Quick Roundup 510

Monday, March 01, 2010

If you haven't rolled your eyes lately, ...

... mosey on over to this Washington Post article (registration required) on the predictable (and predictably derivative) "Coffee Party" "movement." (Will Keith Olbermann call them "coffee grinders?")

Myrhaf pretty much says all that needs to be said about it in this post ...

This movement is typical of the New Left, in that it cannot be honest about what it wants. If these people were honest, and capable of thinking in principles, they would say they want socialism. Of course, they can't say that because it would make the Democrats a party of, I would guess, 15-20% of the population. Honesty on the left means electoral suicide.
... and this:
The idea of forming a movement around "cooperation" is a gimmick to help the Democrats succeed with their socialist agenda, particularly health care reform.

The Tea Party, at least what's best about it, is [sympathetic to] timeless principles: limited government, individual rights. I have held these principles for 33 years, since I first read Atlas Shrugged. [minor edits]
At its worst, the Tea Party movement is unclear about the full meaning of said principles and, thus, sometimes misidentifies the real enemy of freedom. Interestingly, a pair of quotes from the second page of the Washington Post story pretty much helps us see that:
The next evening, Fox News pundit Glenn Beck paces during his keynote speech at the [CPAC] conference. "It is still morning in America," Beck tells the crowd. "It just happens to be kind of a head-pounding, hungover, vomiting-for-four-hours kind of morning in America. . . . What is it that has caused the problem? And if you say 'Obama,' it's too simple of an answer because it's not Barack Obama." He writes "progressivism" on a chalkboard. "This is the disease."
Actually, no. Progressivism is only a symptom.
"There is a synergism between people who realize we've got massive corruption," says [tea partier William] Temple, 59. "We want citizen legislators, people who know about sacrifice. Get the career politicians out of here."
Actually, no. We don't merely need to "throw the bastards out." We need to reach the point where we aren't electing bastards, and that's going to take time and cultural change.

Progressivism is secularized Christianity, and is all about the ethics of self- (i.e., human) sacrifice and collectivism. Until the tea party movement generally grasps that freedom is not and can not be based on anything but self-interest and individual rights, its effectiveness will be limited.

What a run!

Team USA's young, swashbuckling squad held off a team of all-stars from a nation fanatical about the game of hockey -- on home ice -- until overtime in the Gold Medal Game of the Winter Olympics.
The hockey gods were kind enough to bless the gold medal game with overtime, bonus action in a classic matchup between the two superpowers. It merely added more drama, more intensity and more passion to what could go into the books as the most entertaining game in Olympic history. Or hockey history.

Where does this one rank? Up there.

Way up there.
I'd have loved to see gold, but it would be wrong not to applaud this team.

Thank you, Team USA!

Throw in Lack of Empathy

It was interesting and amusing to read the following on the subject of misandry at Classical Values (HT: Instapundit):
I have to say, it's not often that I stumble onto evidence in support of the subject of a blog post simply by the act of writing the first sentence.
Eric Scheie's spell-checker had tagged the term as misspelled, although it was not.

Briefly checking the Wikipedia entry on the subject, I found the following humdinger of a passage from SCUM Manifesto, by feminist Valerie Solanas:
As for the issue of whether or not to continue to reproduce males, it doesn't follow that because the male, like disease, has always existed among us that he should continue to exist. When genetic control is possible -- and soon it will be -- it goes without saying that we should produce only whole, complete beings, not physical defects of deficiencies, including emotional deficiencies, such as maleness. Just as the deliberate production of blind people would be highly immoral, so would be the deliberate production of emotional cripples.
Where is the empathy for us poor, unfortunate cripples, from this emotionally superior being? Solanas does not even regard men as fully human.

Setting aside many, many of the other things wrong with the above passage, it is amazing how thoroughly collectivism can eradicate even the most rudimentary trace of benevolence from man's soul.

The New "Tan"

While looking for a sample image for carotenosis, I stumbled upon Pale is the New Tan, a hilarious blog about fake tans and bad burns.

Wow. Page after page of it.

-- CAV


Anonymous said...

Hi Gus,

I wanted to reply to your earlier entries regarding Olympic hockey, but given that the only game Canada lost in qualification was against the US, I could not say anything. However, now, please allow me a bit of non-objectivist gloating - nah, nah, nah. Just kidding. Please keep up the great blogs.

Amlan (from Ottawa)

Mike said...

Ah, that old canard... men are emotionally stunted or incapable. Perhaps it is simply that men (in general) do not let their emotions rule their rational consciousness as readily as women. But that, too, is an oversimplification and an unjust sweeping generalization. Just as sensitive, emotional men can be observed, so too can stoic, seemingly steel-hearted women. But tell that to Solanas, or her old soul sisters like Andrea Dworkin, and you're just another jack-booted thug propping up the evil Patriarchy.

Gus Van Horn said...


Heh! That didn't stop another of your countrymen from smack talking me before the other game!

I got to see parts of this one and wish I could have seen it all. Congrats, and thanks.


And an emotionally-stunted Jackbooted thug at that!


mtnrunner2 said...

>Will Keith Olbermann call them "coffee grinders?"

Actually, "bean-suckers" would be closer.

Gus Van Horn said...

I like that better.

Given the whole leftists as partiers, everyone else as prudes conceit, mine would be taken as a compliment, if some don't already call themselves that to begin with.

Jim May said...

Hmm, was I the only smack-talker? I thought there was more than one.

After the 5-3 loss, I thought about commenting to the effect that we were just getting it out of our system. After all, it's all about winning the important games. Ask the New England Patriots :P

I think Team Canada benefitted from the extra game anyhow; the big challenge with short tournaments like this is getting all the different players to fit together. The Canadians were still tinkering with lines up to the game against Slovakia.

And yes, it was a fantastic game. There were times where the Canadians were back on their heels, and it could have gone bad really fast -- the end of the second period comes to mind. When the Americans tied it up, I wanted the Canadians to end it in OT, as I figured that Ryan Miller would win it for the Americans if it came to a shootout.

The big takeaway for me is that Canadians are showing some signs of losing their perpetual inferiority complex (though that isn't to say that there are not plenty of Canadians stubbornly holding on to it -- as a defining principle, no less). Winning more Winter Olympic gold medals than any other country -- ever? I never thought I'd see the day.

I should have wagered a beer on it. Are you coming to Vegas, Gus? :)

Gus Van Horn said...

Indeed you were, Jim!

If the 5-3 loss helped in any way other than the extra games, it might have served as a wake-up call.

Will I be in Vegas? I don't know yet, but the odds look slim. I'll let you know if I end up being able to make it.

Steve D said...

"Also, there is a reasonable chance these two teams might meet again."

Even after the first game between Canada and the US I a US/Canada final was the most likely possibility. I was a little surprised at how good the US team was whether through heart or talent. One thing I didn’t expect was for the US to tie it up after they pulled their goaltender. They deserve a lot of credit. (but I am still happy Canada won). It kind of makes you wonder why everyone in Canada was so upset after the first game, though.

“cappuccino party” ??? That would not a particularly good choice I would think - why advertise and reinforce your elitist attitude? Actually, coffee party could have been an interesting parody if it had been meant only as such (I thought that was the case after reading only the title of the article and the first couple of sentences). They spoiled the joke with leftist politics. It wouldn’t be the first thing spoiled by leftist politics, I guess.

“it doesn't follow that because the male, like disease, has always existed among us that he should continue to exist“

Every once in a while I read something idiotic to such a degree it leaves me speechless. When this happens I bet the person who says it to me walks away proudly thinking “wow that statement was so intelligent I left him speechless“. All I can say to this is it sounds like she had a pretty happy childhood!

“Actually, no. Progressivism is only a symptom.”

This is typical of modern thought (and Beck). Look for causes but ignore the causes of causes. That’s how you can end up 200 reasons why the Roman Empire fell.

Gus Van Horn said...

"Look for causes but ignore the causes of causes. That’s how you can end up 200 reasons why the Roman Empire fell. "

I like the way you put that.