HOT5 Daily 9/3/2009

1. "Americans Reject Obama’s Progressive Agenda" They should have thought about his agenda before they voted for him in the first place.

Representative Sample: His lack of executive experience combined with a limited legislative career in the Senate has resulted in an Administration in which the President has ceded governing to a Democrat controlled Congress and a group of czars that are neither elected officials nor do they require confirmation by Congress.

2. "The Iranian Answer To “Enhanced Interrogation Techniques”" I'm sure a policy of "engagement" will work well with these people.

Representative Sample:It appears, at least in the version of Shi’a Islam this cleric claims, that the use of rape, torture and drugs are perfectly permissible for use against enemies of that state – after ritual washing and proper prayers, of course.

3. "Why are atheists so disliked?" I have my own theories on  that, but this is an interesting article.

Representative Sample: religious people have a fairly deep-seated conception of atheists as unpleasant and untrustworthy - but it was the lack of trust that came through strongest.

4. "Who Goes There?" Why can't the West distinguish between enemies and friends? (For example, why are we giving money to the Palestinians?)

Representative Sample: Whether it is throwing CIA field agents, Honduras, or Israel under the bus or reaching out to terrorists and nutball regimes as if they're just friends we haven't made yet (both of the jihadi and non-jihadi variety), we don't seem to have any clue about how to recognize the good guys and bad guys.

5. "Is the FSM insulting to Christians?" That's the Flying Spaghetti Monster, for anyone unfamiliar with Pastafarianism.

Representative Sample: the original intent of the FSM proposal was specifically to challenge the philosophical underpinnings of the ID movement in its attempt to infiltrate the Kansas high school science curriculum. I submit it could be successfully argued that the FSM has been co-opted by atheism to illustrate how religions are formed and how difficult they are to debunk.

To submit a blog post for HOT5 Daily, please e-mail me at unrright@NOSPAMgmail.com. Put HOT5 in the subject.

Top Ten Reasons President Obama Isn't Quite as Bad as He Appears

1. Believes in killing terrorists -- even if only in Afghanistan & Pakistan

2. Supports Big Tobacco by smoking.

3. Once authorized the killing of a pirate.

4. Appointed multiple tax evaders to high office. Shows at least some independence from the liberal love of taxes -- or it could just be hypocrisy.

5. Isn't actually a communist, just a big government liberal -- still bad, but not quite as bad.

6. Is donating all the proceeds from his best selling books to charity, to help some people get health insurance -- ha, just kidding about that one.

7. He's not Nancy Pelosi.

8. He's just crippling the CIA, not shutting it down entirely -- at least for now.

9. Hasn't actually surrendered to anyone yet -- just done a lot of unnecessary apologizing.

10.Two words: President Biden. Here's hoping nothing happens to Obama.

HOT5 Daily 9/2/2009

1. "September 1, 1939" The outbreak of World War Two, seventy years ago yesterday.

Representative Sample: There are two sorts of people in the USA today. A tiny minority who are very interested in military history and know a lot about World War II, and a vast majority who can barely even tell you who was in it (”was that the one with Hitler?”), when it occurred (”the Seventies?”), or what it was about, or even who won (”Japan?”).

2. "What rationing is…and isn’t" Debunking nonsense about "rationing."

Representative Sample: One of the statists’ favorite memes in the health care takeover “reform” debate has been that care is already being rationed, by the inhumane and depraved evil of the marketplace.

3. "The internet turns forty" I'm old enough to remember the lack of internet access or even computers for the general public. 

Representative Sample: think about what someone from 1985 would say about pretty much everyone carrying tiny devices that combine cordless phones, mini-televisions, the internet, etc. Put their jaw back in place and go to hoary old desktop computer with a broadband connection.

4. "Nanny States" When does a reasonable concern for safety morph into nanny-statism?

Representative Sample: The “nanny” agent treats an adult like a child – overriding decision processes that are perfectly capable of making a rational choice.

5. "I can't tell if you're doing that ironically" I haven't linked this site in awhile. It's pretty funny. (NSFW language, including site name.)

Representative Sample: What's with the stupid pose, Cat? I'm sure you think you are just headed for the Sears catalog now... or you are making fun of people who are headed for the Sears catalog.

To submit a blog post for HOT5 Daily, please e-mail me at unrright@NOSPAMgmail.com. Put HOT5 in the subject.

Notable Religious Idiocy

Reverend Rusty Lee Thomas of Waco, Texas has a new book out on "Biblical leadership." According to Thomas, President Obama is God's way of punishing America for its sins. Seriously.

He is a sign of God's judgment and displeasure upon a nation that is gone a whoring after other gods and the vain philosophies of men. Obama is God's ex-ray into the heart of our nation.

Thomas thinks that because we are tolerating those evil homosexuals, and permitting abortion, that God is chastising the U.S. with "tyranny" under Obama.

America is being subject to tyranny and unjust laws as a consequence of our idolatry. Thus, Obama has become the head of a new idolatrous cult, otherwise known as the federal government."

And there's more!

Communism, Socialism, Fascism, and Nazism, which crush freedom and promote tyranny, all have as their foundational premise the vain philosophies of atheism and evolution."

Wow, how many times have we heard this nonsense about atheism -- although he threw in evolution to make it even more ridiculous. None of those ideologies are founded on atheism. Communism promotes atheism because loyalty to a god or religion undermines central control. Atheism is certainly not the "foundational premise." Fascism & Nazism are not atheistic at all. The Nazis did not ban religion, cooperated with various religious organizations, and went after the ones that opposed the regime. Hitler was about control and obedience (among many other things), not atheism.

Unlike what Thomas believes, fascism can be overtly religious in nature, or closely aligned with religion. Defense of Catholicism was a core component of Franco's regime in Spain. And socialism takes many forms, some of which are quite compatible with religious belief.  Thomas comes off like a raving lunatic, with his talk of Obama as a "tyrant," and his ridiculous assertion that the Obama presidency is punishment from God.

I'm not a fan of Obama and his policies. But he's just a liberal president. He'll be gone in four to eight years. He's not a tyrant, a dictator, or punishment from Thomas' imaginary deity. The guy can't even ram through a health care bill with a Democratic majority in both houses of Congress. He's far from a tyrant. I know it's too much to ask of someone whose analysis is based on religious idiocy, but it would be nice if people like Thomas got a basic grip on reality.

A New War Against Radical Islam - Part III

This is the continuation of a multi-part post, Part II, Part I.  Also, see Intro.

The U.S. needs to increase its ability to engage in covert warfare against Islamic terror supporting states. It's not necessary or practical to invade, conquer and occupy every state that undertakes hostilities toward the U.S. or supports Islamic terrorism. We already have major military commitments that will probably continue for the foreseeable future. Launching a large military operation, particularly a preventative or preemptive war, is a serious diplomatic and political problem. After the experience of the Iraq War, the public is highly skeptical about such ventures, and there is likely to be massive international opposition to any such efforts.

But countries which are openly hostile to the U.S., help kill our soldiers, interfere with our operations, and undermine our allies should not be allowed to act with impunity, just because we aren't in a position to go to war against them. There are other ways to make them pay a severe price for their actions, and I'm not talking about largely useless economic sanctions. Along with the assassins, we should establish teams of saboteurs, which the CIA could recruit from people with the necessary skills, such as ex-special forces operators and members of private military corporations.

If we aren't in a position to respond overtly to hostile acts, these saboteurs could exact retribution covertly by destroying or damaging military targets and vital infrastructure. Direct hostility toward the U.S. might be less attractive when bombs start exploding in your military barracks, power plants mysterious shut down, bridges collapse, border posts are destroyed, mines start appearing on military routes, and so forth. I hope we are already doing some of this, but if so, it's one of our few well-guarded secrets.

Richard Cohen's Torture Article

Richard Cohen is one of the more intellectually honest liberals out there, and his piece called, "Torture's Unanswerable Questions," is no exception. In the key passage he asks what will happen the next time we have another terrorist leader in custody.

How do we get him to reveal his group's plans and the names of his colleagues? It will be hard. It will, in fact, be harder than it used to be. He can no longer be waterboarded. He knows this. He cannot be deprived of more than a set amount of sleep. He cannot be beaten or thrown up against even a soft wall. He cannot be threatened with shooting or even frightened by the prospect of an electric drill. Nothing really can be threatened against his relatives -- that they will be killed or sexually abused. 

He knows the new restrictions. He knows the new limits. He may even suggest to his interrogators that their jobs are on the line -- that the Justice Department is looking over their shoulders. The tape is running. Everything is being recorded. He is willing to give up his life. Are his interrogators willing to give up their careers? He laughs.

This scenario is very similar to one laid out previously by Michael Scheuer, with regard to the hypothetical capture of Osama bin Laden. Unfortunately that is where we are right now, with blind legalism in the driver's seat. The whole article should be read, especially by the moralistic fools who put the imaginary rights of terrorists above the security of the American people -- the same imbeciles who think that torturing a terrorist like Khalid Sheikh Mohammed somehow makes us morally equivalent to Al Qaeda. 

HOT5 Daily 9/1/2009

1. "Emasculating American Intelligence" Good article from Max Boot. It's a serious response to one of Sullivan's latest hysterical ravings.

Representative Sample: I am not offended by the authorized techniques laid out in the CIA inspector general’s report—techniques such as sleep deprivation, shackling, and on a few occasions waterboarding, all of it carefully supervised by medical personnel so as not to cause physical harm.

2. "Who Do You Trust More, Obama, or the CIA?" Not a hard question.

Representative Sample: Intelligence is the way wars are won. Yes, our combat forces put their lives on the line in the heat of combat but the intelligence services provide the information upon which the war plans are based. Without intelligence our combat forces would not know where the enemy is and what the enemy’s strengths and weaknesses are, where his supplies and war making material is coming from, etc., etc.

3. "Facts Are NOT Anti-Religious" Really good title. Good post too.

Representative Sample:if their religious beliefs conflict with the conclusions of science, that’s their problem. They can deal with the cognitive dissonance any way they like, but they cannot impose it upon secular society

4. "Will's Afghani Analysis, Kagan's Response" Point & counterpoint.

Representative Sample:Whatever may happen in Afghanistan, counter-insurgency theory does not call for the deployment of hundreds of thousands of coalition forces for decades.

5. "List of Forbidden Rock Bands in the USSR in 1985" Interesting piece of history. Check out the bands the USSR felt were particularly dangerous.

Representative Sample: a translated list of Western rock bands that Soviet Komsomol (a Communist Party for young people) singled out for deletion from the list of permissible music to be played at Soviet dance clubs, due to their "ideologically harmful compositions."

To submit a blog post for HOT5 Daily, please e-mail me at unrright@NOSPAMgmail.com. Put HOT5 in the subject.