Cue hysteria: Judge OKs deer hunt in Valley Forge Park

AP:

A federal judge has approved plans to use sharpshooters to cull the bulging deer population at Valley Forge National Historical Park.

Wednesday's decision rejects a lawsuit filed by several animal-rights groups.

The National Park Service plans to begin the nighttime hunt next month.

U.S. District Judge Mitchell Goldberg says it's clear the park is overrun with white-tail deer, causing damage to the park's vegetation and habitat.

Goldberg says there's no evidence the park service decision was capricious or arbitrary.

Animal-rights activists say the park should be maintained by natural means.

The "natural means" the animal rights activists want? Coyotes.

Now, animal-rights advocates are arguing that the number of coyotes in Valley Forge should be encouraged to grow, as a way to provide a predatory check on the deer and eliminate any cause for gunfire.

"It would serve as a natural form of population control," said Matthew McLaughlin, director of the Pennsylvania chapter of Friends of Animals.

(...)


the Pennsylvania chapter of Friends of Animals has begun a campaign called the Coyote Coexistence Initiative, an outgrowth of a lawsuit the group filed last year to try to stop the deer shoots. That suit, still active, helped delay the first kill for a year.

One of the Friends' arguments is that park officials did not fully consider the role of natural predators - specifically coyotes - in maintaining a stable deer population. The initiative seeks to promote respect for coyotes as important players in the environment and to reduce what has been a dramatic increase in the number of coyotes killed in Pennsylvania.

Friends leaders say the park does not exist in isolation - it must be evaluated as part of the larger biosystem. If coyotes were allowed to increase statewide, the animals would likely also increase inside the park, helping to limit the deer, they said.

"We can't look at the coyotes in a five-mile park as in a vacuum," said Lee Hall, vice president of legal affairs for the Friends.

This sounds like an awesome idea. Really:


No seriously: this sounds like a great idea. I'm sure the coyote will know instinctively that they are a.) to remain inside the Park boundaries and b.) leave the neighborhood pet population alone:

Park officials say it wouldn't work - certainly not fast enough to help a forest that's being devoured by deer. Next month, park managers intend to proceed with a plan to eliminate 86 percent of the deer during the next four years.

Even though the animal rights activists don't think beyond the rights of Bambi, it is a well-known fact that the white-tailed deer is on of the most destructive animals in Pennsylvania when it comes to hindrances of forest regeneration. If the trees as not allowed to grow for the sake of an overlarge deer population, the forests and other various fauna of Valley Forge will not be allowed to regenerate; the deer will starve, and what deer survive will leave the park in search of better feeding grounds: crossing the turnpike and 422 to get to peoples' gardens.

Do animal rights activists ever consider the deers' impact on the ecosystem? Or is this a one way street?

Obama to Latinos: "Punish your enemies by voting Democrat"

Via Kathryn Jean Lopez on the Corner yesterday, the great uniter was out on the stump trying to drum up support for Democrats, and by extension, his agenda of massive government expansion (emphasis mine):

Latino voters, the president said, would have an opportunity to send a message to Republicans, who Obama accused of “politicizing” immigration reform and the border security debate. Obama said “pressure has to be put on the Republican Party” if immigration reform is to become a reality.

“And if Latinos sit out the election instead of saying, we’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us, if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s gonna be harder — and that’s why I think it’s so important that people focus on voting on November 2,” he said.

Turning Americans against Americans? Labeling some Americans as "enemies" because they favor enforcing immigration laws?

Do words matter, Mr. President?



The President is absolutely correct about one thing: If you want to punish Americans, vote Democrat.

Juan Williams: the victim of a "chill wind"

Let's begin with a relevant quote apropos of the video clip below:

A chill wind is blowing in this nation. A message is being sent through the White House and its allies in talk radio and Clear Channel and Cooperstown. 'If you oppose this Administration there can and will be ramifications.' Every day the airwaves are filled with warnings, veiled and unveiled threats, spewed invective and hatred directed at any voice of dissent.

Ready for a little context to that quote above? It's attributed to the actor Tim Robbins in 2003. The following is exerpted from a 2004 column by Ralph Nader:

One year ago, following Major League Baseball's opening week and the second week of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, Tim Robbins and Susan Sarandon were denied an appearance at the National Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, New York.

Robbins and Sarandon, amongst many others, were planning to attend the Hall's fifteenth anniversary celebration of the classic baseball film "Bull Durham," in which they both starred and at the filming of which the couple first met. But the celebration was canceled by the Baseball Hall of Fame President, Dale Petroskey, because Robbins and Sarandon used their social consciences and their sense of activism to question the reasons for our country going to war.

Petroskey, a former assistant press secretary to Ronald Reagan, wrote a public letter to Robbins announcing his decision to call off the event, explaining: "The National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum - and many players and executives in Baseball's family - has honored the United States and those who defend our freedoms. ... We believe your very public criticism of President Bush at this important - and sensitive - time in our nation's history helps undermine the U.S. position, which ultimately could put our troops in even more danger. As an institution, we stand behind our President and our troops in this conflict."

Robbins wrote in his response to Petroskey's actions: "I had been unaware that baseball was a Republican sport. I was looking forward to a weekend away from politics and war to celebrate the fifteenth anniversary of 'Bull Durham.' I am sorry that you have chosen to use baseball and your position at the Hall of Fame to make a political statement. ... As an American who believes that vigorous debate is necessary for the survival of a democracy, I reject your suggestion that one must be silent in a time of war."

To be sure, Robbins is absolutely correct in his assesment here. However, the difference here is the cancelling of a one-time baseball Hall of Fame event because known anti-war activists were going to show up at said event and firing a man from his livlihood--a livlihood, which, by the way, was expressing political opinion.

What happened as a result of Petrovsky using the Baseball Hall of Fame to "punish" Robbins and Sarandon for their political views? Nader tells us:

In a moment of almost unanimous solidarity, baseball fans, sportswriters, political columnists and citizens from across the country, both for and against the war, expressed their anger with calls, letters, emails and columns of protest directed at the Baseball Hall of Fame president.

Will that moment of universal solidarity happen for Juan Williams? It is too soon to tell, but one can only hope so. The conservative blogs I read are buzzing with this story and all of them support Mr. Williams (who, by the way, has landed neatly on his feet with a $2 million contract with Fox News).

As a fan of Brett Baier's "panel" on Fox News, I'm very familiar with Juan Williams' viewpoint, and while I rarely find myself in agreement with him, his opinions are usually well presented in a calm and rational manner, which is becoming all to rare on the left these days. It is a tragedy for all Americans when a citizen's livlihood can be arbitrarily curtailed, not so much because he expresses an offensive position, but because he expresses a true position.

Sanctimonious politically correct cowards of all types must make a pointed show of their supposed moral enlightenment by putting as much distance between the truth teller and themselves. Witness Whoopi Goldberg and Joy Behar stomping off the set because Bill O'Reilly dared to say that Muslims were responsible for murdering 3,000 American citizens on 9/11.

In other words: Don't target me, Jihadis! I hightailed it out of there as soon as I saw that bastard was going to speak against Shari'a law!

And while refusing to watch The View is an adequate weapon of the free market that we can utilize to send a message to these hags, we have better tools at our disposal when it comes to NPR. John Boehner tells NRO:

“We need to face facts — our government is broke,” Boehner tells us. “Washington is borrowing 37 cents of every dollar it spends from our kids and grandkids. Given that, I think it’s reasonable to ask why Congress is spending taxpayers’ money to support a left-wing radio network — and in the wake of Juan Williams’ firing, it’s clearer than ever that’s what NPR is.”

Sounds good to me.

Democrats to seniors: Be afraid. Be very afraid so you won't think clearly and vote for us.

I'm not sure I understand the schizophrenic nature of the Democrat strategy this election. On the one hand, there's a lot of lying about the economy, a lot of demagoguery about (cue scary music) privatizing social security and ending Medicare, and a lot of huffing and puffing about witches and Nazis defining any Tea Party candidate. Over at the Times Herald, poor Tom Lees and Gordon Glantz are so frightened, they are rallying the villagers with torches and pitchforks.

I get the Alinsky tactics of picking the target, personalizing it, then polarizing. That's the strategy behind the witch and Nazi hysteria. But this blantant terrorization senior citizens implying that Republicans want to take away their social security and Medicare seems to be a bit of a half-baked strategy, at best. Since seniors are the ones who are angriest at the Democrats, I get that the Democrats think they need and deserve a good scare. But what I don't understand is that when your party adopts a wholesale slash and burn campaign dedicated to frightening people into voting, why then would the President come out and speak with open contempt of the fear they are creating?

"Part of the reason that our politics seems so tough right now, and facts and science and argument do not seem to be winning the day all the time, is because we're hard-wired not to always think clearly when we're scared," Obama told the assembled Democrats, who paid $15,200 a person to attend. "And the country is scared."

To "break through the fear and the frustration that people are feeling right now," Obama told the crowd, will require high-end donors not just to "write checks" but also to "lift up people's spirits and make sure that they're not reacting just to fear."

Let's just set aside the absolute laughability of the lament that "facts and science and argument do not seem to be winning the day." What the Democrats are doing is basically attempting to create a state of terror among seniors citizens....thereby causing them not to think clearly....and vote Democrat?

Yes, that seems to be the strategy. Oh, that and the $250 "find your way to the polls" social security bonus check that is due to distributed conveniently right before the election.

If I was a senior citizen involved in the Tea Party, which is exactly who these sentiments are aimed at, I'd be insulted at any Democratic implication that I was stupid enough fall for the "Bush did it" explanation of the current economy and that I would believe anyone would take away my social security or Medicare.

Tea Baggers and Tea Bagees

When I was in sixth grade, there was a group of four or five boys on my bus who used to sit in the back and crack disgusting jokes about sexual acts that they had recently discovered. One memorable two week span occured upon the release of Ted Nugent's "Cat Scratch Fever" whereupon this group of boys would ask each girl on the bus, "Do YOU have cat scratch fever?" It didn't matter what you answered, or if you didn't answer at all; any response or non response resulted in a chorus of guffaws, as if she had just played right into their joke by admitting to participating in a disgusting sex act. It never got old for these boys. Kind of like Michael Scott's trademark "That's what she said."

I never did find out what the inside joke regarding "cat scratch fever" was with those pre-teen boys, but I am reminded of their jerky, inside baseball behavior in the use of the term "tea bagger" to describe the Tea Party. Ever since Anderson Cooper/Rick Sanchez/Rachel Maddow started using the term, a certain set of liberals have been acting like those back of the bus giggling guffawing pre-pubescent boys, glorying in using a sexually charged slur against a group of people who weren't in on the joke.

Haw! Haw! Haw! we're calling these backwards conservative dolts tea baggers and they don't even know that tea bagging is a homosexual sex act! Haw haw haw!

What's absolutely awesome about this middle-school boy mentality is when these people get called out on their jerkiness in the presence of video cameras:


There are few truths in life, but one of them is that it is always better to the bagger than the baggee.

The Rent Is Too Damn High

As a karate expert, I recommend the following video:



I KNOW. Everybody funny. Now you funny too.

More here.

Joe Sestak: Another Dem with a scatalogical obsession

What is it with Democrats and their obsession with things scatalogical?



There are so many things to criticize about this ad---the falsehoods about the economy, dragging out boogey man George Bush--- but at the end of the day, why bother? It's really hard to take a man seriously when he's carrying a little bag of doggie doo-doo.

Philadelphia Inquirer: Giving murdering sociopaths exactly what they want

For some reason, the Philadelphia Inquirer's Ronnie Polaneczky ran an in-depth interview with dirty hippie murderer Ira Einhorn. It was apparently assumed that the Delaware Valley had a burning desire to know exactly how Einhorn is making out in prison, if he still has smelly hippie breath and if he is aging well, so Polaneczy hopped into her car last weekend and drove on up there to attempt to satisfy some public curiousity that never existed.

For those who have forgotten him, the reprehensible Einhorn murdered Holly Maddux and stuffed her body into a trunk then fled to France where he lived openly for many years like a country gentleman, thumbing his nose at Philly and Maddux's family while France refused to extradite him. What does an aging hippie radical intellectual scumbag like this long for most? Intelligent conversation and attention. So what did Ronnie Polaneczky do? She drove five hours to the prison in Clearfield, PA and sat for five hours in the same room with Einhorn to interview him, then published her interview with the attention grabbing and, for Einhorn, ego boosting headline, "The Ira Einhorn Interview: 1,800 Lovers."

Einhorn's massive ego having been satisfied, I have one question for Ms. Polaneczky: Now that you have rescued Einhorn from the worst part of his punishment---being relelgated to obscurity---how many "Silkwood" showers will you have to take to feel clean again?

No link to the story, for obvious reasons.

Murphy fires up the yoooon-yun base in Bucks County

If you are going to speak to the unions, you must speak "union-ese." Or so goes Patrick Murphy.

The following Roll Call video was posted by Robert Costa on the Corner.

Warning: Strong language begins at about the 2:00 min mark. Not safe for work or kids.


And the crowd comes alive when Murphy drops the *s*-bomb! I'm sure that before Murphy came to rally the dozen or so faithful union members who showed up at this event, he took a quick video tutorial like the one below demonstrating how to connect with your Union base when you look like that sleazy banker-type that Tony Goldwyn played in "Ghost."

Video below the fold really not safe for work or kids.

How PA Capitalists saved the Chilean Miners

The WSJ's consistently awesome Daniel Henninger has a must read column in Thursday's edition. I quote at length, because there is much awesomeness to behold:

It needs to be said. The rescue of the Chilean miners is a smashing victory for free-market capitalism.

Amid the boundless human joy of the miners' liberation, it may seem churlish to make such a claim. It is churlish. These are churlish times, and the stakes are high.

In the United States, with 9.6% unemployment, a notably angry electorate will go to the polls shortly and dump one political party in favor of the other, on which no love is lost. The president of the U.S. is campaigning across the country making this statement at nearly every stop:

"The basic idea is that if we put our blind faith in the market and we let corporations do whatever they want and we leave everybody else to fend for themselves, then America somehow automatically is going to grow and prosper."

Uh, yeah. That's a caricature of the basic idea, but basically that's right. Ask the miners.

If those miners had been trapped a half-mile down like this 25 years ago anywhere on earth, they would be dead. What happened over the past 25 years that meant the difference between life and death for those men?

Short answer: the Center Rock drill bit.

This is the miracle bit that drilled down to the trapped miners. Center Rock Inc. is a private company in Berlin, Pa. It has 74 employees. The drill's rig came from Schramm Inc. in West Chester, Pa. Seeing the disaster, Center Rock's president, Brandon Fisher, called the Chileans to offer his drill. Chile accepted. The miners are alive.

Longer answer: The Center Rock drill, heretofore not featured on websites like Engadget or Gizmodo, is in fact a piece of tough technology developed by a small company in it for the money, for profit. That's why they innovated down-the-hole hammer drilling. If they make money, they can do more innovation.

This profit = innovation dynamic was everywhere at that Chilean mine. The high-strength cable winding around the big wheel atop that simple rig is from Germany. Japan supplied the super-flexible, fiber-optic communications cable that linked the miners to the world above.

Center Rock's website boasts the refreshing American slogan: "Center Rock Inc. Drill harder. Run Faster. Work smarter."

Center Rock Inc. was founded in 1998 by Brandon W. Fisher at the age of 26. After graduating from Berlin High School in 1990, Brandon took some college classes, got a taste of the drilling industry and in a very short period of time, he was hooked! Brandon worked for one of Ingersoll Rand’s distributors as the company's Eastern Oil & Gas sales Representative, working in the field with new and existing products before deciding to venture out on his own, searching for ways to improve the existing products. This young entrepreneur recognized the need for a manufacturing company that was reactive to customer needs, with innovative products and round-the-clock customer service and support.

This young Pennsylvania entrepreneur has been on site in Chile supervising the drilling operations:

Brandon Fisher, whose American company built the drills, said that the pneumatic-based drilling system that bored the rescue shaft hole used four hammers instead of just one – similar to the drill that Center Rock used to initially reach the miners with a 12” pilot hole.

Center Rock’s drilling expertise was called upon by industry experts and Chile to drill this rescue bore hole for the 33 miners who were trapped during a cave-in on August 5th. The first small bore hole that reached the miners 17 days after the mine collapse brought news to the world they were alive 2,070 feet below the surface. Rescuers have been sending food, medicine and letters through a small pipe to the miners, as well as video cameras so the miners can communicate with their families.

Schramm Inc. is the other Pennsylvania innovator working to free the miners:

Founded in 1900 by Chris Schramm, Schramm, Inc. is a closely held, privately owned Pennsylvania corporation that originally manufactured engine driven machinery and portable air compressors. In the 1950’s Schramm pioneered air flush drilling and in the 1970’s focused engineering and manufacturing operations on production of top head drive mobile drilling equipment.

Today, Schramm is a century-old Chester County, Pennsylvania manufacturer and global supplier to the hydraulic drilling industry progressively improving the function and quality of our products to provide world class performance and reliability.

Henninger highlights the critical importance of small business risk-taking entrepreneurs like these:

In an open economy, you will never know what is out there on the leading developmental edge of this or that industry. But the reality behind the miracles is the same: Someone innovates something useful, makes money from it, and re-innovates, or someone else trumps their innovation. Most of the time, no one notices. All it does is create jobs, wealth and well-being. But without this system running in the background, without the year-over-year progress embedded in these capitalist innovations, those trapped miners would be dead.

Some will recoil at these triumphalist claims for free-market capitalism. Why make them now?

Here's why. When a catastrophe like this occurs—others that come to mind are the BP well blowout, Hurricane Katrina, various disasters in China—a government has all its chips pushed to the center of the table. Chile succeeds (it rebuilt after the February earthquake with phenomenal speed). China flounders. Two American administrations left the public agog as they stumbled through the mess.

Still, what the political class understands is that all such disasters wash away eventually, and that life in a developed nation reverts to a tolerable norm. If the Obama administration refuses to complete free-trade agreements with Colombia, South Korea and Panama, no big deal. It's only politics.

But that's not true. Getting a nation's economics right is more important than at any time since the end of World War II. Chile, Colombia, Peru and Brazil are pulling away from the rest of their hapless South American neighbors. China, India and others are simply copying or buying the West's accomplishments.

The U.S. has a government led by a mindset obsessed with 250K-a-year "millionaires" and given to mocking "our blind faith in the market." In a fast-moving world filled with nations intent on catching up with or passing us, this policy path is a waste of time.

The miners' rescue is a thrilling moment for Chile, an imprimatur on its rising status. But I'm thinking of that 74-person outfit in Berlin, Pa., whose high-tech drill bit opened the earth to free them. You know there are tens of thousands of stories like this in the U.S., as big as Google and small as Center Rock. I'm glad one of them helped save the Chileans. What's needed now is a new American economic model that lets our innovators rescue the rest of us.

It is a joyful night for the thirty-three miners who survived some 70 days in a collapsed mine and who should by all rights be dead. And it is with great pride that I can report that Pennsylvania innovators played a critical role in the worldwide drama.

Well done, gentlemen. Well done.

The environmental canard in Marcellus Shale

Joe Hoeffel, the former perpetual candidate for any available office, and now forever after to be known only as Montgomery County Democrat, sees money being made and wants to make sure that the government gets a piece of the action. Times Herald:

Montgomery County Commissioner Joseph Hoeffel and Bucks County Commissioner Diane Ellis-Marseglia, both Democrats, recently told a small group they support a severance tax on Marcellus Shale gas drilling companies and criticized gubernatorial candidate Tom Corbett for opposing the tax.

Hoeffel and Ellis-Marseglia, who appeared for a brief news conference at Montgomery County Courthouse, stand with Democratic gubernatorial candidate Dan Onorato who favors a using future tax proceeds to repair any environmental damage from the gas extraction.

The subterranean Marcellus Shale rock formation runs along the Appalachian basin in New York, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio and Kentucky. Though there are no plans to drill for gas in Montgomery County, Hoeffel said drilling could still have an environmental impact.

“Montgomery County sits along the Schuylkill River, downstream from the Marcellus Shale deposits,” he said last Tuesday. “If we don’t get this right, our water supply will be threatened and that will cost taxpayers money.”

Color me skeptical--very skeptical---regarding the so-called environmental concerns about our water supply as an excuse to tax Marcellus Shale drilling. If the BP oil disaster this past summer taught us anything at all, its that we don't have to tax companies up front to collect on them for environmental consequences.

No, this strikes me as laying the groundwork for the development of yet another new revenue stream for Pennsylvania law makers. You may recall the great promise of our last new revenue stream: legalized slots gambling. Oh, the dollars that were going to roll in, giving meaningful relief to PA homeowners from the onerous property tax. And we all know how this ended: no property tax relief and the expansion into table games, because the state still needs ever more money to feed the bottomless belly of the government beast.

We are, after all, still paying for the Johnstown flood with our antiquated State Store system.

Lest anyone think that Pennsylvanians are letting Marcellus Shale drillers off the hook financially, allow me to dispell a bit of that notion. My husband and I own a piece of property that sits on top of a rich marcellus shale deposit. We have been fairly compensated for the rights to the gas under our land and, once the well starts pumping, we will receive a monthly stipend for the gas produced, depending upon market price.

And while our stake in this boom is small by most accounts, many of our neighbors are folks who have lived all their lives on this land, scaping a living by farming or in what little industry was left in the area once Adelphia went bust. These folks are being made millionaires almost over night and most of them are so set in their ways that when confronted with the reality of this good fortune, being paid for land rights well into the millions and the promise of steady payoff for at least fifteen years, many can't think of a single thing to do with it. One of our neighbors bought a new quad. Another replaced four of the eight windows in the shack he has lived in for the last fifty or sixty years.

The power to tax is the power to destroy. As long as the drillers continue to fairly compensate the land owners for their property, and as long as they are obeying whatever regulations our government deems necessary to protect our environment, I see no reason to believe that "Pennsylvania" is missing out on their piece of the pie from this boom. Just because Pennsylvania Government is not directly benefitting from this boom does not mean that Pennsylvanians are not benefitting from this boom. When private citizens gain wealth, an unencumbered free market will distribute that wealth more equitably than a bunch of career politicians, who usually have skewed ideas of who is and who is not deserving of personally gained wealth. And make no mistake: any money collected ostensibly to keep the water supply safe will have dissolved should a real crisis arrive.

Best to leave the money in the hands of the citizens. Pennsylvania Government in general and Joe Hoeffel in particular have proven just how well they can manage money.

Fear and loathing in the Liberal Utopia

Just in time for Halloween, liberals are getting very very frightened by real change. As I said before the 2008 election, neither Obama nor McCain represented real change; they simply represented different speeds at which they would implement big government creep.

For years, our government has been slowly turning up the heat on the pot of American freedom. Obama turned that knob full over and now that we are in the boiling water, we're ready to jump out and vote against this destructive and socialist agenda. This terrifies liberals.

Who will take care of us?

Who will create jobs?

Who will provide our welfare?

These are the very real fears of an electorate for whom the words "personal responsibility" are an anathema.

I recently got into a debate with a liberal family member who claimed that government was necessary to protect people from themselves; in fact, he claimed, if government had been more involved in the housing industry we could have avoided the who economic collapse. It is government's role, my family member insisted, to tell people that they could not afford housing. When I asked him if he understood how the financial collapse occured, he waved me off with a, "Yeah, yeah, yeah, Subprime mortgages. I know all about them." I said, no, not subprime mortgages, but the loosening of lending standards which was mandated by government so that more people could own homes. Therefore it was the government preventing bankers from doing their jobs, (a part of which is telling people they cannot afford mortgages). So it was actually government regulations that CAUSED the financial crisis.

My relative is an intelligent guy, but this one clearly threw him for a loop. He wasn't quite willing to give up on his idea of government protection, though, so I countered him by pointing out that our government is entirely peopled with mediocrities. "Oh, I agree with you 100% about that."

"Then why would you want these people to be in charge of anything that affects your life?"

It was at this point my relative found pressing business across the room.

Every once in a while I dip my toe into the fever swamps that are the Times Herald's Gordon Glantz's blog, just to see how the other side thinks. (Tom Lees doesn't write a blog, but you can see what he thinks any given time simply by reading the latest Paul Krugama column) It appears that liberals are currently trying to relive the magic of the 2008 character assasination of Sarah Palin through their demonization of Christine O'Donnell. As I have stated numerous times on my blogs, I am no water carrier of O'Donnell; however her appearance on the political scene is no one's fault except the Republican Committee's for failing to read the mood of the electorate and running someone other than moderate squish Mike Castle. That being said, a quick perusal Mr. Glantz's two posts (here and here) about O'Donnell and the comments section on the latest one reveals how completely liberals are buying into the demonization of their political opponents, led by the demonizer in chief, Barack Obama.

Opponents are not merely espousing a different point of view; they are evil and are motivated only by (insert flavor of bigotry most likely to fit cause they support). Liberals actively and completely fear this.

As a general rule, I do not allow anonymous comments, particularly from this commenter, who occasionally posts (and is deleted) from my blog. But in this case, I will leave his comments up because not only are they paranoid and incoherent, they perfectly illustrate the liberal mindset which claims to be fighting against the hate of conservatives, but is so short sighted, it does not see the hate it has completely embraced. This fellow is so proud of his remarks, he has seen fit to post them here and on Glantz's blog, just so that he could be sure I would not miss his special brand of genius.

Yes, College Girls, there is STILL a double standard

Karen Owen had sex with more than a dozen men and had the audacity to rate them, produce it in a slick power point presentation and send it to her friends. It subsequently went viral, and now it is the subject of of the Today Show report above.

I hope all college girls are paying attention to the tone of the Karen Owen story. This may be cool and acceptable behavior among your sorority sisters, but to the world at large, it's just plain slutty. Pay particular attention to the glee with which the Today Show presents as many of Owen's facebook party pictures as it can, so that her face is not forgotten by the American public. Though this story should be little more than a one-off curiousity, the Today Show is running a follow-up story this morning because Karen Own may now be facing charges for her internet sex report.

Do men engage in this sort of behavior? Of course they do, and probably many of them with far more than a dozen different girls. But this sort of behavior is not frowned upon with men; it is, at best, implicitly condoned with a wink and a shrug, at worst openly celebrated. It's worth noting, however, that if a man had done this to his sexual exploits in such a manner, feminists would be shrieking for their heads.

I highlight this story not to plead a case for Karen Owen; on the contrary, I find nothing about her behavior to be appealing or worthy of defense. It is stupid for girls to sleep around; even stupider to elaborate about those exploits on the internet. No, I highlight this story to point out that Karen Owen's story is exactly the sort of behavior that abortion-loving feminists celebrate and in fact, are celebrating. She is getting fist pumps and kudos from the sisterhood for "turning the tables" on the guys. Feminists have long applauded and encouraged this type of sexual promiscuity in young women; indeed it is often promoted as the only way that women can feel truly equal--by being freed from the shackles of their biology. And of course, the logical corrollary is to be truly free of the shackles of biology, promiscuous sex must be as "consequence-free" as it is for men: ergo the absolute necessity of abortion for female equality.

Though many feminists are considering Karen Owen a hero, using another human being for sex, or objectifying them, is not a triumph of feminism. It is a step backward for society. Sex should be a meaningful and intimate experience for both parties who care deeply about each other; it should not be reduced basically anonymous "hookups'" If feminists think that behavior is wrong when men do it, they should not applaud when a woman does it either.

As I watched this report yesterday, I couldn't help but think of this girl's parents and how they felt. Or the parents of the boys she rated. And though I really have no doubt the fathers of the boys who were rated well by Owen felt a sense of pride; I can' help but wonder how they would feel if that same son brought Karen Owen home to introduce her as his fiance.

Girls, pay attention. And learn the right lesson from Karen Owen.

I can see November from my house

ROY HALLIDAY IS A STUD

Quote of the Day

Mark Victor Davis Hansen's words well:

As in all Greek tragedies, we the audience can see what might have happened had Obama avoided hubris and its attendant nemesis: If, from the get-go, he had focused on jobs; avoided talking about tax hikes; postponed health care; controlled spending; worried about rising deficits; avoided the “them vs. us” rhetoric; and stayed Olympian and aloof when polarizing local controversies grabbed the cable TV headlines.

And now? After November, Obama can only hope that he can outsource the messy work of cuts and budget balancing to the congressional Republicans. Chances are he will demagogue them as heartless while taking credit for an economic rebound once investors, businesses, and corporations see an end to Obamism and its gratuitous slurs against the wealthy, and thus start using their stockpiled trillions to rehire and buy equipment in 2011.

In the meantime, an entire generation of Democratic House members and senators are going to pay a heavy price for falling for a clearly inexperienced, untried, and often petulant candidate amid the exuberance of the 2008 hope and change wave

.

Three great video picks of the day

First, politics. In which Linda McMahon pwns lefty tool Dick Blumenthal on how to create a job during the NH senatorial debate:


Ace of Spades says:

Not only did McMahon ask him the perfect question, but he answered it the perfect way: with baffled bullshit. He had literally no idea now to respond to the question, "How do you create a job?"

This obviously is going to be in commercials.

I think she just won the race.

And now some delicious Frat Boy Gaga:



Finally, fans of Red Letter Media's awesome Plinkett film reviews: it is time...to stock up on Pizza Rolls.



Episode Three: So much to hate! Oh yessssssss!!!!!!

Philly Cop Killers "crowding" death row? There's an ap for that.

Philly.com has a list of cop-killing dirtbags "crowding" death row and consequently, still drawing breath and state benefits in the form of food, shelter and cable TV, some of them for almost 30 years after their convictions:

Philadelphia has sent more cop-killers to death row than any other Pennsylvania jurisdiction since the death penalty was reinstated in 1978.

If Rasheed Scrugs, 35, is convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to die for killing Officer John Pawlowski, he will join seven other men who are waiting to be lethally injected for murdering Philadelphia police officers.

According to the state Department of Corrections, the condemned are:

* Lewis Jordan, a/k/a John Jordan Lewis, 24, for the gunshot murder of Officer Chuck Cassidy during an Oct. 31, 2007, robbery of a Dunkin' Donuts.

Sentence date: Nov. 24, 2009.

* Christopher Roney, 40, for the gunshot murder of Officer Lauretha Vaird during a Jan. 2, 1996, bank robbery.

Sentence date: March 3, 1997.

* Bortella Borgela Philisten, 36, for the gunshot murder of Officer Robert Hayes during a June 16, 1993, traffic stop. Officer John Marynowitz was critically wounded.

Sentence date: Feb. 9, 1995.

* Edward Bracey, 47, for the gunshot murder of rookie Officer Daniel R. Boyle on Feb. 4, 1991.

Sentence date: Oct. 5, 1992.

* Ronald Gibson, 43, for the gunshot murders of Officer Frederick Dukes and Vernae Nixon during the robbery of a tavern on Dec. 24, 1990.

Sentence date: Feb. 10, 1995.

* Leslie Beasley, 59, for the gunshot murders of Officer Ernest Davis on July 16, 1980, and Keith Singleton on April 13, 1980.

Sentence date: Aug. 12, 1981.

* Mumia Abu-Jamal, 56, for the gunshot murder of Officer Daniel Faulkner on Dec. 9, 1981.

Sentence date: May 25, 1983.

Far be it for me to overstate the obvious, but wouldn't seven (or perhaps eight) little needles be a simple solution to this death row crowding problem?