Cheat Seeking Missiles

Unhappy PC Birthday

verything I have to unlearn, I learned in kindergarten - that’s how Incredible Daughter #1 responded to this story, from BBC:

An eight-year-old boy has sparked an unlikely outcry in Sweden after failing to invite two of his classmates to his birthday party.

The boy’s school says he has violated the children’s rights and has complained to the Swedish Parliament.

The school, in Lund, southern Sweden, argues that if invitations are handed out on school premises then it must ensure there is no discrimination.

Violated rights? What right? The right to be an utter jerk and suffer no consequences? For a school to propose that this is discrimination is to tell kids that the most important life lesson is to expect to get everything without investing anything.

One of the boys who didn’t get an invitation didn’t invite the perp of this horrific social crime to his own birthday party. The other boy simply didn’t get along with birthday boy. No matter! Life is happy! We’re all equal! Kumbayah!

Remember: The Dems think Europe is the cat’s meow and won’t be satified until they’ve morphed American independence and frontier spirit into a clone of Sweden. And Obama’s friend, radical educator William Ayres, is at forefront of the effort to use the schools to accomplish that goal.

A China You Haven’t Seen

piegel has a photo gallery posted along with its story Lives Under Chinese Communist, Caught on Film that you ought to take a look at. Here are the two that moved me the most.

First, let’s look at a photo typical of what we see out of China today, symbolic of its emergence on the global economics playing field.

Relaxing on the hood of his new Mercedes is Li Xiaohua who was previously a Red Guard who was forced to the countryside during the Cultural Revolution. His rebirth as a successful capitalist is symbolic of the new China. But we shouldn’t forget that the old China still exists, as shown in this photo of barge-pullers on the upper Yangtse River:

Why are these men naked? Because they own so few clothes that they don’t want to wear them out doing this hard labor.

China has a long way to go, despite the happy face the Beijingoists try to slap on the mess they rule.

Global Warming Quote Of The Week

ou know the drill. The debate is over. Al says so. The U.N. says so. Every Warmie radical from Bangor to Bangladesh says so. The MSM says so.

But why? Here’s why, from Lawrence Solomon of Energy Probe, a group that is against Arctic pipelines, exploiting oil sands and turning towards nuclear power:

The fears of cataclysm over global warming are unfounded. There is no consensus on climate change, despite what Al Gore and the UN’s Panel on Climate Change would have you believe. Let me tell you why most people think that global warming is a serious problem. It comes down to one number: 2500. That’s the number of scientists associated with the UN’s Panel on Climate Change that the press reports has endorsed the UN Panel’s conclusions. These are the conclusions that get released in the UN’s mammoth reports every six years or so, and that then dominate the media airwaves for weeks. “2500 scientists can’t be wrong,” the press always says, explicitly or implicitly. Without that number, it would have no basis for the claim that they repeat over and over again - that there’s a consensus on climate change.

2500 is an impressive number of scientists. To find out who, exactly, they were, I contacted the Secretariat of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and asked for their names. The Secretariat replied that the names were not public, so I couldn’t have them. And I learned that the 2500 scientists were reviewers, not endorsers. Those scientists hadn’t endorsed anything. They had merely reviewed one or more of the literally hundreds of background studies, some important and some not, that were part of this immense United Nations bureaucratic process. They did not review the final report or endorse it.

Read the entire article here, with a hat-tip to ICECAP.

Shocker! “Queer History” Has An Agenda!

istory News Network has given Vicki Eaklor, author of Queer America, A GLBT History of the 20th Century, a soapbox to hold forth on her work - and guess what? She has an agenda!

In attempting to present the variety of experiences of nonstraight Americans and their centrality to what we call “American history” I expect to be accused of having, and serving, an agenda. Guilty as charged.

It is a historical phenomenon in itself that historians and other academics are under this kind of scrutiny regarding our purposes. Since the advent of the new social history of the sixties and seventies we have been under attack for seeking to be more inclusive, to reinterpret the national story through additional eyes and (gasp!) even to redefine what “history” is, at least for our time. It is neither surprising nor accidental that some people involved in social and civil rights activism became historians, whether from outrage at the lies of omission or the hope provided by stories of individual courage and the (uneven but overall) movement towards genuine equality. Thus it is scholars identified with liberal and radical causes who have been perceived as having dangerous and unprecedented agendas.

Re-writing history is a risky thing. Eaklor has a point when she says history omits gays. Now don’t rush and say that it omits straights, too, because it doesn’t: There’s plenty of history written on the relationship between leaders and their spouses - FDR and Elanor, Henry VIII and Anne, Helen and Menalaus and Paris. By this history, we know the players were straight; but their straightness isn’t what made history so much as the fact that because they were sexually conventional, their focus was on matters other than their sexuality.

Back to Eaklor on social history:

Dangerous? Possibly, if learning additional versions of our past has the potential of aiding reform or revolution. … Apparently the “new” groups to be feared, and concurrently denied a history, have been gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered (GLBT) people.

When GLBTs who wear their sexuality on their sleeves (or leathers) actually start making history, they deserve a history. Until then, if history is a servant to revolution as Eaklor would have it be, we would be better without history.

An Exercise In Delusion

he headline is a line from Morgan Tsvangirai, who should be president of Zimbabwe today, not Robert Mugabe, who, sequestered in the privacy of his palace and surrounded by his military, took the oath of office for his sixth term as Zimbabwe’s president oligarch.

Amazing, isn’t it, that just three months after he lost an election to the Movement for Democratic Change he is now claiming a landslide victory with 85.5% of the vote? That’s the sort of thing that happens when you kill nearly 100 opposition supporters and boot another 200,000 from their homes, forcing the opposition off the ballot.

BBC reports on the 85.5% Mugabe garnered:

Independent observers said many of those who did go to the polls voted out of fear, and that thousands of people had spoiled their ballots by defacing them or marking them inaccurately.

Now Mugabe and his hounds from Hell entourage are off to Cairo for an African Union meeting. The question of the day is this: Will the AU recognize him as Zimbabwe’s leader or freeze him out? We’ll learn a lot about the future of democracy in Africa as this tale unfolds.

Bill And Barack: Kissy … Face?

ild Bill Clinton is continuing his remarkable campaign for his wife’s presidency by offering to kiss and make up with Barack Obama. Sort of:

Bill Clinton is so bitter about Barack Obama’s victory over his wife Hillary that he has told friends the Democratic nominee will have to beg for his wholehearted support. …

The Telegraph has learned that the former president’s rage is still so great that even loyal allies are shocked by his patronising attitude to Mr Obama, and believe that he risks damaging his own reputation by his intransigence.

A senior Democrat who worked for Mr Clinton has revealed that he recently told friends Mr Obama could “kiss my ass” in return for his support.

Clinton is telling his friends that he doesn’t think Obama can win in November, and Obama aides are having trouble getting around Clinton’s anger - and his demand that Obama has to come to him, not vice versa - all of which is bad news for the Obama campaign … a campaign Clinton has told his friends is doomed to fail.

Say what you will about Bill, his narcissism and his temper, he’s standing by his woman … or is he just working to ensure she can’t win, putting to end demands for info on Bill’s new financial buddies?

Share this Logic Bomb with others: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.