That’s Because You WEREN’T LISTENING

I love the internet. The interconnectivity. The eidetic memory. The instant recall, complete with footnotes.

Instapundit delivers a smackdown to St. Louis Post-Dispatch editorialist Sylvester Brown Jr.’s latest piece, where Mr. Brown states:

I’ve noticed that comedian Bill Maher has been doing a bit of reaching out himself lately. Several times on his show, “Real Time with Bill Maher,” he’s encouraged more conservatives to join his audience. Maher’s even conceded that his criticism of President George W. Bush’s activities in Iraq may have been at least partly wrong.

“Look, on the long-range, big picture of getting the freedom-and-democracy ball rolling in the Middle East, maybe these guys had it right,” Maher said on his show Friday.

Sounds to me like Maher’s buying into the bait-and-switch rhetoric of the Bush clan. Maybe I would, too, if they were straight shooters. But, before the Iraq invasion, the rallying cry was against an “axis of evil” and “weapons of mass destruction.” I don’t recall any prewar speeches about delivering democracy to the Middle East.

Ah, Mr. Brown, accusing the “Bush clan” of lying when it is YOU who are at fault for not listening, as Glenn and some of his readers point out.

Perhaps you should try removing the blinders and the earplugs, and listen to what the “Bush clan” acutally says rather than what gets through the media filter, eh?

If I recall correctly, the protests against Bush’s call to “deliver democracy to the Middle East” was (and I paraphrase) that ‘the wogs weren’t up to it, and didn’t want it anyway.’

Edited to add: Oh, and this reminds me of a July, 2004 post that drew some attention when Steven Den Beste linked to it for this cartoon:

The Internet = Total Recall

Yup. This is Why Our Ancestors Left Europe

Apparently this week’s Carnival of the Vanities was hosted by some Leftist EUnuch who decided that his/her/its theme would be “trash America and Americans for not being Leftist EUnuchs.” Take, for example it’s intro to Zendo Deb’s entry:

Not satisfied with being shot when they venture overseas, Americans like to shoot each other. Zendo Deb at TFS Magnum sure likes the notion. She is angry that those filthy liberals think the law is something to be respected. Apparently, this old geezer was arrested for concealing a weapon, which he used to shoot and kill an assailant. Deb asks what the old man should have done. Well, Deb, he should have just given the kids his money and rung the coppers. So he loses his wallet. Never mind. Get the criminal compensation board to pay him back what he lost. Don’t have one? You would if you were a liberal. Human lives will never be worth as little as the contents of your wallet, Deb, not in any place Dr Zen has even the smallest say. I don’t care who does the shooting, you or the mugger. The old guy should get life for murder, pure and simple, and idiots like you should cool your boots and learn what really has value in this life.

And, had he not been armed, the three assailants should have gotten counselling, right?

In “It’s most important that all potential victims be as dangerous as they can” I wrote this:

(The) recognition of the difference between violent and predatory and violent but protective illustrates the difference in worldview between people like me, and the (we’ll call it) pacifist culture.

Britain today represents a perfect example of the pacifist culture in control, because that culture doesn’t really distinguish between violent and predatory and violent but protective – it sees only violent. Their worldview is divided between violent and non-violent, or passive. There is an exception, a logical disconnect if you will, that allows for legitimate violence – but only if that violence is committed by sanctioned officials of the State. And even there, there is ambivalence. If violence is committed by an individual there is another dichotomy: If the violence is committed by a predator, it is the fault of society in not meeting that predator’s needs. The predator is the creation of the society, and is not responsible for the violence. He merely needs to be “cured” of his ailment. If violence is committed by a defender, it is a failure of the defender to adhere to the tenets of the pacifist society. It is the defender who is at fault because he has lived by the rules and has chosen to break them, and who must therefore be punished for his transgression.

“Dr. Zen” is a Brit.

I rest my case.

Zendo Deb has a bit more to say, though. And as Eric at Classical Values points out in his cutting commentary on “Dr. Zen,” Lawrence at This Blog is Crap has posted an alternate Carnival.

We Americans. So simplisme.

Did Anyone Watch O’Reilly Tonight?.

A poster at AR15.com reports:

The grandfather of the 5-year-old girl who called 9-1-1 after her parents were stabbed to death was on Bill O’Reilly’s show tonight. The grandfather is a retired LEO and they were discussing how the justice system had let the couple down…

As they were talking about the matter the grandfather said his son had called him 2 weeks before and told him they were afraid of the individual that eventually killed them…

The son asked his farther to get him a gun… the father told him no let the authorities handle it.

Thought he never said so you could see on the man’s face he knew he had really made a bad mistake not getting that gun for his son.

I wanted to get angry but just could not seeing the poor mans anguish.

Another “depend on the government for your protection” victim. Only this time, he was the vector.

Well, he’s still got a granddaughter.

I hope he can sleep at night. Eventually.

You Want to Be Barbarians? Let Me Get Medieval On Your Ass!

Apparently we’re not slouching towards Gomorrah, we’re skiing our way there.

The AP reports the following:

Tuesday, April 12, 2005 2:32 p.m. ET

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — A 16-year-old disabled girl was punched and forced to engage in videotaped sexual acts with several boys in a high school auditorium as dozens of students watched, according to witnesses.

Authorities are investigating and no charges have been filed in the alleged attack last month at Mifflin High School. Four boys suspected of involvement were sent home and have not returned to class.

Also, the principal, Regina Crenshaw, was suspended and will be fired for not calling police, school officials said. And three assistant principals were suspended and will be reassigned to other schools. Crenshaw had no comment Tuesday. The girl was forced to perform oral sex on at least two boys, according to statements from school officials, obtained by The Columbus Dispatch. Part of the alleged assault was videotaped by a student who had a camera for a school project.

School officials found the girl bleeding from the mouth. An assistant principal cautioned the girl’s father against calling 911 to avoid media attention, the statements said. The girl’s father called police.

Her father said the girl is developmentally disabled. A special education teacher said the teen has a severe speech impediment.

If I were Daddy, those four boys would never sexually assault anyone again. WALKING would require years of rehabilitation. And the “assistant principal” who “advised” not calling the police would be in need of a full set of dentures.

This is a couple of orders of magnitude worse than some 12 year-old “chavs” on a bus in London.

They want barbarism? They ought to get it.

New Member of the Blogroll.

I just added fellow Tucsonan Billy Budd’s American Dinosaur to the “Arizona Blogs” list on the blogroll. Billy’s been keeping tabs on the Minuteman Project, and he’s a member of the blog group Stop the ACLU, and gives a list of good reasons for it.

I’ll be stopping in there from time to time. I may look into joining the Stop the ACLU group myself.

For reasons of my own.

BAD AMMO WARNING!!!.

If you shoot military surplus .308 (7.62NATO) ammo, STAY AWAY FROM INDIAN SURPLUS. Excerpt:

Currently there is .308 surplus ammunition on the market made in INDIA with the headstamp OFV M80 and then a date code (usually 97), and a headstamp of KF 762b and then a date code (usually 91). From my understanding this ammunition came from the factory installed in machine gun belts. The ammunition was designed to be shot in a belt fed machine gun. A rumor is that they removed the belts/links from the ammuntion, and during the process, many of the necks got crushed, tweaked, the bullets loosened, and the bullets pressed further into the case.

Having an inquisitive nature, i figured, i would try this stuff out to see if it was as bad as everyone on the internet was saying.

—

Now, my initial test lot was 100 random rounds obtained by grabbing through the can after the obviously bad rounds were removed, and thrown away. I came up with 100 rounds that after a second look, showed zero signs of bad cases, crooked bullets, or anything

—

(O)ut of the 100 test sample rounds, i found a mixture of ball and stick powder (ball is round balls of powder, and stick looks like little sticks – two different things all together). out of 100 of the test samples, 93 had disk or ball type powder and 7 of them had stick type powder. for those not into reloading, that means they dumped whatever they had available into the cases to get them done. usually a lot of ammo is consistent in powder type. not so with the indian i had.

(A)fter weighing each powder charge inside each individual case, and charting it on paper, there was a powder variance of 6 grains between the lowest charge, and the highest charge. 6 grains of powder is an unsafe variance.

I’d say so.

The post has pictures of a blown-up CETME, a blown-up MG42 (!), and a blown-up 1919(!!).

Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls; CHEAPER AIN’T ALWAYS BETTER.

Apparently this is common knowledge around the “black rifle” crowd, but it’s the first I’ve heard about it, and I thought it important enough to pass along.

Just, DAMN!.

Via Kim du Toit comes this outstanding essay on The High Road message board entitled There Are No Barbarians at the Gates. This might be vain, but I mean this sincerely: I wish I had written that. PLEASE go read it.

I did write something roughly tangent to the subject a long time ago at Themestream.com. March 7, 2001, I published Barbarians in the Village:

This week there have been not one, but two shootings on primary school campuses. Two people have died and numerous others were wounded. Both shooters were minors.

William J. Bennett was quoted once on the problem in America’s schools. “Teachers were asked in 1940”, he said, “what the three largest problems were in America’s schools. Their answer was noise, littering, and chewing gum. Teachers were asked last year (1992) what the three largest problems in America’s schools were, and the answer was assault, rape, and suicide.”

Kids have picked on and ridiculed other kids since there have been kids. Kids killing other kids is a fairly recent phenomenon, however. Is society at fault? Parents? Teachers? School administrators? Our elected representatives? The media? The kids themselves?

Yes. All of the above.

Since the 1950’s parents have increasingly relinquished their parental responsibilities to the schools, where education is no longer the goal, state supported day-care is. The schools have increasingly relinquished their responsibility to educate, and cannot maintain order and discipline under the constant threat of lawsuit. This has resulted in repeated generations of kids who receive less and less education, attention, and discipline as they grow up to become teachers, administrators, elected officials, members of the media and parents themselves, all the while concerned about themselves first and foremost. After all, nobody spent any time on them when they were kids. The hard, critical job of being a parent has now been reduced to making sure little Johnny is wearing the fashionable shoe of the week and has a brand-new chrome scooter like all of the “in” kids do.

So we have come to this – kids who kill because they’re unpopular.

I’m not accusing all parents of doing a poor job, but how many does it take to destroy the system? Just a very few. Hillary Clinton wrote a much maligned book entitled “It Takes a Village:” in which she stated that it takes that village to raise a child. I may not agree with anything else the junior Senator from New York has to say, but on that point she’s right. Whether we like it or not, the village raises our children. How much influence the village has is inversely proportional to how much influence the family has on the child. When the entire attention a child receives from his parents is clothing and material goods, the kids turn to the rest of society, our village, to tell them how to live. And our village tells them that violence is an acceptable method of solving our problems.

It took 50 years to get where we are today. The question now isn’t how do we stop it, it is can we stop it?

In another column I wrote: “We don’t live in the United States of America anymore, one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. We live in `Merica, land of the free to do whatever we please, with no adverse consequences to our actions because that just wouldn’t be “fair”. Ain’t Democracy wunnerful? Let’s just vote ourselves bread and circuses and wait for the Barbarians to come over the walls.” I was referring, of course, to the fall of the Roman Empire, whose death-knell was heralded by the empire being overrun by the barbarians they used to keep at bay.

I was wrong. Our barbarians are already inside the walls. Our barbarians are us.

“Control Group,” the author of There Are No Barbarians at the Gates points out quite starkly that the barbarians have always been inside our gates. And as the post below illustrates, England seems to be re-learning this fact about now.

Perhaps the Momentum Really Has Shifted.

There have been a couple of stories lately on how the reaction to the recent “spree” shootings in Atlanta and Red Lake have resulted in unusual (from a historical perspective) reactions; a call for arming teachers and administrators by the NRA that wasn’t immediately and loudly shouted down by all “right-thinking” people, a call for allowing judges and prosecutors to carry concealed in the courtroom, etc. There was a recent editorial protesting that the “humanitarian aid” to Darfur ought to include some guns so that the people being slaughtered could defend themselves. It included this classic line:

” Darfur is one more reminder that gun control is genocide’s best friend.”

Amen.

Congress may actually pass the “Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms” act this session. Nebraska may become the next “shall-issue” state. New Mexico is loosening its restrictions on CCW and looking at reciprocity, and its govenor signed the bill at the NRA’s Raton shooting facility. After four safe years of “shall-issue” concealed-carry, Michigan is looking at allowing permit holders to carry in churches, hospitals, and schools. Florida has overwhelmingly passed a “no duty to retreat” law. A Wisconsin prosecutor showed remarkable restraint in the case of an Arkansas man who defended himself with a handgun he carried, illegally, in his vehicle. He will not be charged. The op-ed includes this:

It’s not legal to carry a concealed weapon here, which many of you know because it’s become one of those debates that are rallying cries for partisan groups.

The side that wants Wisconsin to consider adopting a concealed-weapons law – which most in law enforcement oppose – can point to the Goins case as a perfect example of why it’s needed.

Because Goins possessed the determination to protect himself – and a convenient handgun under his seat – he gets to return to his family and friends in Arkansas instead of having them make a sad journey to Milwaukee to claim his remains.

The Associated Press (!) published an op-ed on concealed-carry laws that includes this line:

Violence this year – from courthouse shootings in Atlanta and Tyler, Texas, to the school killings at Red Lake, Minn., the most deadly since Columbine – has spurred something far different: that if the victims had weapons, they might not be victims.

Mr. V.O. Goins of Arkansas can attest to that fact.

This is not to say that gun control activists have rolled up their carpets and gone home. Hardly, but it’s surprising (at least to me) to see so much support in the media and in the legislatures finally. It appears that the public is finally waking up and getting vocal, and the gun-controllers are getting desperate.

Now Arizona’s govenor, Janet Napolitano, has signed legislation that will allow an elective gun safety class for public schools, that includes actual range time and familiarization with .22 rifles!

Will wonders never cease?

Words of wisdom, however: “Don’t get cocky!”

And don’t let up.

Randy Barnett on Joyce Foundation Funding

I mentioned this last week, when David Hardy picked up on Professor Saul Cornell’s contribution to a Fordham University Law Review symposium, funded (of course) by the Joyce Foundation. Well, Professor Barnett commented at the Volokh Conspiracy on the similar symposium published in the Chicago-Kent Law Review in 2000. One zinger of a quote from Prof. Barnett:

Is accepting honoraria from a foundation, like the Joyce Foundation, that will support only one side of an issue unethical? So long as one does not change one’s views to conform to the funding source’s preferences, I do not think so (though I do think one should disclose one’s funding sources to allow readers to evaluate for themselves whatever impact it may have on one’s analysis). I do not see why foundations who wish to advance a particular view cannot ethically support the research of those who otherwise agree with its agenda. Ultimately, the soundness of one’s scholarship should depend on the reasons and evidence one puts forth, not the source of any financial support one may have received. I think this is true even if the honoraria induced a scholar to write about an issue he or she would not otherwise have done, which I think probably applies to a number of contributors to the Second Amendment symposium. I feel the same way about campaign contributions. Contributing money to the campaign of politicians with whom one agrees does not corrupt the politician, unless he or she was already corrupt. Michael Bellesiles, who was paid to contribute to the Chicago-Kent symposium did not fabricate his evidence because the Joyce Foundation was paying him. He was a corrupt scholar before and after this payment was made.

So refreshing when someone is willing to call a spade a spade and not a “human operated soil relocation device.”

Read Prof. Barnett’s whole piece.

UPDATE, 4/14: Saul Cornell does it again, and Randy Barnett doesn’t let him get away with it. Here’s a key piece:

Saul asked in his reply: “Given that the gun lobby has plenty of money and places like CATO are strongly gun rights it seems a bit unfair to ask Joyce to fund your point of view.” I do not expect Joyce to fund any point of view with which they disagree. It is not Joyce we are talking about, it is Chicago-Kent and Ohio State. Nor, to reiterate, do I have any problem with an individual scholar like Saul who agrees with Joyce accepting funding to support his or her academic research, provided the funding is disclosed. But Ohio State, like Chicago-Kent, is an academic institution, unlike Cato, or the Federalist Society. (I raised the Federalist Society because, even though it is not an academic institution, its programs have more balance than did Chicago-Kent’s. (I did not compare the Fordham Law Review symposium to the Federalist Society—indeed, I did not mention that symposium at all in my post.)

Let me clarify this by posing the following question: Why did Joyce not organize its own conference, law review issue, or Second Amendment Research Center? The answer is plain: it wants its views to enjoy the academic respectability imparted upon it by the imprimatur of Chicago-Kent and Ohio State. It is that institutional imprimatur that enabled the Ninth Circuit to rely so heavily on articles published in the Chicago-Kent Law Review in his opinion in Silveira v. Lockyer. (BTW, the published opinion had to be modified later to remove its reliance on the discredited work of Michael Bellesiles.) This is what Joyce is buying from Chicago-Kent and Ohio State. This is what it is improper of these institutions to sell.

I’ve got a bit more to say here.

Quote of the Week.

Via Instapundit comes an interesting story of in-sourcing – importing Turkish tailors to hand-craft suits, a skill largely lost here. But here’s the quote of the week:

“It’s hard to leave home,” says Aydin Olcum, 36, one of the company’s Turkish master tailors. “But now the world has changed. You’re not supposed to live where you’re born. You’re supposed to live where you can feed your family.”