I guess all is right with the world then, isn’t it? According to the Pew Research Center poll of 1,050 young Muslim adults in the United States, 26% said that suicide bombings are an acceptable tactic to defend their religion.
When you break that number down, 2% say that it can be justified often, 13% say sometimes, and 11% say rarely. That 2% is still a lot of potential suicide bombers, and that is cause for concern.
This same poll shows 5% expressing favorable views of Al Qaeda with about 25% abstaining. Why abstain? There is only one reason that I know of, and that is fear of the 5% becoming 30%, which I now must assume to be the real number. Additionally, only 40% believed Arab men carried out the attacks of 9/11/2001, despite all the evidence to the contrary. The implication is that we need to resume strip-searching little old lady grandmother types. Yeah, right!
This group also favors the Democratic Party by six to one. What does that tell us? Let’s see. 86% of a group deluding itself about the worst attack ever by foreigners on American soil and has a 30% favorable view of Al Qaeda favors Democrats. That tells me that the Democrats are perceived as BFFs (Best Friends Forever) of Al Qaeda by the Muslim community. I agree with that, incidentally, and I don’t come to that conclusion lightly or based only on the Pew Survey.
Recall the interview of left-wing producer Michael Moore by libertarian Bill O’Reilly. During that interview, Moore at one point asked O’Reilly if he would sacrifice his child to go die in Iraq. Ignore for the moment the incredible irrelevance of the question (since the fate of O’Reilly’s child is in the child’s hands – not O’Reilly’s) and focus on the implication. The tactic is one common among anti-war interviewees. Could that indicate a dearth of actual logic? Let me save you the trouble; the answer is yes.
The trap is to fall for an irrelevant premise, another indication of just how stupid we here at the bottom are perceived by the left-wing in America. Say “No” and you are a hypocrite. Say “Yes” and you are a hateful, unloving parent, but at least you have a conviction and may be respected for it. The 26% of the Muslim community as represented in the Pew poll has said yes to their Iraq-equivalent question, and are therefore, by implication, worthy of respect from the left wing. What does that make the left wing? In my view, it makes the left wing Al Qaeda’s BFF.
Other indications are there as well, ranging from the retreat from fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq, to protests that blame America for 9/11.
There is one more troublesome point about the Pew poll. It does not define what constitutes an attack on Islam. I think we can safely assume that Osama bin Laden would be among that 26% suicide bombing enthusiast number. In his view, not being what most of us consider to be radical Muslim fascist would constitute an attack on Islam. What is the definition for this 26% - make that about 273 potential suicide bombers? That’s a lot of potential innocents’ death, and it’s just a small statistical sample. And as for that 2% - about 21 people – look out. That’s more than it took to kill 3,000 innocents in the attacks on the WTC and the Pentagon on 9/11.
Still, let’s all join the lunatic conspiracy theorists and the Muslim community that denies that 9/11 was executed by Arab men despite the crowing by the Arab men who executed it. And while we’re at it, we had better leave our borders open for a few more decades and step up our strip searches of grandmas before it’s too late.
Showing posts with label conspiracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label conspiracy. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 23, 2007
Wednesday, April 4, 2007
Mystery of the Great U.S. Economy
One of the growing number of things that President Bush gets little or no credit for is the fantastic U.S. economy over the course of his administration. This appears to run in (or against) the family and is the fault of the liberal mainstream media in the U.S. encouraged and fueled by liberal Democrats, hungry for ever-more power, both of whom appear to just make stuff up as they go along.
The attacks of 9/11 struck a blow to the U.S. economy that many thought would take years to recover from. According to a September 28, 2001 report from the Fiscal Policy Institute in New York, the economic cost to New York alone was $16.8 billion. The stock market reflected these fears. So I think the fact is pretty well-established that when a skyscraper is destroyed in New York, it tends to depress the economy.
It is now generally agreed among reputable economists that the Bush tax cuts were instrumental in sparing the nation and our trading partners much worse economic performance than what actually came to pass.
Enter the Iraq war, one of the most brilliantly executed and strategic wars in history, the crowning touch to a uniquely patriotic and successful career for which Donald Rumsfeld will never be justly recognized in his lifetime. We won, incidentally, back in 2003. What you currently see in Iraq is the Iraqi revolution – the attempt of the Iraqi people to free themselves from the tyranny of Islamic terrorists (Islamic terrorists are terrorists who have hijacked Islam, incidentally.).
Iraq became a magnet for terrorists because a free and democratic Iraq would mean the expansion of American influence and the loss to terrorists of a safe haven and ally. The fact that terrorists are focused on retaking Iraq means that they are not knocking down skyscrapers in New York or Chicago. That is a good thing. It is a good thing for the people (Americans and legitimate non-citizens) living and working in those buildings. It is a good thing for the U.S. and global economies.
It is the current Iraqi revolution that is enabling the great U.S. economy. It is the current Iraqi revolution and our participation in it (which we should be proud of, just as France was proud of participating in ours) that the anti-war crowd screams about because they have to scream about something, apparently. The anti-war crowd is, by extension, protesting the fact that the U.S. economy is too good, too many skyscrapers are being allowed to remain standing, too many people are being allowed to remain alive in those buildings, and too many families are not being destroyed by the loss of loved ones living and working in those buildings.
For more information on how many lives are at stake in the short run, please see my article of 3/26/2007 – “Dead Heroes=9/11/Victims – The Ignored Upside.”
Thank you again President Bush.
Thank you again Secretary Rumsfeld.
The attacks of 9/11 struck a blow to the U.S. economy that many thought would take years to recover from. According to a September 28, 2001 report from the Fiscal Policy Institute in New York, the economic cost to New York alone was $16.8 billion. The stock market reflected these fears. So I think the fact is pretty well-established that when a skyscraper is destroyed in New York, it tends to depress the economy.
It is now generally agreed among reputable economists that the Bush tax cuts were instrumental in sparing the nation and our trading partners much worse economic performance than what actually came to pass.
Enter the Iraq war, one of the most brilliantly executed and strategic wars in history, the crowning touch to a uniquely patriotic and successful career for which Donald Rumsfeld will never be justly recognized in his lifetime. We won, incidentally, back in 2003. What you currently see in Iraq is the Iraqi revolution – the attempt of the Iraqi people to free themselves from the tyranny of Islamic terrorists (Islamic terrorists are terrorists who have hijacked Islam, incidentally.).
Iraq became a magnet for terrorists because a free and democratic Iraq would mean the expansion of American influence and the loss to terrorists of a safe haven and ally. The fact that terrorists are focused on retaking Iraq means that they are not knocking down skyscrapers in New York or Chicago. That is a good thing. It is a good thing for the people (Americans and legitimate non-citizens) living and working in those buildings. It is a good thing for the U.S. and global economies.
It is the current Iraqi revolution that is enabling the great U.S. economy. It is the current Iraqi revolution and our participation in it (which we should be proud of, just as France was proud of participating in ours) that the anti-war crowd screams about because they have to scream about something, apparently. The anti-war crowd is, by extension, protesting the fact that the U.S. economy is too good, too many skyscrapers are being allowed to remain standing, too many people are being allowed to remain alive in those buildings, and too many families are not being destroyed by the loss of loved ones living and working in those buildings.
For more information on how many lives are at stake in the short run, please see my article of 3/26/2007 – “Dead Heroes=9/11/Victims – The Ignored Upside.”
Thank you again President Bush.
Thank you again Secretary Rumsfeld.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
The Vast Right Wing Conspiracy Is Real – Sort of
Hillary has recently resurrected the concept of the vast right-wing conspiracy. She has been widely criticized for it, having been called paranoid, desperate, and unoriginal, since this is at least a decade-plus old concept of hers.
But let’s put aside the utter stupidity of putting this out there again, looking desperate and forcing her husband’s impeachment back into the minds of voters accompanied by images of her looking like not the assertive, aggressive woman she needs to look like to be the first woman to make a serious run for the presidency, but the meek, abused, pitiable figure of a mentally-abused woman who ultimately stood by her man – right or wrong – insulting Tammy Wynette in the process.
As I say, let’s put that aside. There is, indeed, a vast right-wing conspiracy. Of course, you have to define right-wing (not to be too Clintonian about it). Defining it as right of the Clintons and referencing the election results of 1992 and 1996, we get a clear clue as to what the right-wing conspiracy really is. It’s called a majority of the American electorate. It is the majority that did NOT VOTE FOR Bill Clinton (and especially Hillary) in either election.
The conspiracy grew smaller in 1996, the year in which Hillary was less visible and the Newt Gingrich Congress pulled Bill back toward the center, than 1992, when they ran on a 2-for-1 blue light special platform. History tells us that the vast right-wing conspiracy is likely to grow back to its 1992 level and beyond, as Hillary is decidedly left of Bill.
1992 Election results:
Clinton – 43.0%
Bush – 37.4%
Perrot – 18.9%
Other – 0.6%
1996 Election results:
Clinton – 49.2%
Dole – 40.7%
Perrot – 8.4%
Other – 1.6%
That’s right, Hillary. It’s called a majority.
But let’s put aside the utter stupidity of putting this out there again, looking desperate and forcing her husband’s impeachment back into the minds of voters accompanied by images of her looking like not the assertive, aggressive woman she needs to look like to be the first woman to make a serious run for the presidency, but the meek, abused, pitiable figure of a mentally-abused woman who ultimately stood by her man – right or wrong – insulting Tammy Wynette in the process.
As I say, let’s put that aside. There is, indeed, a vast right-wing conspiracy. Of course, you have to define right-wing (not to be too Clintonian about it). Defining it as right of the Clintons and referencing the election results of 1992 and 1996, we get a clear clue as to what the right-wing conspiracy really is. It’s called a majority of the American electorate. It is the majority that did NOT VOTE FOR Bill Clinton (and especially Hillary) in either election.
The conspiracy grew smaller in 1996, the year in which Hillary was less visible and the Newt Gingrich Congress pulled Bill back toward the center, than 1992, when they ran on a 2-for-1 blue light special platform. History tells us that the vast right-wing conspiracy is likely to grow back to its 1992 level and beyond, as Hillary is decidedly left of Bill.
1992 Election results:
Clinton – 43.0%
Bush – 37.4%
Perrot – 18.9%
Other – 0.6%
1996 Election results:
Clinton – 49.2%
Dole – 40.7%
Perrot – 8.4%
Other – 1.6%
That’s right, Hillary. It’s called a majority.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
