop to defend themselves within the phony terms of the lie itself.

I'm not completely down with Diana's condemnation of conservative capitulation to the left's Big Lie. Politically, it would have been much worse to hold back a response in real time, just as the nihilist hordes were building up their deceits and distortions. But she's right to place the lies squarely in the longstanding tradition of leftist totalitarian utopianism. She illustrates her blog post with the image of Joseph Stalin above, and writes: "'Never mind, they'll swallow it', said Stalin, the 20th Century's first successful progenitor of the Big Lie."

Exactly.

I'll have more later.

Meanwhile, the Big Lie continues with the latest from Frank Rich of the New York Times, "No One Listened to Gabrielle Giffords" (via Memeorandum).

RELATED: "The Lies of Bill Maher — And the Epic Struggle Between Good and Evil in the Aftermath of Tucson, 1/8/11."